OK, all you happy card carrying NRA members.....

[slag]

Hadn't seen Jefferies do that bit ... fuckin' tip top.

[harls]

You are a giant deballed faggot that has no conception that the media is owned by elites and exists only to turn you into the unthinking jackass you so clearly are.



I'm not the one that posted the Natural News link either.

The difference is the British had to have men there to fire upon you. It was men with guns vs men with guns. Now adays the government can take us out with drones. If everything went tits up the government could wipe us out regardless if you had your guns.

That said I dont think guns should be banned. But I do think they need to be regulated, registered and tracked. If your gun is used in a crime you are held responsible.

[FuriousXGeorge]

You are a giant deballed faggot that has no conception that the media is owned by elites and exists only to turn you into the unthinking jackass you so clearly are.

So you trust conspiracy site Natural News' arguments about psychiatric medicine, read MRA sites, believe in conspiracy theories about media brainwashing...

Is this all just an elaborate cry for help? TAKE YOUR MEDS. They will help you, they aren't evil government brainwashing pills. It will be okay. The voices will stop.

[Overbrook]

Giant deballed faggot?

GoodGod, how does a knuckle dragging asshole like you manage to survive in the real world? You're a fucking gem! The poster boy for the new age ignorant as a rock American.

Do the world a favor and go play in traffic.

[IronEagle]

The difference is the British had to have men there to fire upon you. It was men with guns vs men with guns. Now adays the government can take us out with drones. If everything went tits up the government could wipe us out regardless if you had your guns.

That said I dont think guns should be banned. But I do think they need to be regulated, registered and tracked. If your gun is used in a crime you are held responsible.

I get your point about drones, but let's take it a step further. How about a nuke? We have been living under that threat my entire life. How much good is your second amendment (I loved the point that Jefferies made that it is an amendment and can be changed) assault rifle going to do fighting against "tyranny" after a nuke goes off in your area? You're dead.

[harls]

I get your point about drones, but let's take it a step further. How about a nuke? We have been living under that threat my entire life. How much good is your second amendment (I loved the point that Jefferies made that it is an amendment and can be changed) assault rifle going to do fighting against "tyranny" after a nuke goes off in your area?

I don't believe a nuke has ever been as much of a threat in uprising as a drone is. With a nuke you are looking at a situation where you are going to kill hundreds of thousands to millions of innocent people. The government would have to be extremely desperate to do that. A drone they can use surgically to take out the malcontents and minimize the civillian casualties.

That said it isn't "my second ammendment" I personally wouldn't have a problem with any changes to it... I just don't think with the whack jobs in the country that you will be able to repeal it. I would rather try for something more attainable and track and monitor the firearms and hold people accountable for what happens with their firearms. It won't fix all of these tragedies but it would lessen them.

[Kelly Green]

Uh, What About The BEGINNING Of The Second Amendment?

If you listen to the NRA and all the gun lovers out there, the Second Amendment says, in effect, people are allowed to own guns and nobody can prevent it.

However the next time the NRA and all the gun lovers out there remember there was a qualifier to the amendment will be the first time.

The Founding Fathers said, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Last time I looked we now have local police, state police, the FBI, the Army, the Navy, the Marines, the Air Force, the Coast Guard and I'm sure I'm leaving out parts of the law enforcement and peace keeping forces of this country.

There is one thing all have in common...none of them -- NONE OF THEM -- require the members to supply their own weapons!

Just sayin'!

[IronEagle]

I don't believe a nuke has ever been as much of a threat in uprising as a drone is. With a nuke you are looking at a situation where you are going to kill hundreds of thousands to millions of innocent people. The government would have to be extremely desperate to do that. A drone they can use surgically to take out the malcontents and minimize the civillian casualties.

That said it isn't "my second ammendment" I personally wouldn't have a problem with any changes to it... I just don't think with the whack jobs in the country that you will be able to repeal it. I would rather try for something more attainable and track and monitor the firearms and hold people accountable for what happens with their firearms. It won't fix all of these tragedies but it would lessen them.

We are not in disagreement. All I was trying to do was to point out the absurdity that the populace owning guns would be effective against the government in all out warfare.

Man things are f*cked up right now.

We have militarized police and people defending the militarization of the police, while at the same time we have the same people who approve of the militarized police demanding they need to have guns to defend themselves against the "tyranny" of the government and it's militarized police.

Only people that win here are the people in the gun industry.

[harls]

We are not in disagreement. All I was trying to do was to point out the absurdity that the populace owning guns would be effective against the government in all out warfare.

Man things are f*cked up right now.

We have militarized police and people defending the militarization of the police, while at the same time we have the same people who approve of the militarized police demanding they need to have guns to defend themselves against the "tyranny" of the government and it's militarized police.

Only people that win here are the people in the gun industry.

Absolutely. All while the gun industry screams they are going to take our guns then sit back and watch everyone run out to buy more. And if a politician is truly for gun control the NRA will see he is never elected.

[slag]

Uh, not that I'm against gun control, but that provision is focused on ordinary citizens having the ability to form a militia to rise up against a possible tyrannical ruler, notwithstanding the existence of the police and the military.

[McCarthy12]

Don't pay mind to Barrister Green. He was breast deep in an analysis of Dean Milk v. City of Madison when he wrote that ridiculous post.

[Drama Queen]

Constitutional law and boobie juice doesn't mix well on message boards.

[FuriousXGeorge]

Are you actually stupid enough to believe that government, big business, and media don't collude to uphold their corrupt regime?

What does that have to do with psych meds and white supremacist terrorist attacks again?

[Overbrook]

WARNING: Do not try to reason with a mental defect

What does that have to do with psych meds and white supremacist terrorist attacks again?

That is all

[Riccardo]

I'd like to know who "these people" are

while at the same time we have the same people who approve of the militarized police demanding they need to have guns to defend themselves against the "tyranny" of the government and it's militarized police.
.

I know alot of gun owners and defenders of the right to bear arms but I don't know a single person that wants to own guns as defense against the "tyranny of the government". Maybe you know "these people"? You keep bringing this up.