Just to be clear....

Red1966

Well-Known Member
about 20 pounds of 5150 steel and a lot of fake paranoid delusional made up beliefs that i need it for some reason out of principle i bet those turtles around you are vicious for some reason i don think much matters to you other than money and your own agenda . . which is loneliness
Sounds like butthurt.
 

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
nope our tax dollars did . .since you work for the government, you def earned your money , working for the government,


i find it self serving of you to complain about gun rights laws that haven't been enacted by the government yet as they pay for your guns

that you need for what exaclty . . . .

this is the age old if you give a mouse a cookie situation

they dont need it or the glass of milk but they will demand or ask for it even if they dont need em
thre gubmint does not pass "gun rights laws"

laws, by their nature RESTRICT rights, while the constitution enshrines them.

the desire of the gubmint to further curtail our rights to facilitate greater control is not news, and resisting this pressure is the duty of every person who loves our constitution.

you may be satisfied with surrendering your arms in exchange for some new benefit, or maybe just another season of keeping Up With The Khardashians, but i'm not gonna let it slide.

YOU may not find a need for an AR 15, but i dont find a NEED for aan iphone. does this give me the right to restrict YOUR access to apple products? and iPhones arent even protected under the constitution. go figure.

also, mice LOVE cookies, and they also enjoy a glass of La Leche with their Galletas.
 

Figong

Well-Known Member
thre gubmint does not pass "gun rights laws"

laws, by their nature RESTRICT rights, while the constitution enshrines them.

the desire of the gubmint to further curtail our rights to facilitate greater control is not news, and resisting this pressure is the duty of every person who loves our constitution.

you may be satisfied with surrendering your arms in exchange for some new benefit, or maybe just another season of keeping Up With The Khardashians, but i'm not gonna let it slide.

YOU may not find a need for an AR 15, but i dont find a NEED for aan iphone. does this give me the right to restrict YOUR access to apple products? and iPhones arent even protected under the constitution. go figure.

also, mice LOVE cookies, and they also enjoy a glass of La Leche with their Galletas.
Which is why jailbroken phones with custom crypto mechanisms for secure texting are where it's at - anything data-wise, from voice to texts.. email, all of it... none of it is protected whatsoever... and the spy games continue.
 

Totoe

Well-Known Member
thre gubmint does not pass "gun rights laws"

laws, by their nature RESTRICT rights, while the constitution enshrines them. So, do laws prohibiting murder, rape, and theft restrict our "right" to rape and pillage like vikings, or are these laws in place to ensure that everyone gets to personally observe their rights to pursue life, liberty, happiness etc?

the desire of the gubmint to further curtail our rights to facilitate greater control is not news, and resisting this pressure is the duty of every person who loves our constitution.

you may be satisfied with surrendering your arms in exchange for some new benefit, or maybe just another season of keeping Up With The Khardashians, but i'm not gonna let it slide.

YOU may not find a need for an AR 15, but i dont find a NEED for aan iphone. does this give me the right to restrict YOUR access to apple products? and iPhones arent even protected under the constitution. go figure. iPhone's are not potentially dangerous weapons, this is a bad comparison.

also, mice LOVE cookies, and they also enjoy a glass of La Leche with their Galletas.
On a personal note, I enjoy Kynes' argument style; 1-part vocabulary and 1-part alliteration mixed with a healthy three fingers of fear shaken together then garnished with a funny little side-note at the end.
 

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
yes, you are right, our laws are intended to be restrictive by nature. it's the nature of a FREE COUNTRY, in the absence of a prohibition,, an action or object is presumed legal.

countries where the laws prescribe what you MAY do rather than proscribe what you may NOT do are by definition authoritarian dictatorships.

you may not consider iPhones dangerous, but a sack full of them can be quite hazardous to the person you are wailing on.

would you propose restricting the possession of "assault Knives" over 3 inches? they are after all quite dangerous and are DESIGNED TO BE WEAPONS

how about bows and arrows? should those weapons of war be banned?

just because YOU find noi value in guns, that does not give you either the power or the right to make those decisions for the rest of us.

even Barry Seotoro and the congress do not have the power to ban guns, save by amendment to the constitution, why ado the not use this mechanism, since the mechanism for amending the constitution is well established, and available for their use?

if you are so confident that right is on your side, make your pitch for a new amendment.
 

Totoe

Well-Known Member
To the contrary, as a gun owner I find much value in guns. I am pro common sense measures though. I think firearm education should be part of the national curriculum just so everyone knows what to do should they encounter a gun. Certain types of crazies should not have access to firearms. etc. I could go on but my work day is finished.

Really, many things can be fashioned into a weapon even a pencil. People single out firearms because they are made with the intent of being a weapon and make it is easier to kill lots of people really quick.

What if we simply trained everyone to bumrush in an active shooter scenario. sure people would still die, but fewer, and they could take the shooter apart themselves, fun for the whole family. The only problem is the idea relies on people not being scared and putting the good of the group above their own personal good.

Anyways, I don't feel like working overtime.

I'll check back later
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
yes, you are right, our laws are intended to be restrictive by nature. it's the nature of a FREE COUNTRY, in the absence of a prohibition,, an action or object is presumed legal.

countries where the laws prescribe what you MAY do rather than proscribe what you may NOT do are by definition authoritarian dictatorships.

you may not consider iPhones dangerous, but a sack full of them can be quite hazardous to the person you are wailing on.

would you propose restricting the possession of "assault Knives" over 3 inches? they are after all quite dangerous and are DESIGNED TO BE WEAPONS

how about bows and arrows? should those weapons of war be banned?

just because YOU find noi value in guns, that does not give you either the power or the right to make those decisions for the rest of us.

even Barry Seotoro and the congress do not have the power to ban guns, save by amendment to the constitution, why ado the not use this mechanism, since the mechanism for amending the constitution is well established, and available for their use?

if you are so confident that right is on your side, make your pitch for a new amendment.
the SCOTUS sees no problem with gun restrictions, all perfectly consistent with the second.*

go cry now.







*my penis is very small.
 

Twitch

Well-Known Member
lol
i aint given up my guns
and i aint gunna let you take'em

hows that for talking like a hick?....

In the words of the late Charles Heston "from my cold dead hands"
 

Twitch

Well-Known Member
out of respect for y'alls opinions i hope no one with a gun tries to help y'all if something nefarious where to happen.
 

stonerloner822

New Member
I'm a Canadian, but these weapon prohibition acts in the U.S.A. have to make me laugh, in Canada we are not allowed fully automatic weapons, handguns are under very intense scrutiny, yet on the streets of Toronto, Vancouver, Halifax, Dartmouth, Spryfield and many others I have personally witnessed shootings with said weapons, commited by minors and adults alike. Our governments don't need to scrutinize the law abiding citizens by prohibiting these weapons, they need to crack down on unregistered firearms and the suppliers of such weapons, as the law abiding citizens of both our countries should be allowed to defend ourselves from the punks who think they are above the law. I do everything legally now, I have not in my past, and yet these street "thugs" tend to have more money on them than in my bank account. What do they do with this money? Buy weapons, jewellery, cars, and hard drugs. I have worked hard to get where I am and I am not allowed to defend myself? Fuck all governments, they just command and criticize the lower class individuals of their countries.
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
It matters little what weapons they ban or what magazines they ban. I will still legally be enabled to use all my assault style firearms with the 500 round magazines as much as I please, they cannot make them illegal for me to own and use.
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
And the 9th A says we are perfectly free to ignore any law....if we don't get caught.
 

desert dude

Well-Known Member
its not unconstitutional because they arent saying you cant bare arms, they are just saying you cant bare "these" arms. thats almost like complaining about not being able to own grenades or something and saying its unconstitutional.
They are also going to ban all pronouns from here on. It's not like you don't have a shitload of other words at your disposal. No problem, right?
 
Top