Look for terrorist and no fly list to go up substantially

[Fenton Lum]

In other words, you have no clue.

Alternatively, the poster may have accurately determined that you have absolutely no interest in a conversation.

Let's have a conversation then. Let's discuss this comment from you.

Where you may very well be much safer from this madness, and without a 2nd amendment.

Why do you think the U.S. has a second amendment?

Originaly it was setup because the founding fathers having no standing army to fall back upon, wanted to ensure there was a militia they could fall back on in time of crisis. Also they wanted it on record that the government didn't have the right to disarm it's populace.

Very good, and what do you think they meant by "in time of crisis"? What crisis had they just been through that inspired them to make the second amendment the SECOND AMENDMENT?

In time of crisis meant war. Since you guys have an army now it seems obsolete. Especially because back then private citizens could have weapons which where as effective as the best the british possesed a.e. muskets. Unless you have an F22 in your backyard that isn't the case anymore. Your civilian type ar 15 won't do anything in war.

I agree, mass shootings are just part of american life in this exceptional nation. Just the price we pay to be free and be able to have guns so we can fight our govt off.

Define free? I'm European, I'm free to worship, spend money, be gay, ask to end my life when I get sick and am in unbearable pain, have an abortion. And all of this without needing to lose over 30000 ppl anually to guns. What freedoms you enjoy that I don't?

^^^ ahahaha "free" and "European" used in the same sentence how high are your taxes and how long have you been unemployed? lol

Ever lived outside the US? I have. Your indoctrination was very thorough. The only antidote is to get out more. Try it. Grow.

 

[guno]

good now they can place a lot of rightwing christians on that list

 

[BluesLegend]

Alternatively, the poster may have accurately determined that you have absolutely no interest in a conversation.

Let's have a conversation then. Let's discuss this comment from you.

Where you may very well be much safer from this madness, and without a 2nd amendment.

Why do you think the U.S. has a second amendment?

Originaly it was setup because the founding fathers having no standing army to fall back upon, wanted to ensure there was a militia they could fall back on in time of crisis. Also they wanted it on record that the government didn't have the right to disarm it's populace.

Very good, and what do you think they meant by "in time of crisis"? What crisis had they just been through that inspired them to make the second amendment the SECOND AMENDMENT?

In time of crisis meant war. Since you guys have an army now it seems obsolete. Especially because back then private citizens could have weapons which where as effective as the best the british possesed a.e. muskets. Unless you have an F22 in your backyard that isn't the case anymore. Your civilian type ar 15 won't do anything in war.

I agree, mass shootings are just part of american life in this exceptional nation. Just the price we pay to be free and be able to have guns so we can fight our govt off.

Define free? I'm European, I'm free to worship, spend money, be gay, ask to end my life when I get sick and am in unbearable pain, have an abortion. And all of this without needing to lose over 30000 ppl anually to guns. What freedoms you enjoy that I don't?

^^^ ahahaha "free" and "European" used in the same sentence how high are your taxes and how long have you been unemployed? lol

Ever lived outside the US? I have. Your indoctrination was very thorough. The only antidote is to get out more. Try it. Grow.

Oh please, I custom ordered a BMW recently and the guys in Europe have to pay ungodly amounts of taxes on the exact same vehicle plus crap like Co2 taxes and other socialist government BS. I wouldn't live in that shit hole area for no amount of money.

 

[forkup]

Let's have a conversation then. Let's discuss this comment from you.

Why do you think the U.S. has a second amendment?

Originaly it was setup because the founding fathers having no standing army to fall back upon, wanted to ensure there was a militia they could fall back on in time of crisis. Also they wanted it on record that the government didn't have the right to disarm it's populace.

Very good, and what do you think they meant by "in time of crisis"? What crisis had they just been through that inspired them to make the second amendment the SECOND AMENDMENT?

In time of crisis meant war. Since you guys have an army now it seems obsolete. Especially because back then private citizens could have weapons which where as effective as the best the british possesed a.e. muskets. Unless you have an F22 in your backyard that isn't the case anymore. Your civilian type ar 15 won't do anything in war.

I agree, mass shootings are just part of american life in this exceptional nation. Just the price we pay to be free and be able to have guns so we can fight our govt off.

Define free? I'm European, I'm free to worship, spend money, be gay, ask to end my life when I get sick and am in unbearable pain, have an abortion. And all of this without needing to lose over 30000 ppl anually to guns. What freedoms you enjoy that I don't?

^^^ ahahaha "free" and "European" used in the same sentence how high are your taxes and how long have you been unemployed? lol

Ever lived outside the US? I have. Your indoctrination was very thorough. The only antidote is to get out more. Try it. Grow.

Oh please, I custom ordered a BMW recently and the guys in Europe have to pay ungodly amounts of taxes on the exact same vehicle plus crap like Co2 taxes and other socialist government BS. I wouldn't live in that shit hole area for no amount of money.

Time to give some background. I'm married to an American and my daughter has dual nationality. So I can speak from both perspectives. It is true we pay compared to Americans, what to you would seem oppressive taxes. Lets examine what I get back using purely what I know, and have seen in my immediate family and friends circle. In belgium where I life, I can send my kid to school, ANY school regardless of adress, there is no such thing as school districts. My daughter started going to school at 2,5 years old. At 12 she will have a choice to go and prep for college, or if her intellectual capacity won't allow it, she can elect to go into a trade direction, wich would give her a trade by the time she's 18. The cost of this to me out of pocket is about 20 euro anually in kindergarden and elementary, to a few hundred in high school, to lets be generous about 10000 at college level, that includes dorms and living expenses. If I get sick I go to a doctor for about 5 euro and then go to the farmacy to pick up my perscription. I get this filled immediatly no calling to health insurance to ask if I'm covered. A typical ER visit costs me about 1,5 h in time and nothing out of pocket. "How I'm gonna pay for it" is never a question. Nore does E;R mean stabilise and go. My wife broke her ankle before we where married. She got seen. Stabilised, put a cast on, and got a follow up appointment all within 2 hours of entering the ER. Nobody ever refused to see or asked a credit card number. Later I got the bill including her follow up. It was about 400 since she wasn't insured. My grandmother when she got sick here. Got a nurses visit twice daily and a physical therapist 4 times a week for 3 years at her house, at the anual cost of about 650 euro. I visit the states with 3 ppl anually and I'm by no means a rich man in my country. So my question to you is. You feel that your low taxes can provide all that in your country?

 

[BluesLegend]

Originaly it was setup because the founding fathers having no standing army to fall back upon, wanted to ensure there was a militia they could fall back on in time of crisis. Also they wanted it on record that the government didn't have the right to disarm it's populace.

Very good, and what do you think they meant by "in time of crisis"? What crisis had they just been through that inspired them to make the second amendment the SECOND AMENDMENT?

In time of crisis meant war. Since you guys have an army now it seems obsolete. Especially because back then private citizens could have weapons which where as effective as the best the british possesed a.e. muskets. Unless you have an F22 in your backyard that isn't the case anymore. Your civilian type ar 15 won't do anything in war.

I agree, mass shootings are just part of american life in this exceptional nation. Just the price we pay to be free and be able to have guns so we can fight our govt off.

Define free? I'm European, I'm free to worship, spend money, be gay, ask to end my life when I get sick and am in unbearable pain, have an abortion. And all of this without needing to lose over 30000 ppl anually to guns. What freedoms you enjoy that I don't?

^^^ ahahaha "free" and "European" used in the same sentence how high are your taxes and how long have you been unemployed? lol

Ever lived outside the US? I have. Your indoctrination was very thorough. The only antidote is to get out more. Try it. Grow.

Oh please, I custom ordered a BMW recently and the guys in Europe have to pay ungodly amounts of taxes on the exact same vehicle plus crap like Co2 taxes and other socialist government BS. I wouldn't live in that shit hole area for no amount of money.

Time to give some background. I'm married to an American and my daughter has dual nationality. So I can speak from both perspectives. It is true we pay compared to Americans, what to you would seem oppressive taxes. Lets examine what I get back using purely what I know, and have seen in my immediate family and friends circle. In belgium where I life, I can send my kid to school, ANY school regardless of adress, there is no such thing as school districts. My daughter started going to school at 2,5 years old. At 12 she will have a choice to go and prep for college, or if her intellectual capacity won't allow it, she can elect to go into a trade direction, wich would give her a trade by the time she's 18. The cost of this to me out of pocket is about 20 euro anually in kindergarden and elementary, to a few hundred in high school, to lets be generous about 10000 at college level, that includes dorms and living expenses. If I get sick I go to a doctor for about 5 euro and then go to the farmacy to pick up my perscription. I get this filled immediatly no calling to health insurance to ask if I'm covered. A typical ER visit costs me about 1,5 h in time and nothing out of pocket. "How I'm gonna pay for it" is never a question. Nore does E;R mean stabilise and go. My wife broke her ankle before we where married. She got seen. Stabilised, put a cast on, and got a follow up appointment all within 2 hours of entering the ER. Nobody ever refused to see or asked a credit card number. Later I got the bill including her follow up. It was about 400 since she wasn't insured. My grandmother when she got sick here. Got a nurses visit twice daily and a physical therapist 4 times a week for 3 years at her house, at the anual cost of about 650 euro. I visit the states with 3 ppl anually and I'm by no means a rich man in my country. So my question to you is. You feel that your low taxes can provide all that in your country?

Awaken from your Stockholm syndrome you are a slave to the state with limited freedom. Here's an idea get a job and pay your own bills for your kids and healthcare instead of mooching off others.

 

[forkup]

Very good, and what do you think they meant by "in time of crisis"? What crisis had they just been through that inspired them to make the second amendment the SECOND AMENDMENT?

In time of crisis meant war. Since you guys have an army now it seems obsolete. Especially because back then private citizens could have weapons which where as effective as the best the british possesed a.e. muskets. Unless you have an F22 in your backyard that isn't the case anymore. Your civilian type ar 15 won't do anything in war.

Define free? I'm European, I'm free to worship, spend money, be gay, ask to end my life when I get sick and am in unbearable pain, have an abortion. And all of this without needing to lose over 30000 ppl anually to guns. What freedoms you enjoy that I don't?

^^^ ahahaha "free" and "European" used in the same sentence how high are your taxes and how long have you been unemployed? lol

Ever lived outside the US? I have. Your indoctrination was very thorough. The only antidote is to get out more. Try it. Grow.

Oh please, I custom ordered a BMW recently and the guys in Europe have to pay ungodly amounts of taxes on the exact same vehicle plus crap like Co2 taxes and other socialist government BS. I wouldn't live in that shit hole area for no amount of money.

Time to give some background. I'm married to an American and my daughter has dual nationality. So I can speak from both perspectives. It is true we pay compared to Americans, what to you would seem oppressive taxes. Lets examine what I get back using purely what I know, and have seen in my immediate family and friends circle. In belgium where I life, I can send my kid to school, ANY school regardless of adress, there is no such thing as school districts. My daughter started going to school at 2,5 years old. At 12 she will have a choice to go and prep for college, or if her intellectual capacity won't allow it, she can elect to go into a trade direction, wich would give her a trade by the time she's 18. The cost of this to me out of pocket is about 20 euro anually in kindergarden and elementary, to a few hundred in high school, to lets be generous about 10000 at college level, that includes dorms and living expenses. If I get sick I go to a doctor for about 5 euro and then go to the farmacy to pick up my perscription. I get this filled immediatly no calling to health insurance to ask if I'm covered. A typical ER visit costs me about 1,5 h in time and nothing out of pocket. "How I'm gonna pay for it" is never a question. Nore does E;R mean stabilise and go. My wife broke her ankle before we where married. She got seen. Stabilised, put a cast on, and got a follow up appointment all within 2 hours of entering the ER. Nobody ever refused to see or asked a credit card number. Later I got the bill including her follow up. It was about 400 since she wasn't insured. My grandmother when she got sick here. Got a nurses visit twice daily and a physical therapist 4 times a week for 3 years at her house, at the anual cost of about 650 euro. I visit the states with 3 ppl anually and I'm by no means a rich man in my country. So my question to you is. You feel that your low taxes can provide all that in your country?

Awaken from your Stockholm syndrome you are a slave to the state with limited freedom. Here's an idea get a job and pay your own bills for your kids and healthcare instead of mooching off others.

Like my original post said, give me a freedom you have that I don't. I also note you didn't answer my question. And I've been gainfully employed since I got out of high school.

 

[S.J.]

Let's have a conversation then. Let's discuss this comment from you.

Why do you think the U.S. has a second amendment?

Originaly it was setup because the founding fathers having no standing army to fall back upon, wanted to ensure there was a militia they could fall back on in time of crisis. Also they wanted it on record that the government didn't have the right to disarm it's populace.

Very good, and what do you think they meant by "in time of crisis"? What crisis had they just been through that inspired them to make the second amendment the SECOND AMENDMENT?

In time of crisis meant war. Since you guys have an army now it seems obsolete. Especially because back then private citizens could have weapons which where as effective as the best the british possesed a.e. muskets. Unless you have an F22 in your backyard that isn't the case anymore. Your civilian type ar 15 won't do anything in war.

Yeah, they were at war with what USED to be our government. Keep thinking, maybe you'll get it.

So you no longer have anything you consider to be your govt then?

So much for a serious conversation. Get back to me when you have something worthwhile to say.

 

[forkup]

Originaly it was setup because the founding fathers having no standing army to fall back upon, wanted to ensure there was a militia they could fall back on in time of crisis. Also they wanted it on record that the government didn't have the right to disarm it's populace.

Very good, and what do you think they meant by "in time of crisis"? What crisis had they just been through that inspired them to make the second amendment the SECOND AMENDMENT?

In time of crisis meant war. Since you guys have an army now it seems obsolete. Especially because back then private citizens could have weapons which where as effective as the best the british possesed a.e. muskets. Unless you have an F22 in your backyard that isn't the case anymore. Your civilian type ar 15 won't do anything in war.

Yeah, they were at war with what USED to be our government. Keep thinking, maybe you'll get it.

So you no longer have anything you consider to be your govt then?

So much for a serious conversation. Get back to me when you have something worthwhile to say.

Ah so my point that the original meaning of the second amendment isn't applicable anymore is not worthy of discussion. Just so you know there was other text regarding slavery for instance that clearly lost it's meaning after the civil war. I'm arguing that the same can be said of the second amendment. Historically both provisions of the second amendment made sense. The first part ensuring that a new country with little friends and no standing army could at least rely on a militia for self defence. The second part trying to ensure that the goverment would always have to fear armed uprising as a last resort check and balance. The first part of the second amendment is now covered with the most formidable war machine ever assembled. The second part covered by a well established and never broken election cycle and the cheer futility of armed rebellion in the face of modern weapons.

 

[S.J.]

Very good, and what do you think they meant by "in time of crisis"? What crisis had they just been through that inspired them to make the second amendment the SECOND AMENDMENT?

In time of crisis meant war. Since you guys have an army now it seems obsolete. Especially because back then private citizens could have weapons which where as effective as the best the british possesed a.e. muskets. Unless you have an F22 in your backyard that isn't the case anymore. Your civilian type ar 15 won't do anything in war.

Yeah, they were at war with what USED to be our government. Keep thinking, maybe you'll get it.

So you no longer have anything you consider to be your govt then?

So much for a serious conversation. Get back to me when you have something worthwhile to say.

Ah so my point that the original meaning of the second amendment isn't applicable anymore is not worthy of discussion. Just so you know there was other text regarding slavery for instance that clearly lost it's meaning after the civil war. I'm arguing that the same can be said of the second amendment. Historically both provisions of the second amendment made sense. The first part ensuring that a new country with little friends and no standing army could at least rely on a militia for self defence. The second part trying to ensure that the goverment would always have to fear armed uprising as a last resort check and balance. The first part of the second amendment is now covered with the most formidable war machine ever assembled. The second part covered by a well established and never broken election cycle and the cheer futility of armed rebellion in the face of modern weapons.

Except it IS applicable. And like it or not, the second amendment DOES guarantee us the right to keep and bear arms, and it's a right we are not willing to give up, especially since our POTUS and the Democratic nominee are trying to flood our country with terrorists.

And an uprising against government is not likely but a government crackdown is, and even though a shotgun is no match for a tank, why should we voluntarily give up our only means of self defense? It's no gonna happen.

 

[forkup]

In time of crisis meant war. Since you guys have an army now it seems obsolete. Especially because back then private citizens could have weapons which where as effective as the best the british possesed a.e. muskets. Unless you have an F22 in your backyard that isn't the case anymore. Your civilian type ar 15 won't do anything in war.

Yeah, they were at war with what USED to be our government. Keep thinking, maybe you'll get it.

So you no longer have anything you consider to be your govt then?

So much for a serious conversation. Get back to me when you have something worthwhile to say.

Ah so my point that the original meaning of the second amendment isn't applicable anymore is not worthy of discussion. Just so you know there was other text regarding slavery for instance that clearly lost it's meaning after the civil war. I'm arguing that the same can be said of the second amendment. Historically both provisions of the second amendment made sense. The first part ensuring that a new country with little friends and no standing army could at least rely on a militia for self defence. The second part trying to ensure that the goverment would always have to fear armed uprising as a last resort check and balance. The first part of the second amendment is now covered with the most formidable war machine ever assembled. The second part covered by a well established and never broken election cycle and the cheer futility of armed rebellion in the face of modern weapons.

Except it IS applicable. And like it or not, the second amendment DOES guarantee us the right to keep and bear arms, and it's a right we are not willing to give up, especially since our POTUS and the Democratic nominee are trying to flood our country with terrorists.

And an uprising against government is not likely but a government crackdown is, and even though a shotgun is no match for a tank, why should we voluntarily give up our only means of self defense? It's no gonna happen.

Look I see you give no counterargument as to why you feel it is still applicable. Exept saying I want my guns. Fine I already decided that for myself you wanting to have a gun is fine by me. Just don't be sanctimonious about it. It has nothing at all to do with rights and everything to do with wants. You like guns that simple. The reason I know that is by your post. You would have no problem in congress voting laws against Islam. Wich goes against the first amendment. Nore I suspect you have a problem with congress not even giving a hearing to Garland. Wich goes against the second article of the constitution. So if your love for the founding fathers stops at anything that you feel you or the country needs, thats hypocritical.

 

[S.J.]

Yeah, they were at war with what USED to be our government. Keep thinking, maybe you'll get it.

So you no longer have anything you consider to be your govt then?

So much for a serious conversation. Get back to me when you have something worthwhile to say.

Ah so my point that the original meaning of the second amendment isn't applicable anymore is not worthy of discussion. Just so you know there was other text regarding slavery for instance that clearly lost it's meaning after the civil war. I'm arguing that the same can be said of the second amendment. Historically both provisions of the second amendment made sense. The first part ensuring that a new country with little friends and no standing army could at least rely on a militia for self defence. The second part trying to ensure that the goverment would always have to fear armed uprising as a last resort check and balance. The first part of the second amendment is now covered with the most formidable war machine ever assembled. The second part covered by a well established and never broken election cycle and the cheer futility of armed rebellion in the face of modern weapons.

Except it IS applicable. And like it or not, the second amendment DOES guarantee us the right to keep and bear arms, and it's a right we are not willing to give up, especially since our POTUS and the Democratic nominee are trying to flood our country with terrorists.

And an uprising against government is not likely but a government crackdown is, and even though a shotgun is no match for a tank, why should we voluntarily give up our only means of self defense? It's no gonna happen.

Look I see you give no counterargument as to why you feel it is still applicable. Exept saying I want my guns. Fine I already decided that for myself you wanting to have a gun is fine by me. Just don't be sanctimonious about it. It has nothing at all to do with rights and everything to do with wants. You like guns that simple. The reason I know that is by your post. You would have no problem in congress voting laws against Islam. Wich goes against the first amendment. Nore I suspect you have a problem with congress not even giving a hearing to Garland. Wich goes against the second article of the constitution. So if your love for the founding fathers stops at anything that you feel you or the country needs, thats hypocritical.

You're so used to being ruled over you'll accept whatever your government does. In America, We, The People have a say. That's what makes us the greatest and most powerful country in the world while the rest of you live under the thumb of your masters. And the applicability of the second amendment is not determined by your opinion or anyone else's but feel free to voice your worthless opinions. We Americans enjoy a good laugh once in a while when foreign liberal snobs such as yourself spew your ignorance about our Constitution.

 

[forkup]

So you no longer have anything you consider to be your govt then?

So much for a serious conversation. Get back to me when you have something worthwhile to say.

Ah so my point that the original meaning of the second amendment isn't applicable anymore is not worthy of discussion. Just so you know there was other text regarding slavery for instance that clearly lost it's meaning after the civil war. I'm arguing that the same can be said of the second amendment. Historically both provisions of the second amendment made sense. The first part ensuring that a new country with little friends and no standing army could at least rely on a militia for self defence. The second part trying to ensure that the goverment would always have to fear armed uprising as a last resort check and balance. The first part of the second amendment is now covered with the most formidable war machine ever assembled. The second part covered by a well established and never broken election cycle and the cheer futility of armed rebellion in the face of modern weapons.

Except it IS applicable. And like it or not, the second amendment DOES guarantee us the right to keep and bear arms, and it's a right we are not willing to give up, especially since our POTUS and the Democratic nominee are trying to flood our country with terrorists.

And an uprising against government is not likely but a government crackdown is, and even though a shotgun is no match for a tank, why should we voluntarily give up our only means of self defense? It's no gonna happen.

Look I see you give no counterargument as to why you feel it is still applicable. Exept saying I want my guns. Fine I already decided that for myself you wanting to have a gun is fine by me. Just don't be sanctimonious about it. It has nothing at all to do with rights and everything to do with wants. You like guns that simple. The reason I know that is by your post. You would have no problem in congress voting laws against Islam. Wich goes against the first amendment. Nore I suspect you have a problem with congress not even giving a hearing to Garland. Wich goes against the second article of the constitution. So if your love for the founding fathers stops at anything that you feel you or the country needs, thats hypocritical.

You're so used to being ruled over you'll accept whatever your government does. In America, We, The People have a say. That's what makes us the greatest and most powerful country in the world while the rest of you live under the thumb of your masters. And the applicability of the second amendment is not determined by your opinion or anyone else's but feel free to voice your worthless opinions. We Americans enjoy a good laugh once in a while when foreign liberal snobs such as yourself spew your ignorance about our Constitution.

Again no counterargument, but I'm ignorant lol. I can give clear well conceived arguments on American law and history in a language wich is not my own. You can come back with platitudes, preconceptions and insults. Like I said in my first reply to you. I could get mad but this entire exchange sais more about who you are, then it sais about me. And let me tell you, it adds up to, not a very nice or intelligent person.

 

[S.J.]

So much for a serious conversation. Get back to me when you have something worthwhile to say.

Ah so my point that the original meaning of the second amendment isn't applicable anymore is not worthy of discussion. Just so you know there was other text regarding slavery for instance that clearly lost it's meaning after the civil war. I'm arguing that the same can be said of the second amendment. Historically both provisions of the second amendment made sense. The first part ensuring that a new country with little friends and no standing army could at least rely on a militia for self defence. The second part trying to ensure that the goverment would always have to fear armed uprising as a last resort check and balance. The first part of the second amendment is now covered with the most formidable war machine ever assembled. The second part covered by a well established and never broken election cycle and the cheer futility of armed rebellion in the face of modern weapons.

Except it IS applicable. And like it or not, the second amendment DOES guarantee us the right to keep and bear arms, and it's a right we are not willing to give up, especially since our POTUS and the Democratic nominee are trying to flood our country with terrorists.

And an uprising against government is not likely but a government crackdown is, and even though a shotgun is no match for a tank, why should we voluntarily give up our only means of self defense? It's no gonna happen.

Look I see you give no counterargument as to why you feel it is still applicable. Exept saying I want my guns. Fine I already decided that for myself you wanting to have a gun is fine by me. Just don't be sanctimonious about it. It has nothing at all to do with rights and everything to do with wants. You like guns that simple. The reason I know that is by your post. You would have no problem in congress voting laws against Islam. Wich goes against the first amendment. Nore I suspect you have a problem with congress not even giving a hearing to Garland. Wich goes against the second article of the constitution. So if your love for the founding fathers stops at anything that you feel you or the country needs, thats hypocritical.

You're so used to being ruled over you'll accept whatever your government does. In America, We, The People have a say. That's what makes us the greatest and most powerful country in the world while the rest of you live under the thumb of your masters. And the applicability of the second amendment is not determined by your opinion or anyone else's but feel free to voice your worthless opinions. We Americans enjoy a good laugh once in a while when foreign liberal snobs such as yourself spew your ignorance about our Constitution.

Again no counterargument, but I'm ignorant lol. I can give clear well conceived arguments on American law and history in a language wich is not my own. You can come back with platitudes, preconceptions and insults. Like I said in my first reply to you. I could get mad but this entire exchange sais more about who you are, then it sais about me. And let me tell you, it adds up to, not a very nice or intelligent person.

Yes, you are ignorant. You did not give a well conceived argument on American law, you don't understand American law enough to do that and you sure as hell don't understand our Constitution. It isn't something we disregard because times and attitudes change, as you are suggesting, it doesn't bend to the whims of those who think they know better and decide that it's cornerstone is no longer applicable. You ignored the points I made in my last post, so it's pretty clear that you're not really interested in having an honest exchange here, you're only interested in poking and prodding me to get a reaction. We call it trolling and I'm not inclined to indulge you right now. Bye bye.

 

[HUGGY]

I agree, mass shootings are just part of american life in this exceptional nation. Just the price we pay to be free and be able to have guns so we can fight our govt off.

Define free? I'm European, I'm free to worship, spend money, be gay, ask to end my life when I get sick and am in unbearable pain, have an abortion. And all of this without needing to lose over 30000 ppl anually to guns. What freedoms you enjoy that I don't?

Really? How did that thingy involving Adolf Hitler and his buddies work out for you? Europe did a FINE job taking care of that little inconvenience didn't you? Ya think the NAZIS would have even got started if the citizens had weapons?

You and your precious Europe are EXACTLY the reason why a well armed citizenry is necessary. Your stupid asses were clearly NOT worth saving as made clear in this post.

Piss on Europe. Next time you get overtaken by a tyrant ...how's THIS? Save yourselves. We lost a lot of good men and women defending you WITH GUNS. We didn't do it with cupcakes.

But perhaps YOU are better off without guns. I doubt you would have the courage to do what it would take to save yourselves even if you had the means.

Did I mention PISS ON EUROPE?

I have to say your level of discourse is staggering. You think Adolf Hitler would have been stopped if the people would have had guns. Hmms, since Germany had riots and it's citizens fighting basicly since WW1 ended. And there was no gun laws period in the interbellum period that is a weird claim. The rise to power of Hitler has nothing at all to do with the lack of weapons. I could give you a lenghty explanation as to how it happened. But since you are an American who quite clearly doesn't have the brain, the temperament , nore the inclination to listen to someone who has more knowledge then your narrow view of the world, I won't bother.

A man or two with sniper rifles could have easily destroyed the inner circle of Hitler's core group. A few well placed 50 cal machine guns could have easily taken out a whole caravan of the NAZI elites in any highway in Germany. Yes the patriots would have probably been discovered and killed. Taking out Hitler and a few of his top henchmen early on would have brought the NAZIS to a screeching halt.

The problem with stopping a man like Adolf Hitler is that it would take some brave men willing to give up their lives for the greater good. No such person or persons exist in Europe. Stop trying to compare Europe with THE USA. We are made of better stuff. You people are mouths on sticks. You have less character than a ventriloquist's puppet. Did I mention "PISS ON EUROPE"?

 

[forkup]

Ah so my point that the original meaning of the second amendment isn't applicable anymore is not worthy of discussion. Just so you know there was other text regarding slavery for instance that clearly lost it's meaning after the civil war. I'm arguing that the same can be said of the second amendment. Historically both provisions of the second amendment made sense. The first part ensuring that a new country with little friends and no standing army could at least rely on a militia for self defence. The second part trying to ensure that the goverment would always have to fear armed uprising as a last resort check and balance. The first part of the second amendment is now covered with the most formidable war machine ever assembled. The second part covered by a well established and never broken election cycle and the cheer futility of armed rebellion in the face of modern weapons.

Except it IS applicable. And like it or not, the second amendment DOES guarantee us the right to keep and bear arms, and it's a right we are not willing to give up, especially since our POTUS and the Democratic nominee are trying to flood our country with terrorists.

And an uprising against government is not likely but a government crackdown is, and even though a shotgun is no match for a tank, why should we voluntarily give up our only means of self defense? It's no gonna happen.

Look I see you give no counterargument as to why you feel it is still applicable. Exept saying I want my guns. Fine I already decided that for myself you wanting to have a gun is fine by me. Just don't be sanctimonious about it. It has nothing at all to do with rights and everything to do with wants. You like guns that simple. The reason I know that is by your post. You would have no problem in congress voting laws against Islam. Wich goes against the first amendment. Nore I suspect you have a problem with congress not even giving a hearing to Garland. Wich goes against the second article of the constitution. So if your love for the founding fathers stops at anything that you feel you or the country needs, thats hypocritical.

You're so used to being ruled over you'll accept whatever your government does. In America, We, The People have a say. That's what makes us the greatest and most powerful country in the world while the rest of you live under the thumb of your masters. And the applicability of the second amendment is not determined by your opinion or anyone else's but feel free to voice your worthless opinions. We Americans enjoy a good laugh once in a while when foreign liberal snobs such as yourself spew your ignorance about our Constitution.

Again no counterargument, but I'm ignorant lol. I can give clear well conceived arguments on American law and history in a language wich is not my own. You can come back with platitudes, preconceptions and insults. Like I said in my first reply to you. I could get mad but this entire exchange sais more about who you are, then it sais about me. And let me tell you, it adds up to, not a very nice or intelligent person.

Yes, you are ignorant. You did not give a well conceived argument on American law, you don't understand American law enough to do that and you sure as hell don't understand our Constitution. It isn't something we disregard because times and attitudes change, as you are suggesting, it doesn't bend to the whims of those who think they know better and decide that it's cornerstone is no longer applicable. You ignored the points I made in my last post, so it's pretty clear that you're not really interested in having an honest exchange here, you're only interested in poking and prodding me to get a reaction. We call it trolling and I'm not inclined to indulge you right now. Bye bye.

"It isn't something we disregard because times and attitudes change" , really? The thirteent amendment was ratified in 1864, before slavery was legal so you guys changed the constitution because times and attitudes changed.
lol it is something congress is disregarding now, this is part of the second article of the constitution.
"He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court"
If congress said when Scalia died they wouldn't even meet the presidents nominee. Pretty weird way to advice and consent. "don't even try to put somebody up"
Bush signed the patriot act allowing broad power, among other this in wiretapping and holding people without representation for a while. This is the 4th amendment.

"The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause."
The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to legal counsel at all significant stages of a criminal proceeding
If Trump calls for a ban on Muslims entering the country he goes against the first amendment. So tell me again how the constitution is sacred. And for the record I still haven't gotten a single counterargument saying more then "You are wrong". I'm fine with being wrong but it has to be argumenteted.

 

[forkup]

I agree, mass shootings are just part of american life in this exceptional nation. Just the price we pay to be free and be able to have guns so we can fight our govt off.

Define free? I'm European, I'm free to worship, spend money, be gay, ask to end my life when I get sick and am in unbearable pain, have an abortion. And all of this without needing to lose over 30000 ppl anually to guns. What freedoms you enjoy that I don't?

Really? How did that thingy involving Adolf Hitler and his buddies work out for you? Europe did a FINE job taking care of that little inconvenience didn't you? Ya think the NAZIS would have even got started if the citizens had weapons?

You and your precious Europe are EXACTLY the reason why a well armed citizenry is necessary. Your stupid asses were clearly NOT worth saving as made clear in this post.

Piss on Europe. Next time you get overtaken by a tyrant ...how's THIS? Save yourselves. We lost a lot of good men and women defending you WITH GUNS. We didn't do it with cupcakes.

But perhaps YOU are better off without guns. I doubt you would have the courage to do what it would take to save yourselves even if you had the means.

Did I mention PISS ON EUROPE?

I have to say your level of discourse is staggering. You think Adolf Hitler would have been stopped if the people would have had guns. Hmms, since Germany had riots and it's citizens fighting basicly since WW1 ended. And there was no gun laws period in the interbellum period that is a weird claim. The rise to power of Hitler has nothing at all to do with the lack of weapons. I could give you a lenghty explanation as to how it happened. But since you are an American who quite clearly doesn't have the brain, the temperament , nore the inclination to listen to someone who has more knowledge then your narrow view of the world, I won't bother.

A man or two with sniper rifles could have easily destroyed the inner circle of Hitler's core group. A few well placed 50 cal machine guns could have easily taken out a whole caravan of the NAZI elites in any highway in Germany. Yes the patriots would have probably been discovered and killed. Taking out Hitler and a few of his top henchmen early on would have brought the NAZIS to a screeching halt.

The problem with stopping a man like Adolf Hitler is that it would take some brave men willing to give up their lives for the greater good. No such person or persons exist in Europe. Stop trying to compare Europe with THE USA. We are made of better stuff. You people are mouths on sticks. You have less character than a ventriloquist's puppet. Did I mention "PISS ON EUROPE"?

Ah with brave men you mean someone with a gun. As I mentioned before plenty of fighting happened in the NAZI's formative years, and there was no such thing as gun laws. I'll give you a little secret the problem with tyrants is that you often don't know they'll be tyrants until it's to late. Hitler being the prime example. He was duly elected by the German people and for all his faults. Got Germany out of the worst depression ever experienced and gave a demoralised populace it's confidence back. He wasn't just popular until the war begn, but was considered something of rockstar and a genius by his people. He in both his retoric and character reminds me of Trump, so when you say "oh brave men should have stopped him", note that you have a potential tyrant on your hands yourself.

 

[S.J.]

Except it IS applicable. And like it or not, the second amendment DOES guarantee us the right to keep and bear arms, and it's a right we are not willing to give up, especially since our POTUS and the Democratic nominee are trying to flood our country with terrorists.

And an uprising against government is not likely but a government crackdown is, and even though a shotgun is no match for a tank, why should we voluntarily give up our only means of self defense? It's no gonna happen.

Look I see you give no counterargument as to why you feel it is still applicable. Exept saying I want my guns. Fine I already decided that for myself you wanting to have a gun is fine by me. Just don't be sanctimonious about it. It has nothing at all to do with rights and everything to do with wants. You like guns that simple. The reason I know that is by your post. You would have no problem in congress voting laws against Islam. Wich goes against the first amendment. Nore I suspect you have a problem with congress not even giving a hearing to Garland. Wich goes against the second article of the constitution. So if your love for the founding fathers stops at anything that you feel you or the country needs, thats hypocritical.

You're so used to being ruled over you'll accept whatever your government does. In America, We, The People have a say. That's what makes us the greatest and most powerful country in the world while the rest of you live under the thumb of your masters. And the applicability of the second amendment is not determined by your opinion or anyone else's but feel free to voice your worthless opinions. We Americans enjoy a good laugh once in a while when foreign liberal snobs such as yourself spew your ignorance about our Constitution.

Again no counterargument, but I'm ignorant lol. I can give clear well conceived arguments on American law and history in a language wich is not my own. You can come back with platitudes, preconceptions and insults. Like I said in my first reply to you. I could get mad but this entire exchange sais more about who you are, then it sais about me. And let me tell you, it adds up to, not a very nice or intelligent person.

Yes, you are ignorant. You did not give a well conceived argument on American law, you don't understand American law enough to do that and you sure as hell don't understand our Constitution. It isn't something we disregard because times and attitudes change, as you are suggesting, it doesn't bend to the whims of those who think they know better and decide that it's cornerstone is no longer applicable. You ignored the points I made in my last post, so it's pretty clear that you're not really interested in having an honest exchange here, you're only interested in poking and prodding me to get a reaction. We call it trolling and I'm not inclined to indulge you right now. Bye bye.

"It isn't something we disregard because times and attitudes change" , really? The thirteent amendment was ratified in 1864, before slavery was legal so you guys changed the constitution because times and attitudes changed.
lol it is something congress is disregarding now, this is part of the second article of the constitution.
"He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court"
If congress said when Scalia died they wouldn't even meet the presidents nominee. Pretty weird way to advice and consent. "don't even try to put somebody up"
Bush signed the patriot act allowing broad power, among other this in wiretapping and holding people without representation for a while. This is the 4th amendment.

"The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause."
The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to legal counsel at all significant stages of a criminal proceeding
If Trump calls for a ban on Muslims entering the country he goes against the first amendment. So tell me again how the constitution is sacred. And for the record I still haven't gotten a single counterargument saying more then "You are wrong". I'm fine with being wrong but it has to be argumenteted.

What part of "bye bye" did you not understand, troll?

 

[Fenton Lum]

Let's have a conversation then. Let's discuss this comment from you.

Why do you think the U.S. has a second amendment?

Originaly it was setup because the founding fathers having no standing army to fall back upon, wanted to ensure there was a militia they could fall back on in time of crisis. Also they wanted it on record that the government didn't have the right to disarm it's populace.

Very good, and what do you think they meant by "in time of crisis"? What crisis had they just been through that inspired them to make the second amendment the SECOND AMENDMENT?

In time of crisis meant war. Since you guys have an army now it seems obsolete. Especially because back then private citizens could have weapons which where as effective as the best the british possesed a.e. muskets. Unless you have an F22 in your backyard that isn't the case anymore. Your civilian type ar 15 won't do anything in war.

I agree, mass shootings are just part of american life in this exceptional nation. Just the price we pay to be free and be able to have guns so we can fight our govt off.

Define free? I'm European, I'm free to worship, spend money, be gay, ask to end my life when I get sick and am in unbearable pain, have an abortion. And all of this without needing to lose over 30000 ppl anually to guns. What freedoms you enjoy that I don't?

^^^ ahahaha "free" and "European" used in the same sentence how high are your taxes and how long have you been unemployed? lol

Ever lived outside the US? I have. Your indoctrination was very thorough. The only antidote is to get out more. Try it. Grow.

Oh please, I custom ordered a BMW recently and the guys in Europe have to pay ungodly amounts of taxes on the exact same vehicle plus crap like Co2 taxes and other socialist government BS. I wouldn't live in that shit hole area for no amount of money.

China has a very poluted atmosphere, try there. You'll love it.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Originaly it was setup because the founding fathers having no standing army to fall back upon, wanted to ensure there was a militia they could fall back on in time of crisis. Also they wanted it on record that the government didn't have the right to disarm it's populace.

Very good, and what do you think they meant by "in time of crisis"? What crisis had they just been through that inspired them to make the second amendment the SECOND AMENDMENT?

In time of crisis meant war. Since you guys have an army now it seems obsolete. Especially because back then private citizens could have weapons which where as effective as the best the british possesed a.e. muskets. Unless you have an F22 in your backyard that isn't the case anymore. Your civilian type ar 15 won't do anything in war.

Yeah, they were at war with what USED to be our government. Keep thinking, maybe you'll get it.

So you no longer have anything you consider to be your govt then?

So much for a serious conversation. Get back to me when you have something worthwhile to say.

If you can't carry your own conversation and explain your own statements just say so.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

I agree, mass shootings are just part of american life in this exceptional nation. Just the price we pay to be free and be able to have guns so we can fight our govt off.

Define free? I'm European, I'm free to worship, spend money, be gay, ask to end my life when I get sick and am in unbearable pain, have an abortion. And all of this without needing to lose over 30000 ppl anually to guns. What freedoms you enjoy that I don't?

Good. Stay over there. Pretty soon you'll be bowing to allah.