If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Denver Channel)   NRA takes a shot at making robocalls in Newtown, CT   (thedenverchannel.com) divider line 647
    More: Dumbass, NRA, Newtown, Connecticut, Sandy Hook Elementary School  
•       •       •

6170 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Mar 2013 at 9:46 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



647 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-25 10:15:05 PM

Bonzo_1116: I'm not sure how the background check system can be made available to the general public without compromising people's privacy, though.


Easy, you go to a dealer who does the background check for, like $2.
 
2013-03-25 10:15:28 PM

pedrop357: Hack Patooey: pedrop357: LordJiro: pedrop357: JolobinSmokin: Good for them, gun owners are an oppressed group of ppl

If what's done to the 2nd amendment were done to any other enumerated or unenumerated right, the people wishing to exercise those rights would consider it oppression.

Yep, NO right is restricted in any way! That argument is in no way absolute bullshiat.

Gun nuts would be taken a little more seriously if they'd pull themselves off their goddamn crosses. For TOUGH MANLY SHOOTIN MEN, they do seem like a bunch of whiny pussies.

No right is as restricted as the right to bear arms

Speech?

Assembly?

Illegal search?

How many background checks or forms do you have to undergo to have a protest?  How many laws are there restricting bullhorns, sign making materials, etc.?

What about laws restricting containers designed to be concealed, burglar resistant doors/windows, encryption software, etc. all of which can be used to evade lawfully authorized searches?


Oh, you are breaking my heart!  You poor, poor thing!
 
2013-03-25 10:15:38 PM

pedrop357: How many background checks or forms do you have to undergo to have a protest? How many laws are there restricting bullhorns, sign making materials, etc.?


How many men murder their families, enjoy a "barricade situation" and then commit suicide using only bullhorns and sign-making materials?
 
2013-03-25 10:15:58 PM

12349876: pedrop357: The "well regulated" portion does not restrict or confine the right to bear arms and you know it. "Well regulated" was used differently then compared to now and applied to the composition and training of the militia. You have to know that too.

So you're arguing for a "living" constitution?  How Liberal of you!


Actually, that's the opposite of a "living" constitution. A living constitution argument would be exactly what he was negating, suggesting that "well regulated" meant "heavily restricted". What pedrop357 is practicing is known as originalism.

When being snarky, it helps if you actually know what you are talking about.
 
2013-03-25 10:16:08 PM

12349876: pedrop357: The "well regulated" portion does not restrict or confine the right to bear arms and you know it. "Well regulated" was used differently then compared to now and applied to the composition and training of the militia. You have to know that too.

So you're arguing for a "living" constitution?  How Liberal of you!


Nothing living about it.  We use words differently than they did now.

If a constitutional amendment from 1860 said "All gay people shall be permitted to do X", it's disingenuous to act as though only homosexuals are permitted to do X simply because society changed the way they use the word "gay".  I used this example because as I understand it, the word "gay" several decades ago meant "happy", "jolly", or something along those lines.
 
2013-03-25 10:17:13 PM

cameroncrazy1984: pedrop357: How many background checks or forms do you have to undergo to have a protest?  How many laws are there restricting bullhorns, sign making materials, etc.?

What about laws restricting containers designed to be concealed, burglar resistant doors/windows, encryption software, etc. all of which can be used to evade lawfully authorized searches

Again, the first isn't "well-regulated" and speech doesn't generally kill people.


Irrelevant.  The right explicitly protects the right to keep and bear items that can be used to injure or kill.  You'd have to be a moron to think that the idea that arms were deadly somehow escaped those drafting the constitution.
 
2013-03-25 10:17:36 PM

cameroncrazy1984: davidphogan: When members of your community start testifying about federal legislation that's a risk that should be accepted.

Yeah, if you testify in front of a federal hearing, you should be willing to be intimidated.


What's the intimidation of a well known advocacy group racing out to the public on a public referendum? Did the NRA lose their first amendment rights because of Adam Lanza?
 
2013-03-25 10:18:27 PM
Have you no sense of decency?

Listen - I'm a gun owner and a pretty good shooter. I frequently out-shoot my brother who is a cop (much to his dismay). Still, I f*cking HATE those NRA-types who try to turn a tragedy into a goddamn sales pitch.

Have you no sense of decency?
 
2013-03-25 10:18:37 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Bonzo_1116: I'm not sure how the background check system can be made available to the general public without compromising people's privacy, though.

Easy, you go to a dealer who does the background check for, like $2.


Ahh, but then the transaction isn't the "free unfettered commerce" with no paper trail that so many seem to crave.
 
2013-03-25 10:18:52 PM

cameroncrazy1984: pedrop357: phalamir: pedrop357: LordJiro: pedrop357: JolobinSmokin: Good for them, gun owners are an oppressed group of ppl

If what's done to the 2nd amendment were done to any other enumerated or unenumerated right, the people wishing to exercise those rights would consider it oppression.

Yep, NO right is restricted in any way! That argument is in no way absolute bullshiat.

Gun nuts would be taken a little more seriously if they'd pull themselves off their goddamn crosses. For TOUGH MANLY SHOOTIN MEN, they do seem like a bunch of whiny pussies.

No right is as restricted as the right to bear arms

Maybe because the right to a speedy trial pretty much can't injure anyone

That's only relevant if you think that the people drafting the 2nd amendment had no idea that arms could be lethal.

I think mainly they couldn't predict repeating or automatic arms easily accessed by the general public.

The founders weren't gods or seers.


They banged their slaves, though. Never had a thought it would be different..

It doesn't matter what they thought. All that matters is they left it open to interpretation.
 
2013-03-25 10:19:24 PM

LordJiro: pedrop357: LordJiro: pedrop357: JolobinSmokin: Good for them, gun owners are an oppressed group of ppl

If what's done to the 2nd amendment were done to any other enumerated or unenumerated right, the people wishing to exercise those rights would consider it oppression.

Yep, NO right is restricted in any way! That argument is in no way absolute bullshiat.

Gun nuts would be taken a little more seriously if they'd pull themselves off their goddamn crosses. For TOUGH MANLY SHOOTIN MEN, they do seem like a bunch of whiny pussies.

No right is as restricted as the right to bear arms

Which amendment specifically mentions being "Well-regulated" besides the Second?



Do you have a late 1700s early 1800s dictionary to cite the definition?

Words have meaning....and it may vary with the time period.
 
2013-03-25 10:19:26 PM

cameroncrazy1984: pedrop357: phalamir: pedrop357: LordJiro: pedrop357: JolobinSmokin: Good for them, gun owners are an oppressed group of ppl

If what's done to the 2nd amendment were done to any other enumerated or unenumerated right, the people wishing to exercise those rights would consider it oppression.

Yep, NO right is restricted in any way! That argument is in no way absolute bullshiat.

Gun nuts would be taken a little more seriously if they'd pull themselves off their goddamn crosses. For TOUGH MANLY SHOOTIN MEN, they do seem like a bunch of whiny pussies.

No right is as restricted as the right to bear arms

Maybe because the right to a speedy trial pretty much can't injure anyone

That's only relevant if you think that the people drafting the 2nd amendment had no idea that arms could be lethal.

I think mainly they couldn't predict repeating or automatic arms easily accessed by the general public.

The founders weren't gods or seers.


Get off of fark.com and send your reply on parchment paper filled out by quill pen and delivered by horse back carrier.

The founders couldn't predict home printing presses, personal movie studios, etc. yet all of those are protected by the 1st amendment.

The whole purpose of the 2nd amendment is that that general public had the right to the same arms that would be used by the militia.

If it's outdated, you and those who think like you should start a campaign to amend the constitution.
 
2013-03-25 10:19:55 PM

Craptastic: Have you no sense of decency?

Listen - I'm a gun owner and a pretty good shooter. I frequently out-shoot my brother who is a cop (much to his dismay). Still, I f*cking HATE those NRA-types who try to turn a tragedy into a goddamn sales pitch.

Have you no sense of decency?


encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com

"Nope"
 
2013-03-25 10:20:24 PM

Craptastic: Have you no sense of decency?

Listen - I'm a gun owner and a pretty good shooter. I frequently out-shoot my brother who is a cop (much to his dismay). Still, I f*cking HATE those NRA-types who try to turn a tragedy into a goddamn sales pitch.

Have you no sense of decency?


I'm calling bullshiat on you.

2/10
 
2013-03-25 10:20:24 PM

pedrop357: cameroncrazy1984: pedrop357: How many background checks or forms do you have to undergo to have a protest?  How many laws are there restricting bullhorns, sign making materials, etc.?

What about laws restricting containers designed to be concealed, burglar resistant doors/windows, encryption software, etc. all of which can be used to evade lawfully authorized searches

Again, the first isn't "well-regulated" and speech doesn't generally kill people.

Irrelevant.  The right explicitly protects the right to keep and bear items that can be used to injure or kill.  You'd have to be a moron to think that the idea that arms were deadly somehow escaped those drafting the constitution.


As part of a well-regulated militia.  Why is it that gun nuts always ignore that part?
 
2013-03-25 10:20:24 PM

djkutch: I have a baseball bat under my bed. Seems adequate and easier to use.

/apple pie
//kosher dogs


What? Must be a Ford driver
 
2013-03-25 10:21:47 PM

jaytkay: pedrop357: How many background checks or forms do you have to undergo to have a protest? How many laws are there restricting bullhorns, sign making materials, etc.?

How many men murder their families, enjoy a "barricade situation" and then commit suicide using only bullhorns and sign-making materials?


Irrelevant.  The right to bear arms is still a right just like all others.

How many people have to upload pornographic pictures of children before we restrict cameras and internet access so that a person can't just walk out with a camera, computer, cable modem, etc. with cash and no questions asked?
 
2013-03-25 10:22:15 PM

Craptastic: Have you no sense of decency?

Listen - I'm a gun owner and a pretty good shooter. I frequently out-shoot my brother who is a cop (much to his dismay). Still, I f*cking HATE those NRA-types who try to turn a tragedy into a goddamn sales pitch.

Have you no sense of decency?


I'm not a fan of people using fear because they were a victim to pass new laws. Do you like the PATRIOT Act?
 
2013-03-25 10:22:41 PM

cameroncrazy1984: As part of a well-regulated militia. Why is it that gun nuts always ignore that part?


Nope.  The right to bear arms is not conditioned upon militia membership.
 
2013-03-25 10:22:49 PM

Craptastic: Have you no sense of decency?

Listen - I'm a gun owner and a pretty good shooter. I frequently out-shoot my brother who is a cop (much to his dismay). Still, I f*cking HATE those NRA-types who try to turn a tragedy into a goddamn sales pitch.

Have you no sense of decency?


Any love of the gun control crowd exploting children and even surrounding themselves with children during the signing of executive orders for the purpose of selling gun control?
 
2013-03-25 10:23:36 PM

Giltric: LordJiro: pedrop357: LordJiro: pedrop357: JolobinSmokin: Good for them, gun owners are an oppressed group of ppl

If what's done to the 2nd amendment were done to any other enumerated or unenumerated right, the people wishing to exercise those rights would consider it oppression.

Yep, NO right is restricted in any way! That argument is in no way absolute bullshiat.

Gun nuts would be taken a little more seriously if they'd pull themselves off their goddamn crosses. For TOUGH MANLY SHOOTIN MEN, they do seem like a bunch of whiny pussies.

No right is as restricted as the right to bear arms

Which amendment specifically mentions being "Well-regulated" besides the Second?


Do you have a late 1700s early 1800s dictionary to cite the definition?

Words have meaning....and it may vary with the time period.


Like the definition of 'arms'?
 
2013-03-25 10:23:39 PM
Gun control advocates have also been making robocalls in the same area. Bfd
 
2013-03-25 10:24:01 PM
Pro tip.....

Register with the do not call list.
 
2013-03-25 10:24:36 PM

cameroncrazy1984: pedrop357: cameroncrazy1984: pedrop357: How many background checks or forms do you have to undergo to have a protest?  How many laws are there restricting bullhorns, sign making materials, etc.?

What about laws restricting containers designed to be concealed, burglar resistant doors/windows, encryption software, etc. all of which can be used to evade lawfully authorized searches

Again, the first isn't "well-regulated" and speech doesn't generally kill people.

Irrelevant.  The right explicitly protects the right to keep and bear items that can be used to injure or kill.  You'd have to be a moron to think that the idea that arms were deadly somehow escaped those drafting the constitution.

As part of a well-regulated militia.  Why is it that gun nuts always ignore that part?


They're not the brightest people...and what intellect they do have is frequently overridden by emotion.
 
2013-03-25 10:24:57 PM

Propain_az: Craptastic: Have you no sense of decency?

Listen - I'm a gun owner and a pretty good shooter. I frequently out-shoot my brother who is a cop (much to his dismay). Still, I f*cking HATE those NRA-types who try to turn a tragedy into a goddamn sales pitch.

Have you no sense of decency?

I'm calling bullshiat on you.

2/10


I'm interested on what you're calling "BS". Is it that I own a few guns, or that I'm a better shot than you?
 
2013-03-25 10:25:03 PM

dave2198: Giltric: LordJiro: pedrop357: LordJiro: pedrop357: JolobinSmokin: Good for them, gun owners are an oppressed group of ppl

If what's done to the 2nd amendment were done to any other enumerated or unenumerated right, the people wishing to exercise those rights would consider it oppression.

Yep, NO right is restricted in any way! That argument is in no way absolute bullshiat.

Gun nuts would be taken a little more seriously if they'd pull themselves off their goddamn crosses. For TOUGH MANLY SHOOTIN MEN, they do seem like a bunch of whiny pussies.

No right is as restricted as the right to bear arms

Which amendment specifically mentions being "Well-regulated" besides the Second?


Do you have a late 1700s early 1800s dictionary to cite the definition?

Words have meaning....and it may vary with the time period.

Like the definition of 'arms'?


Yep.  Arms were muskets then and are AR-15s, M16s, etc. today.

When companies start producing phased plasma rifles in the 40w range and type II hand phasers, those will be protected by the 2nd amendment as well.
 
2013-03-25 10:25:47 PM

dave2198: Giltric: LordJiro: pedrop357: LordJiro: pedrop357: JolobinSmokin: Good for them, gun owners are an oppressed group of ppl

If what's done to the 2nd amendment were done to any other enumerated or unenumerated right, the people wishing to exercise those rights would consider it oppression.

Yep, NO right is restricted in any way! That argument is in no way absolute bullshiat.

Gun nuts would be taken a little more seriously if they'd pull themselves off their goddamn crosses. For TOUGH MANLY SHOOTIN MEN, they do seem like a bunch of whiny pussies.

No right is as restricted as the right to bear arms

Which amendment specifically mentions being "Well-regulated" besides the Second?


Do you have a late 1700s early 1800s dictionary to cite the definition?

Words have meaning....and it may vary with the time period.

Like the definition of 'arms'?



Sure give me a link to the definition from the time period.

I bet it has more to do with weapons a person can carry than it does saying specifically musket.
 
2013-03-25 10:26:23 PM

Lionel Mandrake: They're not the brightest people...and what intellect they do have is frequently overridden by emotion.


Were you looking at yourself in a mirror when typing that, or is this just projection.

The anti-gun arguments have been overwhelmingly root entirely in emotion.
 
2013-03-25 10:26:28 PM

way south: firefly212: the idea that you could quite literally sell guns out of your trunk in person to person transactions with no paperwork at all... and that it is legal in many places

Selling a few guns privately is legal.   Dealing large numbers of firearms without a license is a felony.
The problem with UBC is they plan to make everything done without government permission a felony, which greatly affects alot of law abiding gun owners. Raising prices and complicating transfers.
Since the government has been in the habit of giving guns away and turning a blind eye to straw purchasers and corrupt dealers, the fact is this law is written to ensnare people like you and me.Not the guy with a trunk full of guns.

/But really, this is the internet era. Who still uses robo-calls?


I'm ok with private gun sales... with background checks... I don't see what's so onerous about a $10 dollar fee (here in CO, that's part of the private background check law that just passed) to make sure that you're not selling to a violent felon or other prohibited person. The problem with the law, as it stood, is you could come up to me while I was selling my private collection out of the trunk on a street corner, and there wouldn't be crap you could do to prove that I was selling more than the allowed number of weapons, so long as I had fewer than the limit in my trunk. I mean, selling 9 guns out of my trunk at a time isn't any farking better than 29, and if I only sold 9 a day, you couldn't prove what I sold the day before because the total lack of a paperwork or background check or any other documentation requirement.

I don't think the robo-calls are a first amendment issue though, the NRA can call whoever they want... but we shouldn't get so wrapped up in what they *can* do to observe what they *should* do (totally different things). With respect to Newtown, they should have just obtained a list of the Newtown numbers and crossed them off their robocalling list. Calling those people is just as tone deaf of a play as when they held their convention here in CO right after Columbine.

The other problem with the NRA is they could get what they want, they could stop the AWB and magazine limits in just about every state... if they weren't so batshiat crazy against background checks. Just like with their woefully ineffective political spending, they seem so committed to a wackadoo ideology that they're losing the war simply by failing to be reasonable. Frankly, the NRA is to gun rights what the Westboro Baptist Church is for traditional marriage... they're so frickin committed to their cause to crazy extents that nobody wants to be with "that guy."
 
2013-03-25 10:26:30 PM

Doom MD: Gun control advocates have also been making robocalls in the same area. Bfd


Apparently since they're the victims that's okay. They're victims, so only they have a valid opinion. Otherwise you're just intimidating them.
 
2013-03-25 10:27:02 PM
Pure. farking. Evil.
 
2013-03-25 10:27:04 PM

davidphogan: Do you like the PATRIOT Act?


No sir. I do not like it. I didn't like it when Bush signed, and I liked it even less when Obama extended it.
 
2013-03-25 10:27:15 PM

pedrop357: fusillade762: Insensitive and tone deaf? The NRA??

Or the ACLU.


Snappy, clever comeback!  Amazing how folks like this crawl out of the woodwork in gun threads.  Nice to meet you, pedrop357, never seen you before.
 
2013-03-25 10:27:29 PM

pedrop357: Yep. Arms were muskets then and are AR-15s, M16s, etc. today.


And howitzers, and flamethrowers and F-16s?
 
2013-03-25 10:27:54 PM

pedrop357: How many people have to upload pornographic pictures of children before we restrict cameras and internet access so that a person can't just walk out with a camera, computer, cable modem, etc. with cash and no questions asked?


So you're saying the NRA is like the kiddie porn business?

I agree.
 
2013-03-25 10:29:23 PM
pedrop357:  The whole purpose of the 2nd amendment is that that general public had the right to the same arms that would be used by the militia.

Que?  A militia would have been made up of the general public.  "We will insure that John Smith has access to the same weapon that John Smith has access to" would have to be the lamest Amendment ever.
 
2013-03-25 10:29:50 PM

pedrop357: dave2198: Giltric: LordJiro: pedrop357: LordJiro: pedrop357: JolobinSmokin: Good for them, gun owners are an oppressed group of ppl

If what's done to the 2nd amendment were done to any other enumerated or unenumerated right, the people wishing to exercise those rights would consider it oppression.

Yep, NO right is restricted in any way! That argument is in no way absolute bullshiat.

Gun nuts would be taken a little more seriously if they'd pull themselves off their goddamn crosses. For TOUGH MANLY SHOOTIN MEN, they do seem like a bunch of whiny pussies.

No right is as restricted as the right to bear arms

Which amendment specifically mentions being "Well-regulated" besides the Second?


Do you have a late 1700s early 1800s dictionary to cite the definition?

Words have meaning....and it may vary with the time period.

Like the definition of 'arms'?

Yep.  Arms were muskets then and are AR-15s, M16s, etc. today.

When companies start producing phased plasma rifles in the 40w range and type II hand phasers, those will be protected by the 2nd amendment as well.


That's a nice, selective list there. I want an RPG. That doesn't fit into your nice little box of what you think 'arms' means. However, I need to defend my family from the government. And they have armored SUV's and shiat.

So can I have an RPG?
 
2013-03-25 10:30:08 PM

Lionel Mandrake: pedrop357: Yep. Arms were muskets then and are AR-15s, M16s, etc. today.

And howitzers, and flamethrowers and F-16s?


Howizters and jets can indeed be owned and if the police and military are using them, it would seem that the 2nd amendment protections apply to them being kept and beared by the people who empower those groups in the first place.

Flamethrowers are not regulated by the ATF or any other agency of the federal government that I can find.  As such, they're easier to purchase, construct, possess than a firearm.
 
2013-03-25 10:30:16 PM

Lionel Mandrake: pedrop357: Yep. Arms were muskets then and are AR-15s, M16s, etc. today.

And howitzers, and flamethrowers and F-16s?


Flamethrowers only need an agricultural permit. No background check.

Howitzers are privately owned, so are war birds, including modern jet fighters and bombers.
 
2013-03-25 10:30:33 PM

Craptastic: Have you no sense of decency?

Listen - I'm a gun owner and a pretty good shooter. I frequently out-shoot my brother who is a cop (much to his dismay). Still, I f*cking HATE those NRA-types who try to turn a tragedy into a goddamn sales pitch.

Have you no sense of decency?


The gun control advocates started waving the bloody shirt within minutes of the tragedy. This is tepid by comparison
 
2013-03-25 10:30:53 PM

Giltric: dave2198: Giltric: LordJiro: pedrop357: LordJiro: pedrop357: JolobinSmokin: Good for them, gun owners are an oppressed group of ppl

If what's done to the 2nd amendment were done to any other enumerated or unenumerated right, the people wishing to exercise those rights would consider it oppression.

Yep, NO right is restricted in any way! That argument is in no way absolute bullshiat.

Gun nuts would be taken a little more seriously if they'd pull themselves off their goddamn crosses. For TOUGH MANLY SHOOTIN MEN, they do seem like a bunch of whiny pussies.

No right is as restricted as the right to bear arms

Which amendment specifically mentions being "Well-regulated" besides the Second?


Do you have a late 1700s early 1800s dictionary to cite the definition?

Words have meaning....and it may vary with the time period.

Like the definition of 'arms'?


Sure give me a link to the definition from the time period.

I bet it has more to do with weapons a person can carry than it does saying specifically musket.


I can carry an RPG. Hell, I bet I can carry two.

Can I have one?
 
2013-03-25 10:31:06 PM
Gun control people have been making calls and being douche bags for 3 months.  The NRA (who doesn't have to defend anything regarding what happened in CT) makes some calls, like it does in many swing states, gets national attention.  POS liberal media making something out of nothing.
 
2013-03-25 10:31:15 PM

firefly212: The other problem with the NRA is they could get what they want, they could stop the AWB and magazine limits in just about every state... if they weren't so batshiat crazy against background checks.


The NRA, as the gun industry lobby, wants as many guns sold as possible.  A background check may prevent a gun sale.
 
2013-03-25 10:31:47 PM

dave2198: pedrop357: dave2198: Giltric: LordJiro: pedrop357: LordJiro: pedrop357: JolobinSmokin: Good for them, gun owners are an oppressed group of ppl

If what's done to the 2nd amendment were done to any other enumerated or unenumerated right, the people wishing to exercise those rights would consider it oppression.

Yep, NO right is restricted in any way! That argument is in no way absolute bullshiat.

Gun nuts would be taken a little more seriously if they'd pull themselves off their goddamn crosses. For TOUGH MANLY SHOOTIN MEN, they do seem like a bunch of whiny pussies.

No right is as restricted as the right to bear arms

Which amendment specifically mentions being "Well-regulated" besides the Second?


Do you have a late 1700s early 1800s dictionary to cite the definition?

Words have meaning....and it may vary with the time period.

Like the definition of 'arms'?

Yep.  Arms were muskets then and are AR-15s, M16s, etc. today.

When companies start producing phased plasma rifles in the 40w range and type II hand phasers, those will be protected by the 2nd amendment as well.

That's a nice, selective list there. I want an RPG. That doesn't fit into your nice little box of what you think 'arms' means. However, I need to defend my family from the government. And they have armored SUV's and shiat.

So can I have an RPG?


Yes. Destructive device as per the NFA. there is a 200$ tax stamp and background check needed per round and for the launcher though. You also need a certified explosives storage bunker.
 
2013-03-25 10:31:49 PM

phalamir: pedrop357:  The whole purpose of the 2nd amendment is that that general public had the right to the same arms that would be used by the militia.

Que?  A militia would have been made up of the general public.  "We will insure that John Smith has access to the same weapon that John Smith has access to" would have to be the lamest Amendment ever.


I was trying to express that the people and those in the militia ARE two different things.  The old lady who can't cut it in the militia and isn't in any organized militia doesn't lose her right to bear arms and she can own the exact same arms that the (organized) militia itself uses.
 
2013-03-25 10:32:29 PM

dave2198: pedrop357: dave2198: Giltric: LordJiro: pedrop357: LordJiro: pedrop357: JolobinSmokin: Good for them, gun owners are an oppressed group of ppl

If what's done to the 2nd amendment were done to any other enumerated or unenumerated right, the people wishing to exercise those rights would consider it oppression.

Yep, NO right is restricted in any way! That argument is in no way absolute bullshiat.

Gun nuts would be taken a little more seriously if they'd pull themselves off their goddamn crosses. For TOUGH MANLY SHOOTIN MEN, they do seem like a bunch of whiny pussies.

No right is as restricted as the right to bear arms

Which amendment specifically mentions being "Well-regulated" besides the Second?


Do you have a late 1700s early 1800s dictionary to cite the definition?

Words have meaning....and it may vary with the time period.

Like the definition of 'arms'?

Yep.  Arms were muskets then and are AR-15s, M16s, etc. today.

When companies start producing phased plasma rifles in the 40w range and type II hand phasers, those will be protected by the 2nd amendment as well.

That's a nice, selective list there. I want an RPG. That doesn't fit into your nice little box of what you think 'arms' means. However, I need to defend my family from the government. And they have armored SUV's and shiat.

So can I have an RPG?


Yes you can.  Next question.
 
2013-03-25 10:33:05 PM

BGates: POS liberal media making something out of nothing.


Yes, clearly the NRA is the victim in Newtown.
 
2013-03-25 10:33:07 PM

Giltric: dave2198: pedrop357: dave2198: Giltric: LordJiro: pedrop357: LordJiro: pedrop357: JolobinSmokin: Good for them, gun owners are an oppressed group of ppl

If what's done to the 2nd amendment were done to any other enumerated or unenumerated right, the people wishing to exercise those rights would consider it oppression.

Yep, NO right is restricted in any way! That argument is in no way absolute bullshiat.

Gun nuts would be taken a little more seriously if they'd pull themselves off their goddamn crosses. For TOUGH MANLY SHOOTIN MEN, they do seem like a bunch of whiny pussies.

No right is as restricted as the right to bear arms

Which amendment specifically mentions being "Well-regulated" besides the Second?


Do you have a late 1700s early 1800s dictionary to cite the definition?

Words have meaning....and it may vary with the time period.

Like the definition of 'arms'?

Yep.  Arms were muskets then and are AR-15s, M16s, etc. today.

When companies start producing phased plasma rifles in the 40w range and type II hand phasers, those will be protected by the 2nd amendment as well.

That's a nice, selective list there. I want an RPG. That doesn't fit into your nice little box of what you think 'arms' means. However, I need to defend my family from the government. And they have armored SUV's and shiat.

So can I have an RPG?

Yes. Destructive device as per the NFA. there is a 200$ tax stamp and background check needed per round and for the launcher though. You also need a certified explosives storage bunker.


Can we sell them at Wal-Mart?
 
2013-03-25 10:33:19 PM

pedrop357: Lionel Mandrake: pedrop357: Yep. Arms were muskets then and are AR-15s, M16s, etc. today.

And howitzers, and flamethrowers and F-16s?

Howizters and jets can indeed be owned and if the police and military are using them, it would seem that the 2nd amendment protections apply to them being kept and beared by the people who empower those groups in the first place.

Flamethrowers are not regulated by the ATF or any other agency of the federal government that I can find.  As such, they're easier to purchase, construct, possess than a firearm.


Damn.  Even for a gun nut, you're bonkers.

That's cool...the loonier you and the Wayne LaPierres get, the more people support gun control.
 
2013-03-25 10:33:21 PM

Craptastic: davidphogan: Do you like the PATRIOT Act?

No sir. I do not like it. I didn't like it when Bush signed, and I liked it even less when Obama extended it.


So is one emotional policy reaction better or worse than another? If the NRA's actions are so bad assume you have the same issue with the victims families testifying in favor of gun control?

Emotional responses to a tragedy don't result in good policy no mater which side you agree with.
 
Displayed 50 of 647 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report