Jump to content

A Well Regulated Militia...


Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, shetluck said:

I think Scout left to go look up the definition of infringed.

Nah, she just ran away.  It's what they do when they get their butts kicked. 

Next she'll put you on ignore, because she can't debate facts. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

What is a gun nutter? And yes, the constitution says we may arm ourselves with whatever firearm we want .  Would you like to rewrite the constitution? To bend it to fit YOUR feelings ?  fuck your

sad Scout doesn't understand the 2nd Amendment... the bitch doesn't realize that without the 2nd you don't have the 1st.

Yes, they did.  

21 hours ago, Scout said:

Saul Cornell told you what infringed does NOT mean.  :D   

 

Of Course - you would believe an Academic Communist Malcontent like Saul Cornell.

 

This Contrary Revisionist History - is his Bread-and-Butter for Notoriety.

 

Like "Rules for Radicals" was for Academic Communist Malcontent Saul Alinsky.

 

If he's all you got...?

 

You got Nothin' ...but Propaganda.

 

 

Now THIS will set you straight, Comrade...

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Blue Devil said:

 

Of Course - you would believe an Academic Communist Malcontent like Saul Cornell.

 

This Contrary Revisionist History - is his Bread-and-Butter for Notoriety.

 

Like "Rules for Radicals" was for Academic Communist Malcontent Saul Alinsky.

 

If he's all you got...?

 

You got Nothin' ...but Propaganda.

 

 

Now THIS will set you straight, Comrade...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOwy9OWfnAM

Of course I believe a good American like Cornell over ANY gun nutter. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Scout said:

Of course I believe a good American like Cornell over ANY gun nutter. 

 

A One/ea. Singular Academic Communist Malcontent on the Subject.

 

You could do better throwin' darts.

 

3a24cb2689d5d0c6741a6fb2690ed3b0-thomas-

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The phrase “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms” shows up in a draft of a proposed Virginia constitution in 1776. Subsequent drafts included the bracketed qualifier that “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms [within his own lands or tenements].” Although this sentence did not find its way into the final version of the Virginia state constitution, it is documented in The Papers of Thomas Jefferson.

The sentence “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government” appears to be a modern augmentation. It does not appear to date back much further than its publication in a 1989 pro-Second Amendment newspaper column by Charlie Reese, and it is certainly not found among Jefferson’s recorded writings, letters, or speeches:

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, shetluck said:

How about that "shall not be infringed". Talk about lack of articulation.  You constantly post opinions you heard on campass but never follow with any fact or data to back it up. You are a zombie.

Go to Freethinker's? or some libs "Second Amendment" thread and read the

OP.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Scout said:

Go to Freethinker's? or some libs "Second Amendment" thread and read the

OP.  

 

They are ALL based on Academic Communist Malcontent like Saul Cornell.

 

He is your One/Ea. Propaganda canard.

 

goebbelsquote.jpg

 

...or Not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Scout said:

Go to Freethinker's? or some libs "Second Amendment" thread and read the

OP.  

Read the OP. Does not square "infringement". Lets make a deal. You can get stuck on "militia" I will get stuck on "infringement". And this will never end. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Scout said:

Saul Cornell told you what infringed does NOT mean.  :D   

Would it work for you if the same infringements you are  just fine with for the second amendment were to be applied to your abortion "rights"

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Blue Devil said:

 

They are ALL based on Academic Communist Malcontent like Saul Cornell.

 

He is your One/Ea. Propaganda canard.

 

goebbelsquote.jpg

 

...or Not.

Blue can't take the truth.

He actually does not have the ability to perform sexually without a gun in hand. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, shetluck said:

Read the OP. Does not square "infringement". Lets make a deal. You can get stuck on "militia" I will get stuck on "infringement". And this will never end. 

 

It proves the Founders did intend to have gun control.

That is the point of the article and it does it beautifully.

You guys can't come up with any defense.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, shetluck said:

Would it work for you if the same infringements you are  just fine with for the second amendment were to be applied to your abortion "rights"

 

They already are. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Scout said:

Blue can't take the truth.

He actually does not have the ability to perform sexually without a gun in hand. 

 

I just preform better is all.

 

8>)

 

And THIS is all the Truth I need.

 

Second-_Amendment--620x358.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Scout said:

 

I apologize for making that comment.  

 

This is an emotional issue for you.

 

Understood and accepted.

 

That it is entwined with Sovereign Constitutional Liberty and Natural Law is the problem.

 

 

Automobiles  - kill more kids than guns.

 

No Sovereign Constitutional Liberty or Natural Law issues there.

 

Try that one.

 

 

You have my Generously Full Length of support.

 

... for the Children.

 

8>)

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Blue Devil said:

 

This is an emotional issue for you.

 

Understood and accepted.

 

That it is entwined with Sovereign Constitutional Liberty and Natural Law is the problem.

 

 

Automobiles  - kill more kids than guns.

 

No Sovereign Constitutional Liberty or Natural Law issues there.

 

Try that one.

 

 

You have my Generously Full Length of support.

 

... for the Children.

 

8>)

Automobiles save many times more lives than they take.

Can't say that about guns. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Scout said:

Automobiles save many times more lives than they take.

Can't say that about guns. 

 

Guns - save lives every day.

 

Most without even having to be fired.

 

There is a Constitutionally Protected Right to "Keep and Bear" them in America.

 

Not so, the Automobile.

 

- Mass Murdering Automobiles -

Multiple Casualties And Injuries After Van Attack In Germany

Barcelona - At least 13 Dead/100 Injured After Van Plows into Crowd

Automobile Mass-murders 6, wounds 21 in van rampage on London Bridge

Automobile Mass-murders 4, Wounds 44 in Stillwater, Okla.

Automobile Mass-murders 12, Wounds 48 in Berlin, Germany.

 

Toronto has been the scene of many deliberate attacks involving vehicles

At least 10 people were killed and 15 injured when a man drove a van through pedestrians walking on a crowded Toronto street Monday. Police said the act seemed deliberate, although early indications do not point to an act of terrorism, because Liberal Socialists are afraid of offending mass murderers.

 

 

- They are registered.

- They are licensed.

- They are regulated by the Government.

- Owners are trained.

- Owners are licensed.

- Owners are regulated by the Government.

 

...and still, automobiles commit mass murder.

 

30,000 Americans this Year...

 

 

By far the most common type of injury accident involving children are those that also involve motor vehicle collisions. According to the National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA), nearly 250,000 children are injured every year in car accidents.

 

This means that on any given day nearly 700 children are harmed due to accidents on our roadways. Of the 250,000 kids injured each year, approximately 2,000 die from their injuries. Children make up about 5% of total fatalities due to car accidents. In fact, for children between the ages of 2 and 14, motor vehicle accidents are the leading cause of death...

 

 

- The leading cause of death among young people ages 15-29, and the second leading cause of death worldwide among young people ages 5-14.

 

- Over 1,600 children under 15 years of age die each year.

 

 

So, there is only one option left to guarantee the safety and protection of Citizens...

 

Automobile confiscation.

 

Your Government will still have them... but you will not.

 

You don't really need one, anyway, car-nuts... you can walk or ride a bicycle...

Billions of people on this planet do every day. Or use public transportation.

 

Because, you don't have one of THESE for your car, do you?

Second-_Amendment--620x358.jpg

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, shetluck said:

What is a gun nutter? Have you ever been shooting. Do you own a gun.

She's scared of guns.  They're big, and black. 

The ironic thing is that liberals hate the police, but they want the police to be the only ones in this country that is armed. 

 

Liberalism is devoid of logic. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...