Do You Support The "Gun Show Loophole?"

[Dubya]

Actually the electorial college isn't metioned except in Article 2. Article 1, Section 2 is talking about voter qualifications to vote for members of the House of Representatives. It states those Electors (voters) are required to have the qualifications to vote for the most numerous branch of the State legislature, meaning the State House.

Care to try again?

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows

Source: Article 2, Section 1, Clause 1

So the term Electoral College came after it was described in Article 2 of the Constitution. Are you so damned stupid you can't even read what is being said? They are talking about the method of electing the President and Vice President.

Let's cut the crap and get back to your original statements.

The first was: "I don't recall ever seeing the right to liberty in the Bill of Rights." I told you to see the 5th Amendment.

The second was: "The right to vote isn't explicitly mentioned in the Constitution." I mistakenly said to see Article I, Clause 2, when I should have said Article 1, Section 2. Which is the FIRST place the Constitution mentions voter qualifications, which provides a right to vote if you meet the qualifications.

So drop the crap about Article 2, that comes from you imagination not my arguments. You also did not address my comments on your delusional statement about militias.

You claim it's a right to liberty, because it mentions it can be deprived by due process of law.

The right of suffrage was left up to the states to determine. Try reading towards the bottom when it was brought up from the Records of the Federal Convention!

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 1: Records of the Federal Convention

 

[M14 Shooter]

I'm not, I'm a vegetarian, so I have no need for one. That 10,000 people a year die from gun proves that....

... the number of people who die of gunshots each year, compared to the 300,000,000 guns in the country, statistically approaches zero.

Assault rifles I would ban outright. It seems like only the dumbest people have them anyways...

This is nothing but mindlessness, ignorance and bigotry.

 

[ima]

I'm not, I'm a vegetarian, so I have no need for one. That 10,000 people a year die from gun proves that....

... the number of people who die of gunshots each year, compared to the 300,000,000 guns in the country, statistically approaches zero.

Assault rifles I would ban outright. It seems like only the dumbest people have them anyways...

This is nothing but mindlessness, ignorance and bigotry.

You're part of the problem, that much is obvious. So what do ordinary folks need assault weapons for?

 

[M14 Shooter]

I'm not, I'm a vegetarian, so I have no need for one. That 10,000 people a year die from gun proves that....

... the number of people who die of gunshots each year, compared to the 300,000,000 guns in the country, statistically approaches zero.

Assault rifles I would ban outright. It seems like only the dumbest people have them anyways...

This is nothing but mindlessness, ignorance and bigotry.

You're part of the problem, that much is obvious.

Says she who speaks from a position of minldessness, ignorance and bigotry.

Not a single assault rifle, one legally owned by a cilivian, has ever been used in a crime.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You're part of the problem, that much is obvious. So what do ordinary folks need assault weapons for?

Christopher Dorner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

'nuff said.

 

[ima]

You're part of the problem, that much is obvious. So what do ordinary folks need assault weapons for?

Christopher Dorner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

'nuff said.

We need assault rifles to create more guys like him?

 

[ima]

... the number of people who die of gunshots each year, compared to the 300,000,000 guns in the country, statistically approaches zero.


This is nothing but mindlessness, ignorance and bigotry.

You're part of the problem, that much is obvious.

Says she who speaks from a position of minldessness, ignorance and bigotry.

Not a single assault rifle, one legally owned by a cilivian, has ever been used in a crime.

If assault rifle were never sold in the first place, NO crimes would ever have been committed with any assault rifles.
I believe that that's called "check mate".

Now go stoke your still.

 

[The Rabbi]

You're part of the problem, that much is obvious.

Says she who speaks from a position of minldessness, ignorance and bigotry.

Not a single assault rifle, one legally owned by a cilivian, has ever been used in a crime.

If assault rifle were never sold in the first place, NO crimes would ever have been committed with any assault rifles.
I believe that that's called "check mate".

Now go stoke your still.

If your grandmother had wheels she'd be a tricycle.
It is irrelevant what would have been. We've had "assault rifles" (whatever those are) for 100 years. Too late for "what if".
Trumps your checkmate, Sparky.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You're part of the problem, that much is obvious.

Says she who speaks from a position of minldessness, ignorance and bigotry.

Not a single assault rifle, one legally owned by a cilivian, has ever been used in a crime.

If assault rifle were never sold in the first place, NO crimes would ever have been committed with any assault rifles.

If no assault rifles were ever sold in the first place, what would the military use?

You are mindlessly and ignorantly trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist, because of your ignorant and bigoted stance on guns and gun owners.

I believe that that's called "check mate".

Psst...
You're playing tiddly-winks.

 

[OriginalShroom]

The Founding Fathers had gun laws so restrictive that today’s NRA leaders would never support them



The Founding Fathers had gun laws so restrictive that today’s NRA leaders would never support them.



more

What a bullshit article.

I just read it and while it makes the claim, it does nothing to support it. Just like most liberals, they expect us to believe what they say is true without supporting evidence that can be verified.

 

[Uncensored2008]

We need assault rifles to create more guys like him?

To protect ourselves from guys like him. Cops gone wild..

Quick; an innocent American is;

A) thousands of times more likely to be shot by a cop than by the Mexican drug cartels
B) thousands of times more likely to be shot by a cop than by the Crips
C) thousands of times more likely to be shot by a cop than by the Bloods
D) All of the above

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I think the government should heavily regulate a VERY dangerous thing called a gun. 10,000 people a year die of gunshot in the US and nuts like you want to loosen the laws.

You've convinced me you are a gun owner.

I'm not, I'm a vegetarian, so I have no need for one. That 10,000 people a year die from gun proves that we can't be trusted with them and should tighten the laws to make it harder for people to get them. Assault rifles I would ban outright. It seems like only the dumbest people have them anyways, so having none would be actually safer then people in your community having them.

If you can't be trusted with a gun, don't buy one. I, on the other hand, have never shot anyone.

I am not sure why you insist cops are the dumbest people, but feel free to tell them that the next time you see one.

 

[ima]

Says she who speaks from a position of minldessness, ignorance and bigotry.

Not a single assault rifle, one legally owned by a cilivian, has ever been used in a crime.

If assault rifle were never sold in the first place, NO crimes would ever have been committed with any assault rifles.

If no assault rifles were ever sold in the first place, what would the military use?

You are mindlessly and ignorantly trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist, because of your ignorant and bigoted stance on guns and gun owners.

I believe that that's called "check mate".

Psst...
You're playing tiddly-winks.

I'm of course talking about civilians. Cops and the military should have assault weapon of course.
But I'm still waiting to hear what civilians need assault weapons for. Anything at all?

 

[M14 Shooter]

If assault rifle were never sold in the first place, NO crimes would ever have been committed with any assault rifles.

If no assault rifles were ever sold in the first place, what would the military use?

You are mindlessly and ignorantly trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist, because of your ignorant and bigoted stance on guns and gun owners.

I believe that that's called "check mate".

Psst...
You're playing tiddly-winks.

I'm of course talking about civilians. Cops and the military should have assault weapon of course.

No legally owneed assault rifle has -ever- been used in a crime - as such, you don't have even a rational bassis for banning them,.

But I'm still waiting to hear what civilians need assault weapons for. Anything at all?

False premise - the exerrcise of a right is not subject to someone's subjective evaluation of "need".

You continue to mindlessly and ignorantly try to solve a problem that doesn't exist, because of your ignorant and bigoted stance on guns and gun owners.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I'm of course talking about civilians.

You're talking about peasants.

You demand a return to Feudalism, where the nobility alone has the right to arms. Our ruling lords will protect us, unless they don't feel like it, or would rather kill us.

Cops and the military should have assault weapon of course.
But I'm still waiting to hear what civilians need assault weapons for. Anything at all?

You've been told, but apparently lack the wits to grasp the concepts presented.

Why do you yearn so for enslavement? Do you honestly believe that only your neighbor will be put under the yoke? Or is your lust to crush others under the heel of a ruler so great, that you will gladly endure the same just for the pleasure of inflicting misery on others?

 

[ima]

If no assault rifles were ever sold in the first place, what would the military use?

You are mindlessly and ignorantly trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist, because of your ignorant and bigoted stance on guns and gun owners.


Psst...
You're playing tiddly-winks.

I'm of course talking about civilians. Cops and the military should have assault weapon of course.

No legally owneed assault rifle has -ever- been used in a crime - as such, you don't have even a rational bassis for banning them,.

But I'm still waiting to hear what civilians need assault weapons for. Anything at all?

False premise - the exerrcise of a right is not subject to someone's subjective evaluation of "need".

You continue to mindlessly and ignorantly try to solve a problem that doesn't exist, because of your ignorant and bigoted stance on guns and gun owners.

So you can't even show a reason to have such a weapon. If you could, I might be forced to agree, but you have nada. The fact that assault weapons are used in crimes, and not corner store robberies, but major mass murders and cop killings, is reason enough not to have any. I know, it's like closing the barn after all the animals have left, but something has to be done. People like you don't want ANYTHING done. It's immoral. You have blood on your hands.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I'm of course talking about civilians. Cops and the military should have assault weapon of course.

No legally owneed assault rifle has -ever- been used in a crime - as such, you don't have even a rational bassis for banning them,.

But I'm still waiting to hear what civilians need assault weapons for. Anything at all?

False premise - the exerrcise of a right is not subject to someone's subjective evaluation of "need".

You continue to mindlessly and ignorantly try to solve a problem that doesn't exist, because of your ignorant and bigoted stance on guns and gun owners.

So you can't even show a reason to have such a weapon.

No.. .. I have many reasons to have an assault rifle.
You asked for a need. Your request is unsound because it proceeds from the false premise, previously described.

Fact remanins, you cannot show a rational basis for banning them, and so your desire to do so can only be laughed at by rational, reasonable people.

Fact that assault weapons...

Ah... moving the goalposts. What a surprise.

You continue to mindlessly and ignorantly try to solve a problem that doesn't exist, because of your ignorant and bigoted stance on guns and gun owners.

 

[ima]

No legally owneed assault rifle has -ever- been used in a crime - as such, you don't have even a rational bassis for banning them,.

False premise - the exerrcise of a right is not subject to someone's subjective evaluation of "need".

You continue to mindlessly and ignorantly try to solve a problem that doesn't exist, because of your ignorant and bigoted stance on guns and gun owners.

So you can't even show a reason to have such a weapon.

No.. .. I have many reasons to have an assault rifle.
You asked for a need. Your request is unsound because it proceeds from the false premise, previously described.

Fact remanins, you cannot show a rational basis for banning them, and so your desire to do so can only be laughed at by rational, reasonable people.

Fact that assault weapons...

Ah... moving the goalposts. What a surprise.

You continue to mindlessly and ignorantly try to solve a problem that doesn't exist, because of your ignorant and bigoted stance on guns and gun owners.

I don't get the "moving the goalposts" with that piece of quote.

But all I'm asking is for you to give me a good reason or two to want an assault rifle. And you can't seem to. If they were any good, I might buy one myself!

 

[M14 Shooter]

So you can't even show a reason to have such a weapon.

No.. .. I have many reasons to have an assault rifle.
You asked for a need. Your request is unsound because it proceeds from the false premise, previously described.

Fact remanins, you cannot show a rational basis for banning them, and so your desire to do so can only be laughed at by rational, reasonable people.

Fact that assault weapons...

Ah... moving the goalposts. What a surprise.

You continue to mindlessly and ignorantly try to solve a problem that doesn't exist, because of your ignorant and bigoted stance on guns and gun owners.

I don't get the "moving the goalposts" with that piece of quote.

That's because you don't understand there is a difference between assault rifles and assault weapons. You are, obviously, almost completely ignorant about everything on this topic, and are therefore incapable of creating a sound argument with regard to same.

But all I'm asking is foryou to give me a good reason or two to want an assault rifle.

An assault rifle is suitable for any legal use one might have for a gun -- that is, for any legal uprpose you might have for a gun, you can, with efficacy, use an assault rifle.

You, OTOH, cannot show any rational basis to ban them.

Please feel free to continue to put your mindlessness, ignorance and bigotry on display for alll to see.

 

[ima]

Buddy, all you got is to call me names? Figures. You never were able to give me ONE solid reason to need an assault weapon.