Kalamazoo shooter....a "progressive" Left wing tears are flowing...not a rightwinger..again...

[PaintMyHouse]

The fact that you think you are the judge of what "almost no one" needs just further underscores the reason for the 2nd Amendment.

It's not a hard thing to do. When was the last time you went to war, or hunted for dinner? Oh right, you don't do either, and neither does just about anyone else.

And neither are the conditions for the right to own a gun.

No, but they should be, these days.

Exactly the fascist perspective ^^^^

Fascists like guns, just not for their enemies. Do you want your enemies to have guns?

 

[theHawk]

Thanks to another poster...we have this new piece of info.

From Stevemcgarret.....

"Progressive" Jason Brian Dalton Arrested for Random Kalamazoo Shootings After Killing 6 - Was Uber Driver - The Gateway Pundit

Chances are he's a queer.

He was queer alright, he killed random people...

Queers are mentally unstable and usually have a propensity towards violence.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Thanks to another poster...we have this new piece of info.

From Stevemcgarret.....

"Progressive" Jason Brian Dalton Arrested for Random Kalamazoo Shootings After Killing 6 - Was Uber Driver - The Gateway Pundit

Chances are he's a queer.

He was queer alright, he killed random people...

Queers are mentally unstable and usually have a propensity towards violence.

Your homophobia is uninteresting. Keep your fears in check, please.

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

There are absolutely no restrictions on free speech.

Time for you to grow up: United States free speech exceptions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Read a book and learn the difference between free speech and restricted speech. Speech that comes with legal liabilities isn't free speech.

Again, there are absolutely no restrictions on free speech.

But, seeing how you'll never need free speech, let's abolish the 1st Amendment.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Again, there are absolutely no restrictions on free speech.

That's just wrong, utterly.

It says this:

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


And we have this:

Exceptions to free speech in the United States are limitations on the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech and expression as recognized by the United States Supreme Court. These exceptions have been created over time, based on certain types of speech and expression, and under different contexts. While freedom of speech in the United States is a right protected by the constitution, these exceptions make that right a limited one.
United States free speech exceptions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rational thought is a new concept to you I see...

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

Again, there are absolutely no restrictions on free speech.

That's just wrong, utterly.

It says this:

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


And we have this:

Exceptions to free speech in the United States are limitations on the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech and expression as recognized by the United States Supreme Court. These exceptions have been created over time, based on certain types of speech and expression, and under different contexts. While freedom of speech in the United States is a right protected by the constitution, these exceptions make that right a limited one.
United States free speech exceptions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rational thought is a new concept to you I see...

I should be surprised, but I'm not, that you don't understand the difference between free speech and speech that is restricted, liabilous, or illegal.

 

[Camp]

There are absolutely no restrictions on free speech.

Time for you to grow up: United States free speech exceptions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Read a book and learn the difference between free speech and restricted speech. Speech that comes with legal liabilities isn't free speech.

Again, there are absolutely no restrictions on free speech.

But, seeing how you'll never need free speech, let's abolish the 1st Amendment.

Which book should we read if you want to be indoctrinated into your views?

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

There are absolutely no restrictions on free speech.

Time for you to grow up: United States free speech exceptions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Read a book and learn the difference between free speech and restricted speech. Speech that comes with legal liabilities isn't free speech.

Again, there are absolutely no restrictions on free speech.

But, seeing how you'll never need free speech, let's abolish the 1st Amendment.

Which book should we read if you want to be indoctrinated into your views?

Whichever book you want, if it teaches you That free speech isn't restricted.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Again, there are absolutely no restrictions on free speech.

That's just wrong, utterly.

It says this:

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


And we have this:

Exceptions to free speech in the United States are limitations on the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech and expression as recognized by the United States Supreme Court. These exceptions have been created over time, based on certain types of speech and expression, and under different contexts. While freedom of speech in the United States is a right protected by the constitution, these exceptions make that right a limited one.
United States free speech exceptions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rational thought is a new concept to you I see...

I should be surprised, but I'm not, that you don't understand the difference between free speech and speech that is restricted, liabilous, or illegal.

Not sure you know what "...or abridging the freedom of speech..." means? It doesn't mean, you can "abridge" it.

a·bridge
əˈbrij/
verb
verb: abridge; 3rd person present: abridges; past tense: abridged; past participle: abridged; gerund or present participle: abridging

1. 1.
   shorten (a book, movie, speech, or other text) without losing the sense.
   
   
2. 2.
   Law
   curtail (rights or privileges).
   "even the right to free speech can be abridged"

 

[sealybobo]

Guns are all that matter. That never changes.

I have several guns and none have ever committed a crime. Perhaps they are broken?

His wasn't...

His guns were functional but he was not. Did the human with the gun kill? Or did the gun with a human? If you take the human factor out you remove the death.

If you take the gun out that also works. My choice, both.

Michigan has no death penalty. Why?

 

[theHawk]

Thanks to another poster...we have this new piece of info.

From Stevemcgarret.....

"Progressive" Jason Brian Dalton Arrested for Random Kalamazoo Shootings After Killing 6 - Was Uber Driver - The Gateway Pundit

Chances are he's a queer.

He was queer alright, he killed random people...

Queers are mentally unstable and usually have a propensity towards violence.

Your homophobia is uninteresting. Keep your fears in check, please.

It's not "homophobia" you moron, it's the truth.

The CDC says homos are more violent: http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/cdc_nisvs_victimization_final-a.pdf

Gays make up a disproportionate amount of serial murderers, that's a fact.

I don't really care if you and the rest of the assclown brigade get upset about it.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Guns are all that matter. That never changes.

I have several guns and none have ever committed a crime. Perhaps they are broken?

His wasn't...

His guns were functional but he was not. Did the human with the gun kill? Or did the gun with a human? If you take the human factor out you remove the death.

If you take the gun out that also works. My choice, both.

Michigan has no death penalty. Why?

It's expensive, unfairly applied, and doesn't work to stop murder. Besides that, great idea.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Thanks to another poster...we have this new piece of info.

From Stevemcgarret.....

"Progressive" Jason Brian Dalton Arrested for Random Kalamazoo Shootings After Killing 6 - Was Uber Driver - The Gateway Pundit

Chances are he's a queer.

He was queer alright, he killed random people...

Queers are mentally unstable and usually have a propensity towards violence.

Your homophobia is uninteresting. Keep your fears in check, please.

It's not "homophobia" you moron, it's the truth.

The CDC says homos are more violent: http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/cdc_nisvs_victimization_final-a.pdf

Gays make up a disproportionate amount of serial murderers, that's a fact.

I don't really care if you and the rest of the assclown brigade get upset about it.

You fear the faggots. It's alright, you are hardly alone.

 

[sealybobo]

I have several guns and none have ever committed a crime. Perhaps they are broken?

His wasn't...

His guns were functional but he was not. Did the human with the gun kill? Or did the gun with a human? If you take the human factor out you remove the death.

If you take the gun out that also works. My choice, both.

Michigan has no death penalty. Why?

It's expensive, unfairly applied, and doesn't work to stop murder. Besides that, great idea.

I don't think life in prison is a deterant either.

And we can fix the other two problems easy.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

There are absolutely no restrictions on free speech.

Time for you to grow up: United States free speech exceptions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Read a book and learn the difference between free speech and restricted speech. Speech that comes with legal liabilities isn't free speech.

Again, there are absolutely no restrictions on free speech.

But, seeing how you'll never need free speech, let's abolish the 1st Amendment.

Which book should we read if you want to be indoctrinated into your views?

Whichever book you want, if it teaches you That free speech isn't restricted.

Like this?

"In Freedom of Expression in the Supreme Court, Terry Eastland brings together the Court's leading First Amendment cases, some 60 in all, starting with Schenck v. United States (1919) and ending with Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union (1998). Complete with a comprehensive introduction, pertinent indices and a useful bibliography, Freedom of Expression in the Supreme Court offers the general and specialized reader alike a thorough treatment of the Court's understanding on the First Amendment's speech, press, assembly, and petition clauses."
http://www.amazon.com/Freedom-Expre...60_&refRID=1M9QXJDD3H5TSSWRYMWV&tag=ff0d01-20

 

[PaintMyHouse]

His wasn't...

His guns were functional but he was not. Did the human with the gun kill? Or did the gun with a human? If you take the human factor out you remove the death.

If you take the gun out that also works. My choice, both.

Michigan has no death penalty. Why?

It's expensive, unfairly applied, and doesn't work to stop murder. Besides that, great idea.

I don't think life in prison is a deterant either.

And we can fix the other two problems easy.

Do tell?

 

[AmericanFirst1]

Guns are all that matter. That never changes.

Arrest my guns, go ahead and try. Still stupid aren't you?

 

[AmericanFirst1]

The only thing his neighbors know about him is that "he liked guns". He`s a regressive no matter what he calls himself on Facebook. I suspect he`s the typical gun fondling loser with a typical gun nut room temperature IQ.

Libtards wish they had an iq as high as room temperature.

 

[theHawk]

Chances are he's a queer.

He was queer alright, he killed random people...

Queers are mentally unstable and usually have a propensity towards violence.

Your homophobia is uninteresting. Keep your fears in check, please.

It's not "homophobia" you moron, it's the truth.

The CDC says homos are more violent: http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/cdc_nisvs_victimization_final-a.pdf

Gays make up a disproportionate amount of serial murderers, that's a fact.

I don't really care if you and the rest of the assclown brigade get upset about it.

You fear the faggots. It's alright, you are hardly alone.

I fear for the safety of US citizens, yes. The CDC and many other studies show that faggots are mentally unstable and commit a lot of violence, especially the most heinous crimes like serial killings and child molestation.

Pacquiao was right, they are worse than animals.

 

[bucs90]

Thanks to another poster...we have this new piece of info.

From Stevemcgarret.....

"Progressive" Jason Brian Dalton Arrested for Random Kalamazoo Shootings After Killing 6 - Was Uber Driver - The Gateway Pundit

Chances are he's a queer.

He was queer alright, he killed random people...

Queers are mentally unstable and usually have a propensity towards violence.

Your homophobia is uninteresting. Keep your fears in check, please.

It's not "homophobia" you moron, it's the truth.

The CDC says homos are more violent: http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/cdc_nisvs_victimization_final-a.pdf

Gays make up a disproportionate amount of serial murderers, that's a fact.

I don't really care if you and the rest of the assclown brigade get upset about it.

It makes sense. Most serial killers are mentally ill. And homosexuality is a mental disorder just like liberalism.