Because of no right to own firearms...

[jon_berzerk]

The cesspool that is Western Europe...

Home Secretary Sajid Javid reveals how he was a moped mugging victim as he launches battle to beat villains

Less than one in 20 street robberies are being solved by police | Daily Mail Online

The guns are needed to protect ourselves against the government. This is why the leftists want to so badly to ban them.

Especially if they decide to open the borders like in Europe. Patriots will line up and declare an open season on the savages, and shortly after the idiots in power will be safely removed and deported to their utopias.

And we need the Government to protect us from the likes of YOU. Sure am glad that what you get wet dreams of doing is highly illegal and whole communities and law enforcement would take up arms against your kind. Sure is good to sleep good at night knowing this.

we need the Government to protect us

--LOL

what a idiotic thing to say

 

[Uncensored2008]

Actually, I follow ALL of the Constitution instead of just the parts that I agree with, unlike you. Just keep picking and choosing as you go.

You "follow" it by seeking to repeal the 2nd (and no doubt 1st) amendment? Sounds like you betray all of the the Constitution.

Now, which part do you allege I don't follow?

The Constitution is a Living Document according to our Founding Fathers. It's designed to be updated as needed.

Now, here we go.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State

For the first half. In 1917, the National Guard Act allowed the Federal Government to Federalize, equip and fund all State National Guards. Most States no longer felt the need to have State Militias any more and stopped having them. The States realized that the weapons as the Federal Level could not be afforded by the State and NO state could go up against the Federal government anymore due to the power of the weapons and the numbers of available troops. The Organized Militia no longer applied.

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,

As of 1850, the power of the firearms outgrew the human being when the Walker Colt was introduced. And it just got worse after that. The Firearms just got more deadly each year. In 1871, many cowtowns outlawed the carrying of firearms of any kind inside of city limits due to the murder rate. Not many years after WWI when the really nasty automatic weapons surfaced that the first Firearms Regulations were enacted for the safety of the Public. The Automatic Weapons were grandfathered out of existence. It took about 10 years to get them completely out of circulation. They weren't really banned but they were regulated into non existence. The main target was the Thompson SMG but it also affect others as well. What this means is that we need to clearly specify what firearms are legal for the street. That means be specific. Where all others are not legal. It's never been spelled out so it's been too ambiguous and open to interpretation. When any firearm is deemed a Public Safety Issue then we need to take a good hard look at it. Just like we do for a power cord or a toaster.

shall not be infringed.

Finally, something that can stay. But what does it really mean if the rest is too ambiguous or no longer applies?

And since when have I EVER said anything about the 1st amendment other than I like it. I like a free press. I like Freedom of Religion. I like freedom of Expression. Obviously much more than you do.

We have to in advance decide which guns are allowed?

Let's rather make a following modification: these traitors can be in advance be deported before they cast a single vote and damage the country.

That kind of law has only one purpose, make it easier for government to be tyrannical, his real goal.

And who gets to decide who can and can't vote? Do you get to decide and I don't? Or does the courts decide? And yes, you have to decide what can be exempted before you can regulate the rest through Federal Firearms. Not Bans, but Federal Firearms Acts. Once that is done, the last part of the 2nd amendment now can be fully enacted. Otherwise, you have to include Nuclear Weapons as part of the "Shall Not Be Infringed" as well. Where do you draw the line? The problem we are having right now is, the line is a bit hazy. We need to define it legally once and for all and then we know.

But you can't just start tossing Citizens out of the US that disagree with you willy nilly. I believe that there is a couple of places in the Constitution that would frown on that. And you already told me you follow the Constitution all the time, right?

No Comrade, you may NOT crush the bill of rights.

 

[Norman]

Actually, I follow ALL of the Constitution instead of just the parts that I agree with, unlike you. Just keep picking and choosing as you go.

You "follow" it by seeking to repeal the 2nd (and no doubt 1st) amendment? Sounds like you betray all of the the Constitution.

Now, which part do you allege I don't follow?

The Constitution is a Living Document according to our Founding Fathers. It's designed to be updated as needed.

Now, here we go.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State

For the first half. In 1917, the National Guard Act allowed the Federal Government to Federalize, equip and fund all State National Guards. Most States no longer felt the need to have State Militias any more and stopped having them. The States realized that the weapons as the Federal Level could not be afforded by the State and NO state could go up against the Federal government anymore due to the power of the weapons and the numbers of available troops. The Organized Militia no longer applied.

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,

As of 1850, the power of the firearms outgrew the human being when the Walker Colt was introduced. And it just got worse after that. The Firearms just got more deadly each year. In 1871, many cowtowns outlawed the carrying of firearms of any kind inside of city limits due to the murder rate. Not many years after WWI when the really nasty automatic weapons surfaced that the first Firearms Regulations were enacted for the safety of the Public. The Automatic Weapons were grandfathered out of existence. It took about 10 years to get them completely out of circulation. They weren't really banned but they were regulated into non existence. The main target was the Thompson SMG but it also affect others as well. What this means is that we need to clearly specify what firearms are legal for the street. That means be specific. Where all others are not legal. It's never been spelled out so it's been too ambiguous and open to interpretation. When any firearm is deemed a Public Safety Issue then we need to take a good hard look at it. Just like we do for a power cord or a toaster.

shall not be infringed.

Finally, something that can stay. But what does it really mean if the rest is too ambiguous or no longer applies?

And since when have I EVER said anything about the 1st amendment other than I like it. I like a free press. I like Freedom of Religion. I like freedom of Expression. Obviously much more than you do.

We have to in advance decide which guns are allowed?

Let's rather make a following modification: these traitors can be in advance be deported before they cast a single vote and damage the country.

That kind of law has only one purpose, make it easier for government to be tyrannical, his real goal.

And who gets to decide who can and can't vote? Do you get to decide and I don't? Or does the courts decide? And yes, you have to decide what can be exempted before you can regulate the rest through Federal Firearms. Not Bans, but Federal Firearms Acts. Once that is done, the last part of the 2nd amendment now can be fully enacted. Otherwise, you have to include Nuclear Weapons as part of the "Shall Not Be Infringed" as well. Where do you draw the line? The problem we are having right now is, the line is a bit hazy. We need to define it legally once and for all and then we know.

But you can't just start tossing Citizens out of the US that disagree with you willy nilly. I believe that there is a couple of places in the Constitution that would frown on that. And you already told me you follow the Constitution all the time, right?

A 5-year old could decide and my plan would still be better than yours.

I already drew the line on the 2nd amendment. Enough firearms to stop tyrannical government take over dead on its tracks. Enough that the law makers fear the people and not the other way around. By your law a super-soaker would be deemed too much.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The Constitution is a Living Document according to our Founding Fathers. It's designed to be updated as needed.

The process to "update" the Constitution is the amendment process or a convention of states. It is not you butt hurt leftists denying civil rights to Americans.

Now, here we go.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State

There is more to the amendment, comrade.

For the first half. In 1917, the National Guard Act allowed the Federal Government to Federalize, equip and fund all State National Guards. Most States no longer felt the need to have State Militias any more and stopped having them. The States realized that the weapons as the Federal Level could not be afforded by the State and NO state could go up against the Federal government anymore due to the power of the weapons and the numbers of available troops. The Organized Militia no longer applied.

And yet the 2nd isn't about the National Guard, never was.

{
"The militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves, ... all men capable of bearing arms;..."
— "Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republic", 1788 (either Richard Henry Lee or Melancton Smith).
"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? Congress shall have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People."
— Tench Coxe, 1788.
"How we burned in the prison camps later thinking: What would things have been like if every police operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive? If during periods of mass arrests people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever was at hand? The organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt."
— Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Nobel Prize winner and author of The Gulag Archipelago, who spent 11 years in Soviet concentration camps.
If we are ready to violate the Constitution, will the people submit to our unauthorized acts? Sir, they ought not to submit; they would deserve the chains that our measures are forging for them, if they did not resist.
— Edward Livingston
Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.
— Mao Zedong, Nov. 6, 1938, Selected Works, Vol. 2}

http://www.constitution.org/mil/cs_milit.htm

The militia is all people Comrade, anyone who can carry arms.

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,

As of 1850, the power of the firearms outgrew the human being when the Walker Colt was introduced. And it just got worse after that. The Firearms just got more deadly each year. In 1871, many cowtowns outlawed the carrying of firearms of any kind inside of city limits due to the murder rate. Not many years after WWI when the really nasty automatic weapons surfaced that the first Firearms Regulations were enacted for the safety of the Public. The Automatic Weapons were grandfathered out of existence. It took about 10 years to get them completely out of circulation. They weren't really banned but they were regulated into non existence. The main target was the Thompson SMG but it also affect others as well. What this means is that we need to clearly specify what firearms are legal for the street. That means be specific. Where all others are not legal. It's never been spelled out so it's been too ambiguous and open to interpretation. When any firearm is deemed a Public Safety Issue then we need to take a good hard look at it. Just like we do for a power cord or a toaster.

Your flaccid argument against civil rights is as stupid as claiming that Madison never intended for a typewriter to support freedom of speech, hence we should do away with the 1st (as you leftists seek.)

shall not be infringed.

Finally, something that can stay. But what does it really mean if the rest is too ambiguous or no longer applies?

And since when have I EVER said anything about the 1st amendment other than I like it. I like a free press. I like Freedom of Religion. I like freedom of Expression. Obviously much more than you do.

Oh, you'll allow that to stay? how magnanimous of your, Comrade.

IF you seek to change the constitution, the way to do it is through the amendment process. SHOULD you Stalinist thugs attempt to crush civil rights outside of that process, we the people will resist you with deadly force.

Da Comrade?

There are enough filters in our system to EVER allow your fears to become a reality. What you are doing is repeating things from fictitious books or from other countries without our Constitution and governing limits. Go back to hiding under that bed. You'll feel much safer.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Actually, I follow ALL of the Constitution instead of just the parts that I agree with, unlike you. Just keep picking and choosing as you go.

You "follow" it by seeking to repeal the 2nd (and no doubt 1st) amendment? Sounds like you betray all of the the Constitution.

Now, which part do you allege I don't follow?

The Constitution is a Living Document according to our Founding Fathers. It's designed to be updated as needed.

Now, here we go.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State

For the first half. In 1917, the National Guard Act allowed the Federal Government to Federalize, equip and fund all State National Guards. Most States no longer felt the need to have State Militias any more and stopped having them. The States realized that the weapons as the Federal Level could not be afforded by the State and NO state could go up against the Federal government anymore due to the power of the weapons and the numbers of available troops. The Organized Militia no longer applied.

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,

As of 1850, the power of the firearms outgrew the human being when the Walker Colt was introduced. And it just got worse after that. The Firearms just got more deadly each year. In 1871, many cowtowns outlawed the carrying of firearms of any kind inside of city limits due to the murder rate. Not many years after WWI when the really nasty automatic weapons surfaced that the first Firearms Regulations were enacted for the safety of the Public. The Automatic Weapons were grandfathered out of existence. It took about 10 years to get them completely out of circulation. They weren't really banned but they were regulated into non existence. The main target was the Thompson SMG but it also affect others as well. What this means is that we need to clearly specify what firearms are legal for the street. That means be specific. Where all others are not legal. It's never been spelled out so it's been too ambiguous and open to interpretation. When any firearm is deemed a Public Safety Issue then we need to take a good hard look at it. Just like we do for a power cord or a toaster.

shall not be infringed.

Finally, something that can stay. But what does it really mean if the rest is too ambiguous or no longer applies?

And since when have I EVER said anything about the 1st amendment other than I like it. I like a free press. I like Freedom of Religion. I like freedom of Expression. Obviously much more than you do.

We have to in advance decide which guns are allowed?

Let's rather make a following modification: these traitors can be in advance be deported before they cast a single vote and damage the country.

That kind of law has only one purpose, make it easier for government to be tyrannical, his real goal.

And who gets to decide who can and can't vote? Do you get to decide and I don't? Or does the courts decide? And yes, you have to decide what can be exempted before you can regulate the rest through Federal Firearms. Not Bans, but Federal Firearms Acts. Once that is done, the last part of the 2nd amendment now can be fully enacted. Otherwise, you have to include Nuclear Weapons as part of the "Shall Not Be Infringed" as well. Where do you draw the line? The problem we are having right now is, the line is a bit hazy. We need to define it legally once and for all and then we know.

But you can't just start tossing Citizens out of the US that disagree with you willy nilly. I believe that there is a couple of places in the Constitution that would frown on that. And you already told me you follow the Constitution all the time, right?

A 5-year old could decide and my plan would still be better than yours.

I already drew the line on the 2nd amendment. Enough firearms to stop tyrannical government take over dead on its tracks. Enough that the law makers fear the people and not the other way around. By your law a super-soaker would be deemed too much.

Knowing you, you would fill yours with Acid.

 

[Rustic]

The cesspool that is Western Europe...

Home Secretary Sajid Javid reveals how he was a moped mugging victim as he launches battle to beat villains

Less than one in 20 street robberies are being solved by police | Daily Mail Online

The guns are needed to protect ourselves against the government. This is why the leftists want to so badly to ban them.

Especially if they decide to open the borders like in Europe. Patriots will line up and declare an open season on the savages, and shortly after the idiots in power will be safely removed and deported to their utopias.

And we need the Government to protect us from the likes of YOU. Sure am glad that what you get wet dreams of doing is highly illegal and whole communities and law enforcement would take up arms against your kind. Sure is good to sleep good at night knowing this.

we need the Government to protect us

--LOL

what a idiotic thing to say

No doubt, Brings new meaning the fox in the hen house

 

[MaryL]

Oh yeah the mockery clause, "comrade". I am so NOT offended. That doesn't fly anymore. Guns never helped little old ladies cross the street . I rarely see a gun kneeling at mass at church, either. And that whole flighty "blacks lives matter"' stuff is just a veiled gun control matter. I like guns, but within reason.

 

[Norman]

You "follow" it by seeking to repeal the 2nd (and no doubt 1st) amendment? Sounds like you betray all of the the Constitution.

Now, which part do you allege I don't follow?

The Constitution is a Living Document according to our Founding Fathers. It's designed to be updated as needed.

Now, here we go.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State

For the first half. In 1917, the National Guard Act allowed the Federal Government to Federalize, equip and fund all State National Guards. Most States no longer felt the need to have State Militias any more and stopped having them. The States realized that the weapons as the Federal Level could not be afforded by the State and NO state could go up against the Federal government anymore due to the power of the weapons and the numbers of available troops. The Organized Militia no longer applied.

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,

As of 1850, the power of the firearms outgrew the human being when the Walker Colt was introduced. And it just got worse after that. The Firearms just got more deadly each year. In 1871, many cowtowns outlawed the carrying of firearms of any kind inside of city limits due to the murder rate. Not many years after WWI when the really nasty automatic weapons surfaced that the first Firearms Regulations were enacted for the safety of the Public. The Automatic Weapons were grandfathered out of existence. It took about 10 years to get them completely out of circulation. They weren't really banned but they were regulated into non existence. The main target was the Thompson SMG but it also affect others as well. What this means is that we need to clearly specify what firearms are legal for the street. That means be specific. Where all others are not legal. It's never been spelled out so it's been too ambiguous and open to interpretation. When any firearm is deemed a Public Safety Issue then we need to take a good hard look at it. Just like we do for a power cord or a toaster.

shall not be infringed.

Finally, something that can stay. But what does it really mean if the rest is too ambiguous or no longer applies?

And since when have I EVER said anything about the 1st amendment other than I like it. I like a free press. I like Freedom of Religion. I like freedom of Expression. Obviously much more than you do.

We have to in advance decide which guns are allowed?

Let's rather make a following modification: these traitors can be in advance be deported before they cast a single vote and damage the country.

That kind of law has only one purpose, make it easier for government to be tyrannical, his real goal.

And who gets to decide who can and can't vote? Do you get to decide and I don't? Or does the courts decide? And yes, you have to decide what can be exempted before you can regulate the rest through Federal Firearms. Not Bans, but Federal Firearms Acts. Once that is done, the last part of the 2nd amendment now can be fully enacted. Otherwise, you have to include Nuclear Weapons as part of the "Shall Not Be Infringed" as well. Where do you draw the line? The problem we are having right now is, the line is a bit hazy. We need to define it legally once and for all and then we know.

But you can't just start tossing Citizens out of the US that disagree with you willy nilly. I believe that there is a couple of places in the Constitution that would frown on that. And you already told me you follow the Constitution all the time, right?

A 5-year old could decide and my plan would still be better than yours.

I already drew the line on the 2nd amendment. Enough firearms to stop tyrannical government take over dead on its tracks. Enough that the law makers fear the people and not the other way around. By your law a super-soaker would be deemed too much.

Knowing you, you would fill yours with Acid.

It seems the only one who has been reading fictional books and taking advice from certain countries here is you. The book?

Koran. And the countries being fundamental Islamist countries.

That's where you learned about the acid attacks. Don't conflate that with me.

 

[Rustic]

The Constitution is a Living Document according to our Founding Fathers. It's designed to be updated as needed.

The process to "update" the Constitution is the amendment process or a convention of states. It is not you butt hurt leftists denying civil rights to Americans.

Now, here we go.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State

There is more to the amendment, comrade.

For the first half. In 1917, the National Guard Act allowed the Federal Government to Federalize, equip and fund all State National Guards. Most States no longer felt the need to have State Militias any more and stopped having them. The States realized that the weapons as the Federal Level could not be afforded by the State and NO state could go up against the Federal government anymore due to the power of the weapons and the numbers of available troops. The Organized Militia no longer applied.

And yet the 2nd isn't about the National Guard, never was.

{
"The militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves, ... all men capable of bearing arms;..."
— "Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republic", 1788 (either Richard Henry Lee or Melancton Smith).
"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? Congress shall have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People."
— Tench Coxe, 1788.
"How we burned in the prison camps later thinking: What would things have been like if every police operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive? If during periods of mass arrests people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever was at hand? The organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt."
— Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Nobel Prize winner and author of The Gulag Archipelago, who spent 11 years in Soviet concentration camps.
If we are ready to violate the Constitution, will the people submit to our unauthorized acts? Sir, they ought not to submit; they would deserve the chains that our measures are forging for them, if they did not resist.
— Edward Livingston
Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.
— Mao Zedong, Nov. 6, 1938, Selected Works, Vol. 2}

http://www.constitution.org/mil/cs_milit.htm

The militia is all people Comrade, anyone who can carry arms.

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,

As of 1850, the power of the firearms outgrew the human being when the Walker Colt was introduced. And it just got worse after that. The Firearms just got more deadly each year. In 1871, many cowtowns outlawed the carrying of firearms of any kind inside of city limits due to the murder rate. Not many years after WWI when the really nasty automatic weapons surfaced that the first Firearms Regulations were enacted for the safety of the Public. The Automatic Weapons were grandfathered out of existence. It took about 10 years to get them completely out of circulation. They weren't really banned but they were regulated into non existence. The main target was the Thompson SMG but it also affect others as well. What this means is that we need to clearly specify what firearms are legal for the street. That means be specific. Where all others are not legal. It's never been spelled out so it's been too ambiguous and open to interpretation. When any firearm is deemed a Public Safety Issue then we need to take a good hard look at it. Just like we do for a power cord or a toaster.

Your flaccid argument against civil rights is as stupid as claiming that Madison never intended for a typewriter to support freedom of speech, hence we should do away with the 1st (as you leftists seek.)

shall not be infringed.

Finally, something that can stay. But what does it really mean if the rest is too ambiguous or no longer applies?

And since when have I EVER said anything about the 1st amendment other than I like it. I like a free press. I like Freedom of Religion. I like freedom of Expression. Obviously much more than you do.

Oh, you'll allow that to stay? how magnanimous of your, Comrade.

IF you seek to change the constitution, the way to do it is through the amendment process. SHOULD you Stalinist thugs attempt to crush civil rights outside of that process, we the people will resist you with deadly force.

Da Comrade?

There are enough filters in our system to EVER allow your fears to become a reality. What you are doing is repeating things from fictitious books or from other countries without our Constitution and governing limits. Go back to hiding under that bed. You'll feel much safer.

You’re the progressive that is sitting in his safe space, why don’t you go to Europe where firearm ownership is not a right and there is no right to freedom of speech

 

[Rustic]

Oh yeah the mockery clause, "comrade". I am so NOT offended. That doesn't fly anymore. Guns never helped little old ladies cross the street . I rarely see a gun kneeling at mass at church, either. And that whole flighty "blacks lives matter"' stuff is just a veiled gun control matter. I like guns, but within reason.

Any other Individuals firearm ownership is none of your fucking business, none of my business and certainly none of the federal government business...

 

[MaryL]

Oh yeah the mockery clause, "comrade". I am so NOT offended. That doesn't fly anymore. Guns never helped little old ladies cross the street . I rarely see a gun kneeling at mass at church, either. And that whole flighty "blacks lives matter"' stuff is just a veiled gun control matter. I like guns, but within reason.

Any other Individuals firearm ownership is none of your fucking business, none of my business and certainly none of the federal government business...

Ok. Why not? Because …? I have all day.

 

[Rustic]

Oh yeah the mockery clause, "comrade". I am so NOT offended. That doesn't fly anymore. Guns never helped little old ladies cross the street . I rarely see a gun kneeling at mass at church, either. And that whole flighty "blacks lives matter"' stuff is just a veiled gun control matter. I like guns, but within reason.

Any other Individuals firearm ownership is none of your fucking business, none of my business and certainly none of the federal government business...

Ok. Why not? Because …? I have all day.

Because firearm ownership is personal, just like any other part of a person’s personal life.

 

[MaryL]

Oh yeah the mockery clause, "comrade". I am so NOT offended. That doesn't fly anymore. Guns never helped little old ladies cross the street . I rarely see a gun kneeling at mass at church, either. And that whole flighty "blacks lives matter"' stuff is just a veiled gun control matter. I like guns, but within reason.

Any other Individuals firearm ownership is none of your fucking business, none of my business and certainly none of the federal government business...

Ok. Why not? Because …? I have all day.

Because firearm ownership is personal, just like any other part of a person’s personal life.

Well brotherman, we have to agree to disagree on that. You realize how many cookies and tracking data you created on this issue alone? What is personal? You are passionate about firearms. Notice all those adds that magically appear hence that appeal to your sentiments.... So, let's back up here. I have actually been negatively affected by guns, it's scared me deeply on many levels.

 

[Rustic]

Oh yeah the mockery clause, "comrade". I am so NOT offended. That doesn't fly anymore. Guns never helped little old ladies cross the street . I rarely see a gun kneeling at mass at church, either. And that whole flighty "blacks lives matter"' stuff is just a veiled gun control matter. I like guns, but within reason.

Any other Individuals firearm ownership is none of your fucking business, none of my business and certainly none of the federal government business...

Ok. Why not? Because …? I have all day.

Because firearm ownership is personal, just like any other part of a person’s personal life.

Well brotherman, we have to agree to disagree on that. You realize how many cookies and tracking data you created on this issue alone? What is personal? You are passionate about firearms. Notice all those adds that magically appear hence that appeal to your sentiments.... So, let's back up here. I have actually been negatively affected by guns, it's scared me deeply on many levels.

Well, I sell firearms and ammo for a living.
And I have not been negatively affected by firearms in fact opposite is true in every way

 

[MaryL]

Oh yeah the mockery clause, "comrade". I am so NOT offended. That doesn't fly anymore. Guns never helped little old ladies cross the street . I rarely see a gun kneeling at mass at church, either. And that whole flighty "blacks lives matter"' stuff is just a veiled gun control matter. I like guns, but within reason.

Any other Individuals firearm ownership is none of your fucking business, none of my business and certainly none of the federal government business...

Ok. Why not? Because …? I have all day.

Because firearm ownership is personal, just like any other part of a person’s personal life.

Well brotherman, we have to agree to disagree on that. You realize how many cookies and tracking data you created on this issue alone? What is personal? You are passionate about firearms. Notice all those adds that magically appear hence that appeal to your sentiments.... So, let's back up here. I have actually been negatively affected by guns, it's scared me deeply on many levels.

Well, I sell firearms and ammo for a living.
And I have not been negatively affected by firearms in fact opposite is true in every way

I wish you well. I have to reset and not be a sarcastic b*tch. But you must understand the rest of us are being hurt by your current trade? I cringe saying this, perhaps there is another better way to make money? I totally respect any business person, without saying.

 

[Rustic]

Any other Individuals firearm ownership is none of your fucking business, none of my business and certainly none of the federal government business...

Ok. Why not? Because …? I have all day.

Because firearm ownership is personal, just like any other part of a person’s personal life.

Well brotherman, we have to agree to disagree on that. You realize how many cookies and tracking data you created on this issue alone? What is personal? You are passionate about firearms. Notice all those adds that magically appear hence that appeal to your sentiments.... So, let's back up here. I have actually been negatively affected by guns, it's scared me deeply on many levels.

Well, I sell firearms and ammo for a living.
And I have not been negatively affected by firearms in fact opposite is true in every way

I wish you well. I have to reset and not be a sarcastic b*tch. But you must understand the rest of us are being hurt by your current trade? I cringe saying this, perhaps there is another better way to make money? I totally respect any business person, without saying.

I have been self-employed for over 20 years, and I sleep good at night.
Firearms are the least of this country’s worries...
2018 Real Time Death Statistics in America
Almost 116,000 deaths have been caused by medical errors so far this year, that is murder... absolutely. Why don’t you say/do something about that, if you don’t you’re a hypocrite and one

 

[MaryL]

Ok. Why not? Because …? I have all day.

Because firearm ownership is personal, just like any other part of a person’s personal life.

Well brotherman, we have to agree to disagree on that. You realize how many cookies and tracking data you created on this issue alone? What is personal? You are passionate about firearms. Notice all those adds that magically appear hence that appeal to your sentiments.... So, let's back up here. I have actually been negatively affected by guns, it's scared me deeply on many levels.

Well, I sell firearms and ammo for a living.
And I have not been negatively affected by firearms in fact opposite is true in every way

I wish you well. I have to reset and not be a sarcastic b*tch. But you must understand the rest of us are being hurt by your current trade? I cringe saying this, perhaps there is another better way to make money? I totally respect any business person, without saying.

I have been self-employed for over 20 years, and I sleep good at night.
Firearms are the least of this country’s worries...
2018 Real Time Death Statistics in America
Almost 116,000 deaths have been caused by medical errors so far this year, that is murder... absolutely. Why don’t you say/do something about that, if you don’t you’re a hypocrite and one

I like you, you feisty person . But, we still all see mass shootings, people that never should have gotten firearms ….SCREEECH. I put on brakes. So, UMM, you just sell guns to...just anybody? How do you know, hypothetically, they wont become paranoid schizophrenics potentially? What skill set did you develop as a small business owner allows you that right over life and death? That is something you are going to have to live with. If you sold anything else, it mightn't be an issue.

 

[Rustic]

Because firearm ownership is personal, just like any other part of a person’s personal life.

Well brotherman, we have to agree to disagree on that. You realize how many cookies and tracking data you created on this issue alone? What is personal? You are passionate about firearms. Notice all those adds that magically appear hence that appeal to your sentiments.... So, let's back up here. I have actually been negatively affected by guns, it's scared me deeply on many levels.

Well, I sell firearms and ammo for a living.
And I have not been negatively affected by firearms in fact opposite is true in every way

I wish you well. I have to reset and not be a sarcastic b*tch. But you must understand the rest of us are being hurt by your current trade? I cringe saying this, perhaps there is another better way to make money? I totally respect any business person, without saying.

I have been self-employed for over 20 years, and I sleep good at night.
Firearms are the least of this country’s worries...
2018 Real Time Death Statistics in America
Almost 116,000 deaths have been caused by medical errors so far this year, that is murder... absolutely. Why don’t you say/do something about that, if you don’t you’re a hypocrite and one

I like you, you feisty person . But, we still all see mass shootings, people that never should have gotten firearms ….SCREEECH. I put on brakes. So, UMM, you just sell guns to...just anybody? How do you know, hypothetically, they wont become paranoid schizophrenics potentially? What skill set did you develop as a small business owner allows you that right over life and death? That is something you are going to have to live with. If you sold anything else, it mightn't be an issue.

Shit happens,
This country has much bigger fish to fry... take your pick
2018 Real Time Death Statistics in America

 

[MaryL]

Well brotherman, we have to agree to disagree on that. You realize how many cookies and tracking data you created on this issue alone? What is personal? You are passionate about firearms. Notice all those adds that magically appear hence that appeal to your sentiments.... So, let's back up here. I have actually been negatively affected by guns, it's scared me deeply on many levels.

Well, I sell firearms and ammo for a living.
And I have not been negatively affected by firearms in fact opposite is true in every way

I wish you well. I have to reset and not be a sarcastic b*tch. But you must understand the rest of us are being hurt by your current trade? I cringe saying this, perhaps there is another better way to make money? I totally respect any business person, without saying.

I have been self-employed for over 20 years, and I sleep good at night.
Firearms are the least of this country’s worries...
2018 Real Time Death Statistics in America
Almost 116,000 deaths have been caused by medical errors so far this year, that is murder... absolutely. Why don’t you say/do something about that, if you don’t you’re a hypocrite and one

I like you, you feisty person . But, we still all see mass shootings, people that never should have gotten firearms ….SCREEECH. I put on brakes. So, UMM, you just sell guns to...just anybody? How do you know, hypothetically, they wont become paranoid schizophrenics potentially? What skill set did you develop as a small business owner allows you that right over life and death? That is something you are going to have to live with. If you sold anything else, it mightn't be an issue.

Shit happens,
This country has much bigger fish to fry... take your pick
2018 Real Time Death Statistics in America

It might, it might not. But I don't want to nail anyone to a cross.

 

[MaryL]

Selling guns to anyone, for any reason at any time. Sh*t happens? Blithely ignoring the consequences? That's the best you can do? Ever thought about selling used cars to the blind on the side? Just to supplement your income? What difference would it make? Sorry, hate to be such a judgmental jerk and all...