Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I acknowledge facts when they are presented. Iāve never said I wanted to disarm law abiding citizens. Im a gun owner and donāt support disarming the public. Iām making a case for smart regulation, like the current laws that we have, and Iām opening up the door to discuss if further actions should be taken. Iāve called LCMs a grey area thatās a good debate. People on your side either play hard ass and saying that there should be zero regulations as any infringe in our constitutional rights. This is why I bring up things like age restrictions, mental health and machine guns. Do you want machine guns for sale to anybody who wants to buy one, readily available at every sporting goods store, no questions asked? Cause most people would think that would dangerous and crazy. Since that is currently restricted from happening then my question is simple. Do you support those regulations or do you want a free for all. My guess is that you support the restrictions, however like the rest you are likely to spin and divert away from admitting that. Prove me wrongItās just so easy to reverse the argument and use your own shit against you so Iāll just do that in this case. If you are worried that 10 rounds isnāt enough ammo to properly protect yourself then buy more magazines.If LCMs donāt provide any more firepower than 10 round mags then why would banning them weaken law abiding citizens? Youāre stepping all over yourself with your two conflicting arguments. Sorry but itās trueAnd the actual research, which I have posted and you have seen shows you are wrong....the only people who need standard magazines are law abiding people who may have to defend themselves from one or more attackers who may be armed ,and to so without help. Criminals can get any magazine they want, and mass shooters can kill lots of unarmed people with 10 round magazines...so you are only hurting normal gun owners...
And also, you are banning the pistols of law abiding gun owners who already have pistols that hold more than 10 rounds in their magazines......
The only thing you are going to do is impact law abiding gun owners...you won't save one life, stop one rape, murder or robbery.....
First.....why don't you define a large capacity magazine...so we are on the same page...for me, it would be a 100 drum magazine.
Criminals and mass shooters are different from law abiding citizens in their need for standard magazines...the 15-19 round magazines for most pistols and the 30 round magazines for rifles....
Criminals can commit rape, robbery and murder with a 6 shot revolver, they choose the victim and forcing compliance from an unarmed victim simply needs a gun with bullets......also, if they want 15-19 round magazines they steal them or get them from illegal sources.....
Mass shooters choose democrat gun free zones as targets, we know this from the mass shooters we capture and the notes from the dead ones.....shooting unarmed victims in a surprise attack doesn't change if they use 10 round magazines...as the research I posted shows....there is no difference in casualty rates.....they can kill lots of people with 10 round magazines as the shooter in Parkland did, the shooter in Santa Barbara did, and the shooter at columbine and Virginia tech did.....
The Law Abiding citizen needs as many bullets as they can carry. When they are attacked, they will be alone, and usually targeted by ambush and likely attacked by more than one attacker. So you want to limit them to 10 bullets between whatever size group attacks their family an the outcome, rape, robbery or murder.......that is what you want to do.....
We do not tell fire fighters before they try to put out a fire exactly how many gallons of water they get to put the fire out.....they get whatever it takes...
You are saying...if you can't save your family with 10 bullets...fuck you and your family, you should have been a better shot.
Then, in the middle of the fight you use your 10 rounds.....now, with adrenaline going through your system, your vision is dilated, you have the shakes and you have to try to change a magazine while under attack and with your body impaired by the adrenaline rush.....and that doesn't even count if you are injured, and then your body gets an even bigger chemical dump......and what if you are injured in one of your arms or hands...a defensive wound and now, because of people like you, instead of having an extra 5-9 rounds to fight with, you are forced to change your magazine...
Because someone like you doesn't like 10 round magazines......
The famous shootout in Florida between the FBI and 2 bank robbers ended with the last standing agent having to do a one handed magazine change because he was shot several times.....
You don't know how many bullets a normal person is going to need to save themselves or their family....yet you want to limit the good guy to 10 rounds, not because it has any effect on criminals or mass shooters, but simply because you don't like guns that hold more than 10 rounds...
You are stuck in a catch 22 Where you try and claim that LCMs donāt give a shooter more power then you try and take the side that it weakens people trying to protect themselves. Canāt have it both ways no matter how hard you try.
What gives you the Right to tell a law abiding person what they can own when it is protected by the Constitution....and on the practical level...you haven't created a catch 22.....
I stated that criminals can rape, rob and murder without 15 round magazines, but if they want them they will get them. Pointing any gun at an unarmed victim will force them to comply with the rape or robbery, and you can murder an unarmed victim with one bullet when they are cowering before you.....
I stated that mass shooters have already shot and killed lots of people with 10 round magazines and shown you actual research that shows you are wrong on these magazines and mass shootings. Unarmed people do not shoot back....so the shooter...from actual research, does not have to rush to commit his acts, and as actual witnesses tell us, they are calm and relaxed as they murder unarmed victims...
I then showed you that the only one who needs 15-19 round magazines are law abiding citizens...who will be fighting for their lives against the criminals and mass shooters.....and that those 5-9 rounds could be the difference between life and death for their families.....facing one or more attackers, likely armed and attacking from surprise or ambush in the middle of the night when the victim is isolated and without help.......possibly injured and definitely suffering from the adrenaline dump making changing magazines over your arbitrary limit much more difficult, especially in the middle of an attack.....
You just don't care about the truth, facts or reality, you are irrational, and foolish.
I commend the directness and clarity of how you speak. As for myself I agree with about half of what you said and have a different view on the other half. Your tax and fees comment caught my attention, if you say we canāt charge fees on gun purchases because it is a right, does that translate to healthcare and our right for Life?I acknowledge facts when they are presented. Iāve never said I wanted to disarm law abiding citizens. Im a gun owner and donāt support disarming the public. Iām making a case for smart regulation, like the current laws that we have, and Iām opening up the door to discuss if further actions should be taken. Iāve called LCMs a grey area thatās a good debate. People on your side either play hard ass and saying that there should be zero regulations as any infringe in our constitutional rights. This is why I bring up things like age restrictions, mental health and machine guns. Do you want machine guns for sale to anybody who wants to buy one, readily available at every sporting goods store, no questions asked? Cause most people would think that would dangerous and crazy. Since that is currently restricted from happening then my question is simple. Do you support those regulations or do you want a free for all. My guess is that you support the restrictions, however like the rest you are likely to spin and divert away from admitting that. Prove me wrongItās just so easy to reverse the argument and use your own shit against you so Iāll just do that in this case. If you are worried that 10 rounds isnāt enough ammo to properly protect yourself then buy more magazines.If LCMs donāt provide any more firepower than 10 round mags then why would banning them weaken law abiding citizens? Youāre stepping all over yourself with your two conflicting arguments. Sorry but itās true
First.....why don't you define a large capacity magazine...so we are on the same page...for me, it would be a 100 drum magazine.
Criminals and mass shooters are different from law abiding citizens in their need for standard magazines...the 15-19 round magazines for most pistols and the 30 round magazines for rifles....
Criminals can commit rape, robbery and murder with a 6 shot revolver, they choose the victim and forcing compliance from an unarmed victim simply needs a gun with bullets......also, if they want 15-19 round magazines they steal them or get them from illegal sources.....
Mass shooters choose democrat gun free zones as targets, we know this from the mass shooters we capture and the notes from the dead ones.....shooting unarmed victims in a surprise attack doesn't change if they use 10 round magazines...as the research I posted shows....there is no difference in casualty rates.....they can kill lots of people with 10 round magazines as the shooter in Parkland did, the shooter in Santa Barbara did, and the shooter at columbine and Virginia tech did.....
The Law Abiding citizen needs as many bullets as they can carry. When they are attacked, they will be alone, and usually targeted by ambush and likely attacked by more than one attacker. So you want to limit them to 10 bullets between whatever size group attacks their family an the outcome, rape, robbery or murder.......that is what you want to do.....
We do not tell fire fighters before they try to put out a fire exactly how many gallons of water they get to put the fire out.....they get whatever it takes...
You are saying...if you can't save your family with 10 bullets...fuck you and your family, you should have been a better shot.
Then, in the middle of the fight you use your 10 rounds.....now, with adrenaline going through your system, your vision is dilated, you have the shakes and you have to try to change a magazine while under attack and with your body impaired by the adrenaline rush.....and that doesn't even count if you are injured, and then your body gets an even bigger chemical dump......and what if you are injured in one of your arms or hands...a defensive wound and now, because of people like you, instead of having an extra 5-9 rounds to fight with, you are forced to change your magazine...
Because someone like you doesn't like 10 round magazines......
The famous shootout in Florida between the FBI and 2 bank robbers ended with the last standing agent having to do a one handed magazine change because he was shot several times.....
You don't know how many bullets a normal person is going to need to save themselves or their family....yet you want to limit the good guy to 10 rounds, not because it has any effect on criminals or mass shooters, but simply because you don't like guns that hold more than 10 rounds...
You are stuck in a catch 22 Where you try and claim that LCMs donāt give a shooter more power then you try and take the side that it weakens people trying to protect themselves. Canāt have it both ways no matter how hard you try.
What gives you the Right to tell a law abiding person what they can own when it is protected by the Constitution....and on the practical level...you haven't created a catch 22.....
I stated that criminals can rape, rob and murder without 15 round magazines, but if they want them they will get them. Pointing any gun at an unarmed victim will force them to comply with the rape or robbery, and you can murder an unarmed victim with one bullet when they are cowering before you.....
I stated that mass shooters have already shot and killed lots of people with 10 round magazines and shown you actual research that shows you are wrong on these magazines and mass shootings. Unarmed people do not shoot back....so the shooter...from actual research, does not have to rush to commit his acts, and as actual witnesses tell us, they are calm and relaxed as they murder unarmed victims...
I then showed you that the only one who needs 15-19 round magazines are law abiding citizens...who will be fighting for their lives against the criminals and mass shooters.....and that those 5-9 rounds could be the difference between life and death for their families.....facing one or more attackers, likely armed and attacking from surprise or ambush in the middle of the night when the victim is isolated and without help.......possibly injured and definitely suffering from the adrenaline dump making changing magazines over your arbitrary limit much more difficult, especially in the middle of an attack.....
You just don't care about the truth, facts or reality, you are irrational, and foolish.
I will live with current background checks at gun stores, but will not support background checks for private sales. We already have laws that allow us to arrest felons who buy guns.
I think people should be allowed to buy fully automatic weapons if they want them, but using them to commit murder should stay illegal.
There should be no limits on magazine capacity, no gun registration, no licensing gun owners and taxes and fees on guns and ammo should be ended since owning a gun is a Right, and any fee on the exercise of a Right has already been declared unConstitutional in Murdock v. Pennsylvania.
Felons and the dangerously mentally ill should be kept from buying guns...non violent felons should have a path to getting their gun Rights back.
Crimes with guns, actual crimes such as rape, robbery and murder should carry a 30 year sentence, on top of the sentence for the crime.....and the gun charge cannot be bargained away.
If a felon is caught in possession of an illegal gun they should also get 30 years.....
Semi automatic weapons, rifles, pistols and shotguns are protected by the Second Amendment and all bans on these weapons need to be removed.....
That is where I stand...
No shit Sherlock, this conversation is obviously over your head. Just give it up, you are not getting itAgain for the slow and amazingly STUPID, a militia has NOTHING to do with the right to keep possess and use firearms.Itās not important? Really? Is that how you talk about our second amendment?! You should be ashamed! To me it sounds like you really understand what it means so you are deflectingThe Supreme Court ruled you retard it is NOT important and has NOTHING to do with the right of the people to own firearms, do try and keep up.It has to do with the meaning of the second amendment of our constitution, but if thatās too much for you to handle then itās fine... you donāt need to engage.What is constructive about talking about a term that has NOTHING to do with owning possessing and using firearms?Nobody needs to do anything but we are trying to have a productive conversation so when you run and hide from answering simple questions it just makes you sound uninformed.
Iāve asked the question to 5 of you dipshits and all but one has dodged. Of course yāall are backing each other up, doesnāt make you rightNo you actually donāt, which I clearly point out each time you dodgeThatās totally fine and itās a fair debate to have. But what multiplies the problem is when it takes a day and dozens of repetitions to get a simple answer from you. You canāt simply say that you support a certain degree of regulation when it comes to weapons cause you are too dug in on your side. I have to drag it out of you one deflection at a time. How are we to have an productive debate when you act like that?Wow, are you really not understanding my question or are you just trying so hard to dance around it. Itās been over a day and I still cant get a straight forward answer from you. Whatās the deal man, how embarrassing for you. Here Iāll ask it a THIRD time and restate that Iām not talking about future laws or regulations Iām talking about EXISTING ones.
Do you agree with current regulations and laws we have on guns and those who are permitted to buy them? Yes or no. I really canāt be any more simple or clear.
Youāve said in your dodge, that you think anybody who can legally purchase firearms should be able to purchase any kind of gun. But laws define who is considered ālegalā so are you ok with those laws?
I don't care if convicted felons or the adjudicated mentally ill are barred from owning firearms. Never did
IMO we are going about the whole gun control thing all wrong anyway.
We do not enforce the laws we have and those laws are not harsh enough instead we step on the rights of people who have done nothing wrong,
You want stop gun crimes? So do I. But telling me and millions of other people who do not commit crimes we don't have the right to own certain firearms is not going to do it
I answer your questions you just want to nit pick
Funny how another poster thought my answer was very clear I guess you can't understand
Again for the slow and amazingly STUPID, a militia has NOTHING to do with the right to keep possess and use firearms.Itās not important? Really? Is that how you talk about our second amendment?! You should be ashamed! To me it sounds like you really understand what it means so you are deflectingThe Supreme Court ruled you retard it is NOT important and has NOTHING to do with the right of the people to own firearms, do try and keep up.It has to do with the meaning of the second amendment of our constitution, but if thatās too much for you to handle then itās fine... you donāt need to engage.What is constructive about talking about a term that has NOTHING to do with owning possessing and using firearms?Nobody needs to do anything but we are trying to have a productive conversation so when you run and hide from answering simple questions it just makes you sound uninformed.
Posters like Slade own guns and support any law abiding citizen to protect themselves with a firearm. You are just too dense to engage in a civil discourse about the subject so you resort to just making things up. Nice try, but you need to grow up and stop acting like a child.Again for the slow and amazingly STUPID, a militia has NOTHING to do with the right to keep possess and use firearms.Itās not important? Really? Is that how you talk about our second amendment?! You should be ashamed! To me it sounds like you really understand what it means so you are deflectingThe Supreme Court ruled you retard it is NOT important and has NOTHING to do with the right of the people to own firearms, do try and keep up.It has to do with the meaning of the second amendment of our constitution, but if thatās too much for you to handle then itās fine... you donāt need to engage.What is constructive about talking about a term that has NOTHING to do with owning possessing and using firearms?
You have to wonder why posters like Slade want to make it more difficult to defend yourself in your own home.
Are they looking for easier victims?
Posters like Slade own guns and support any law abiding citizen to protect themselves with a firearm. You are just too dense to engage in a civil discourse about the subject so you resort to just making things up. Nice try, but you need to grow up and stop acting like a child.Again for the slow and amazingly STUPID, a militia has NOTHING to do with the right to keep possess and use firearms.Itās not important? Really? Is that how you talk about our second amendment?! You should be ashamed! To me it sounds like you really understand what it means so you are deflectingThe Supreme Court ruled you retard it is NOT important and has NOTHING to do with the right of the people to own firearms, do try and keep up.It has to do with the meaning of the second amendment of our constitution, but if thatās too much for you to handle then itās fine... you donāt need to engage.
You have to wonder why posters like Slade want to make it more difficult to defend yourself in your own home.
Are they looking for easier victims?
You fucking retard you keep bringing up the militia in this conversation like somehow it is important.No shit Sherlock, this conversation is obviously over your head. Just give it up, you are not getting itAgain for the slow and amazingly STUPID, a militia has NOTHING to do with the right to keep possess and use firearms.Itās not important? Really? Is that how you talk about our second amendment?! You should be ashamed! To me it sounds like you really understand what it means so you are deflectingThe Supreme Court ruled you retard it is NOT important and has NOTHING to do with the right of the people to own firearms, do try and keep up.It has to do with the meaning of the second amendment of our constitution, but if thatās too much for you to handle then itās fine... you donāt need to engage.What is constructive about talking about a term that has NOTHING to do with owning possessing and using firearms?
How so? Why donāt you ever explain yourself? If all you have are petty lies and insults then Iām sorry to say that you are the one acting like a troll.Posters like Slade own guns and support any law abiding citizen to protect themselves with a firearm. You are just too dense to engage in a civil discourse about the subject so you resort to just making things up. Nice try, but you need to grow up and stop acting like a child.Again for the slow and amazingly STUPID, a militia has NOTHING to do with the right to keep possess and use firearms.Itās not important? Really? Is that how you talk about our second amendment?! You should be ashamed! To me it sounds like you really understand what it means so you are deflectingThe Supreme Court ruled you retard it is NOT important and has NOTHING to do with the right of the people to own firearms, do try and keep up.
You have to wonder why posters like Slade want to make it more difficult to defend yourself in your own home.
Are they looking for easier victims?
^^^^^ Troll
I asked about the well regulated militia once as we were speaking about the second amendment and dupes like you kept dodging an answer so I kept asking. P@triot and 2aguy are the only ones that have provided direct answers to direct questions. Even though I disagree with them in many areas I respect their ideas and how they engage. You and your kind on the other hand, avoid, deflect, pivot, lie and then just resort to insults. Itās pathetic. Grow up.You fucking retard you keep bringing up the militia in this conversation like somehow it is important.No shit Sherlock, this conversation is obviously over your head. Just give it up, you are not getting itAgain for the slow and amazingly STUPID, a militia has NOTHING to do with the right to keep possess and use firearms.Itās not important? Really? Is that how you talk about our second amendment?! You should be ashamed! To me it sounds like you really understand what it means so you are deflectingThe Supreme Court ruled you retard it is NOT important and has NOTHING to do with the right of the people to own firearms, do try and keep up.It has to do with the meaning of the second amendment of our constitution, but if thatās too much for you to handle then itās fine... you donāt need to engage.
defense of self and property are considered natural rights and are in State Constitutions.Again for the slow and amazingly STUPID, a militia has NOTHING to do with the right to keep possess and use firearms.Itās not important? Really? Is that how you talk about our second amendment?! You should be ashamed! To me it sounds like you really understand what it means so you are deflectingThe Supreme Court ruled you retard it is NOT important and has NOTHING to do with the right of the people to own firearms, do try and keep up.It has to do with the meaning of the second amendment of our constitution, but if thatās too much for you to handle then itās fine... you donāt need to engage.What is constructive about talking about a term that has NOTHING to do with owning possessing and using firearms?
You have to wonder why posters like Slade want to make it more difficult to defend yourself in your own home.
Are they looking for easier victims?
It is. The End justifies the means. The security of a free State is the End, my friend.You fucking retard you keep bringing up the militia in this conversation like somehow it is important.No shit Sherlock, this conversation is obviously over your head. Just give it up, you are not getting itAgain for the slow and amazingly STUPID, a militia has NOTHING to do with the right to keep possess and use firearms.Itās not important? Really? Is that how you talk about our second amendment?! You should be ashamed! To me it sounds like you really understand what it means so you are deflectingThe Supreme Court ruled you retard it is NOT important and has NOTHING to do with the right of the people to own firearms, do try and keep up.It has to do with the meaning of the second amendment of our constitution, but if thatās too much for you to handle then itās fine... you donāt need to engage.
We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems in our free States.I asked about the well regulated militia once as we were speaking about the second amendment and dupes like you kept dodging an answer so I kept asking. P@triot and 2aguy are the only ones that have provided direct answers to direct questions. Even though I disagree with them in many areas I respect their ideas and how they engage. You and your kind on the other hand, avoid, deflect, pivot, lie and then just resort to insults. Itās pathetic. Grow up.You fucking retard you keep bringing up the militia in this conversation like somehow it is important.No shit Sherlock, this conversation is obviously over your head. Just give it up, you are not getting itAgain for the slow and amazingly STUPID, a militia has NOTHING to do with the right to keep possess and use firearms.Itās not important? Really? Is that how you talk about our second amendment?! You should be ashamed! To me it sounds like you really understand what it means so you are deflectingThe Supreme Court ruled you retard it is NOT important and has NOTHING to do with the right of the people to own firearms, do try and keep up.
Militias have NOTHING to do with our rights under the 2nd amendment retard. You keep pretending otherwise as to US Government law and Militia every male 17 to 45 is in the unorganized militia and the law does not require training drilling mustering or any other action. Which you already know most likely, so stop wasting our time with questions in this thread that have NOTHING to do with the 2nd amendment.I asked about the well regulated militia once as we were speaking about the second amendment and dupes like you kept dodging an answer so I kept asking. P@triot and 2aguy are the only ones that have provided direct answers to direct questions. Even though I disagree with them in many areas I respect their ideas and how they engage. You and your kind on the other hand, avoid, deflect, pivot, lie and then just resort to insults. Itās pathetic. Grow up.You fucking retard you keep bringing up the militia in this conversation like somehow it is important.No shit Sherlock, this conversation is obviously over your head. Just give it up, you are not getting itAgain for the slow and amazingly STUPID, a militia has NOTHING to do with the right to keep possess and use firearms.Itās not important? Really? Is that how you talk about our second amendment?! You should be ashamed! To me it sounds like you really understand what it means so you are deflectingThe Supreme Court ruled you retard it is NOT important and has NOTHING to do with the right of the people to own firearms, do try and keep up.
The security of a free State, and what we need to muster, to solve our security problems with.Militias have NOTHING to do with our rights under the 2nd amendment retard. You keep pretending otherwise as to US Government law and Militia every male 17 to 45 is in the unorganized militia and the law does not require training drilling mustering or any other action. Which you already know most likely, so stop wasting our time with questions in this thread that have NOTHING to do with the 2nd amendment.I asked about the well regulated militia once as we were speaking about the second amendment and dupes like you kept dodging an answer so I kept asking. P@triot and 2aguy are the only ones that have provided direct answers to direct questions. Even though I disagree with them in many areas I respect their ideas and how they engage. You and your kind on the other hand, avoid, deflect, pivot, lie and then just resort to insults. Itās pathetic. Grow up.You fucking retard you keep bringing up the militia in this conversation like somehow it is important.No shit Sherlock, this conversation is obviously over your head. Just give it up, you are not getting itAgain for the slow and amazingly STUPID, a militia has NOTHING to do with the right to keep possess and use firearms.Itās not important? Really? Is that how you talk about our second amendment?! You should be ashamed! To me it sounds like you really understand what it means so you are deflecting
First off, why are you so damn defensive and angry. Go take a few deep breaths and calm the fuck down. We are just having a conversation. Second, the second amendment is literally one sentence...Militias have NOTHING to do with our rights under the 2nd amendment retard. You keep pretending otherwise as to US Government law and Militia every male 17 to 45 is in the unorganized militia and the law does not require training drilling mustering or any other action. Which you already know most likely, so stop wasting our time with questions in this thread that have NOTHING to do with the 2nd amendment.I asked about the well regulated militia once as we were speaking about the second amendment and dupes like you kept dodging an answer so I kept asking. P@triot and 2aguy are the only ones that have provided direct answers to direct questions. Even though I disagree with them in many areas I respect their ideas and how they engage. You and your kind on the other hand, avoid, deflect, pivot, lie and then just resort to insults. Itās pathetic. Grow up.You fucking retard you keep bringing up the militia in this conversation like somehow it is important.No shit Sherlock, this conversation is obviously over your head. Just give it up, you are not getting itAgain for the slow and amazingly STUPID, a militia has NOTHING to do with the right to keep possess and use firearms.Itās not important? Really? Is that how you talk about our second amendment?! You should be ashamed! To me it sounds like you really understand what it means so you are deflecting
The Supreme Court ruled that the ONLY part of that sentence that matterd was the part with the right of the people, you are trying to claim otherwise and I won't have it. NO ONE is required to belong to a MILITIA to exercise their second amendment rights , A militia is totally ignored by the Supreme Court ruling stating it was just one of many reasons one might CHOOSE to exercise their rights. You bring it up in the manner you did in an effort to claim that if the Well regulated part was ignored we did not have a right under the second, you are WRONG.First off, why are you so damn defensive and angry. Go take a few deep breaths and calm the fuck down. We are just having a conversation. Second, the second amendment is literally one sentence...Militias have NOTHING to do with our rights under the 2nd amendment retard. You keep pretending otherwise as to US Government law and Militia every male 17 to 45 is in the unorganized militia and the law does not require training drilling mustering or any other action. Which you already know most likely, so stop wasting our time with questions in this thread that have NOTHING to do with the 2nd amendment.I asked about the well regulated militia once as we were speaking about the second amendment and dupes like you kept dodging an answer so I kept asking. P@triot and 2aguy are the only ones that have provided direct answers to direct questions. Even though I disagree with them in many areas I respect their ideas and how they engage. You and your kind on the other hand, avoid, deflect, pivot, lie and then just resort to insults. Itās pathetic. Grow up.You fucking retard you keep bringing up the militia in this conversation like somehow it is important.No shit Sherlock, this conversation is obviously over your head. Just give it up, you are not getting itAgain for the slow and amazingly STUPID, a militia has NOTHING to do with the right to keep possess and use firearms.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
This can be interpreted in many ways so when I bring up the militia for discussion and you get all pissy and try to dismiss it after several dodge and pivots then it just makes you look bad. Honestly what are you so frustrated about?
I think avoiding and deflecting is a sign of one not really understanding an issue and/or not knowing where they really stand.You and your kind on the other hand, avoid, deflect, pivot, lie and then just resort to insults.
Well said. You and I have opposing views on many subjects but Iāve enjoyed the debates and youāve made me rethink many positions and dig into some good legal and historical research. Thatās what this board should be about. Iām as guilty as the next guy to get heated and let some insults fly but we have too many on here that only rant and insult without a care to think, listen, understand and then have an intelligent and respectful debate by reviewing facts.I think avoiding and deflecting is a sign of one not really understanding an issue and/or not knowing where they really stand.You and your kind on the other hand, avoid, deflect, pivot, lie and then just resort to insults.
If you have a position - you should be able to defend it. If you canāt, at the very least you should re-examine it.
