Private paramilitaries are ILLEGAL

I said nothing remotely like that. Try reading what I actually write. Maybe that'll lessen your confusion.
You obviously aren't the one who interprets Democrat policy in a court of law to revoke gun rights.
The law is the law, how it's written. And however it is written, it will be be construed to revoke and deny gun rights in a court of law, because guns are banned, and that's the law, since the courts no longer recognize the written word of the Constitution as the law, without being forced to by a higher court, which certainly isn't going to happen with SCOTUS being the way it is.
 
Behold Truth (ya Loons :~)

Your link says it's an opinion.

what makes it 'truth'?
It's not an opinion.


It's not?

"Opinion | What's the difference between a private militia and an armed mob? Nothing.
A militia operates under the authority of the president or a governor; if it doesn’t, it’s just an armed mob.
www.nbcnews.com
www.nbcnews.com"

Then what, exactly, is the first word I copied from the OP?
You didn't read the link.

the word OPINION was the first word of the Link.

Did you MISS that?
Not the one I posted.

Behold Truth (ya Loons :~)

Your link says it's an opinion.

what makes it 'truth'?
It's not an opinion.


It's not?

"Opinion | What's the difference between a private militia and an armed mob? Nothing.
A militia operates under the authority of the president or a governor; if it doesn’t, it’s just an armed mob.
www.nbcnews.com
www.nbcnews.com"

Then what, exactly, is the first word I copied from the OP?
You didn't read the link.

the word OPINION was the first word of the Link.

Did you MISS that?
Not the one I posted.

Odd, I was responding to the OP.

Which CLEARLY says 'Opinion'.
If you'd bothered to follow the thread instead of just spewing nonsense for a change you'd have actually read the post that you quoted, which was mine and not the OP.

tRumplings, I swear.

I quoted Dr Love, you responded to me.

Maybe if YOU read the thread...
Once more, for the hard of thinking.

I posted a link to a scholarly article that wasn't an opinion when I quoted you. You then quoted me, obviously without bothering to read the link, quite possibly without even reading the two word post it was attached to.

tRumplings... Sigh.

For the IQ impaired..


I quoted Dr, the OP said it was an opinion.

you said it wasn't, and posted another link.

I corrected you, stating that the OP claimed it was an opinion.


(try the purple crayons next, they taste like grapes)

In you’re case - SOUR grapes :)
 
Behold Truth (ya Loons :~)

Your link says it's an opinion.

what makes it 'truth'?
It's not an opinion.


It's not?

"Opinion | What's the difference between a private militia and an armed mob? Nothing.
A militia operates under the authority of the president or a governor; if it doesn’t, it’s just an armed mob.
www.nbcnews.com
www.nbcnews.com"

Then what, exactly, is the first word I copied from the OP?
You didn't read the link.

the word OPINION was the first word of the Link.

Did you MISS that?
Not the one I posted.

Behold Truth (ya Loons :~)

Your link says it's an opinion.

what makes it 'truth'?
It's not an opinion.


It's not?

"Opinion | What's the difference between a private militia and an armed mob? Nothing.
A militia operates under the authority of the president or a governor; if it doesn’t, it’s just an armed mob.
www.nbcnews.com
www.nbcnews.com"

Then what, exactly, is the first word I copied from the OP?
You didn't read the link.

the word OPINION was the first word of the Link.

Did you MISS that?
Not the one I posted.

Odd, I was responding to the OP.

Which CLEARLY says 'Opinion'.
If you'd bothered to follow the thread instead of just spewing nonsense for a change you'd have actually read the post that you quoted, which was mine and not the OP.

tRumplings, I swear.

I quoted Dr Love, you responded to me.

Maybe if YOU read the thread...
Once more, for the hard of thinking.

I posted a link to a scholarly article that wasn't an opinion when I quoted you. You then quoted me, obviously without bothering to read the link, quite possibly without even reading the two word post it was attached to.

tRumplings... Sigh.

For the IQ impaired..


I quoted Dr, the OP said it was an opinion.

you said it wasn't, and posted another link.

I corrected you, stating that the OP claimed it was an opinion.


(try the purple crayons next, they taste like grapes)

In you’re case - SOUR grapes :)

What do I have to be sour about?
 
Behold Truth (ya Loons :~)

Your link says it's an opinion.

what makes it 'truth'?
It's not an opinion.


It's not?

"Opinion | What's the difference between a private militia and an armed mob? Nothing.
A militia operates under the authority of the president or a governor; if it doesn’t, it’s just an armed mob.
www.nbcnews.com
www.nbcnews.com"

Then what, exactly, is the first word I copied from the OP?
You didn't read the link.

the word OPINION was the first word of the Link.

Did you MISS that?
Not the one I posted.

Behold Truth (ya Loons :~)

Your link says it's an opinion.

what makes it 'truth'?
It's not an opinion.


It's not?

"Opinion | What's the difference between a private militia and an armed mob? Nothing.
A militia operates under the authority of the president or a governor; if it doesn’t, it’s just an armed mob.
www.nbcnews.com
www.nbcnews.com"

Then what, exactly, is the first word I copied from the OP?
You didn't read the link.

the word OPINION was the first word of the Link.

Did you MISS that?
Not the one I posted.

Odd, I was responding to the OP.

Which CLEARLY says 'Opinion'.
If you'd bothered to follow the thread instead of just spewing nonsense for a change you'd have actually read the post that you quoted, which was mine and not the OP.

tRumplings, I swear.

I quoted Dr Love, you responded to me.

Maybe if YOU read the thread...
Once more, for the hard of thinking.

I posted a link to a scholarly article that wasn't an opinion when I quoted you. You then quoted me, obviously without bothering to read the link, quite possibly without even reading the two word post it was attached to.

tRumplings... Sigh.

For the IQ impaired..


I quoted Dr, the OP said it was an opinion.

you said it wasn't, and posted another link.

I corrected you, stating that the OP claimed it was an opinion.


(try the purple crayons next, they taste like grapes)

In you’re case - SOUR grapes :)

What do I have to be sour about?

The free & fair election we just conducted that you LOST? :lol:
 
Behold Truth (ya Loons :~)

Your link says it's an opinion.

what makes it 'truth'?
It's not an opinion.


It's not?

"Opinion | What's the difference between a private militia and an armed mob? Nothing.
A militia operates under the authority of the president or a governor; if it doesn’t, it’s just an armed mob.
www.nbcnews.com
www.nbcnews.com"

Then what, exactly, is the first word I copied from the OP?
You didn't read the link.

the word OPINION was the first word of the Link.

Did you MISS that?
Not the one I posted.

Behold Truth (ya Loons :~)

Your link says it's an opinion.

what makes it 'truth'?
It's not an opinion.


It's not?

"Opinion | What's the difference between a private militia and an armed mob? Nothing.
A militia operates under the authority of the president or a governor; if it doesn’t, it’s just an armed mob.
www.nbcnews.com
www.nbcnews.com"

Then what, exactly, is the first word I copied from the OP?
You didn't read the link.

the word OPINION was the first word of the Link.

Did you MISS that?
Not the one I posted.

Odd, I was responding to the OP.

Which CLEARLY says 'Opinion'.
If you'd bothered to follow the thread instead of just spewing nonsense for a change you'd have actually read the post that you quoted, which was mine and not the OP.

tRumplings, I swear.

I quoted Dr Love, you responded to me.

Maybe if YOU read the thread...
Once more, for the hard of thinking.

I posted a link to a scholarly article that wasn't an opinion when I quoted you. You then quoted me, obviously without bothering to read the link, quite possibly without even reading the two word post it was attached to.

tRumplings... Sigh.

For the IQ impaired..


I quoted Dr, the OP said it was an opinion.

you said it wasn't, and posted another link.

I corrected you, stating that the OP claimed it was an opinion.


(try the purple crayons next, they taste like grapes)

In you’re case - SOUR grapes :)

What do I have to be sour about?

The free & fair election we just conducted that you LOST? :lol:

How long is it going to take you low IQ meatbags to understand that I didn't vote in 2020, or 2016?

There was no one worth voting FOR
 
Behold Truth (ya Loons :~)

Your link says it's an opinion.

what makes it 'truth'?
It's not an opinion.


It's not?

"Opinion | What's the difference between a private militia and an armed mob? Nothing.
A militia operates under the authority of the president or a governor; if it doesn’t, it’s just an armed mob.
www.nbcnews.com
www.nbcnews.com"

Then what, exactly, is the first word I copied from the OP?
You didn't read the link.

the word OPINION was the first word of the Link.

Did you MISS that?
Not the one I posted.

Behold Truth (ya Loons :~)

Your link says it's an opinion.

what makes it 'truth'?
It's not an opinion.


It's not?

"Opinion | What's the difference between a private militia and an armed mob? Nothing.
A militia operates under the authority of the president or a governor; if it doesn’t, it’s just an armed mob.
www.nbcnews.com
www.nbcnews.com"

Then what, exactly, is the first word I copied from the OP?
You didn't read the link.

the word OPINION was the first word of the Link.

Did you MISS that?
Not the one I posted.

Odd, I was responding to the OP.

Which CLEARLY says 'Opinion'.
If you'd bothered to follow the thread instead of just spewing nonsense for a change you'd have actually read the post that you quoted, which was mine and not the OP.

tRumplings, I swear.

I quoted Dr Love, you responded to me.

Maybe if YOU read the thread...
Once more, for the hard of thinking.

I posted a link to a scholarly article that wasn't an opinion when I quoted you. You then quoted me, obviously without bothering to read the link, quite possibly without even reading the two word post it was attached to.

tRumplings... Sigh.

For the IQ impaired..


I quoted Dr, the OP said it was an opinion.

you said it wasn't, and posted another link.

I corrected you, stating that the OP claimed it was an opinion.


(try the purple crayons next, they taste like grapes)

In you’re case - SOUR grapes :)

What do I have to be sour about?

The free & fair election we just conducted that you LOST? :lol:

How long is it going to take you low IQ meatbags to understand that I didn't vote in 2020, or 2016?

There was no one worth voting FOR

Well then you have no right to whine - About ANYTHING
 
Behold Truth (ya Loons :~)

Your link says it's an opinion.

what makes it 'truth'?
It's not an opinion.


It's not?

"Opinion | What's the difference between a private militia and an armed mob? Nothing.
A militia operates under the authority of the president or a governor; if it doesn’t, it’s just an armed mob.
www.nbcnews.com
www.nbcnews.com"

Then what, exactly, is the first word I copied from the OP?
You didn't read the link.

the word OPINION was the first word of the Link.

Did you MISS that?
Not the one I posted.

Behold Truth (ya Loons :~)

Your link says it's an opinion.

what makes it 'truth'?
It's not an opinion.


It's not?

"Opinion | What's the difference between a private militia and an armed mob? Nothing.
A militia operates under the authority of the president or a governor; if it doesn’t, it’s just an armed mob.
www.nbcnews.com
www.nbcnews.com"

Then what, exactly, is the first word I copied from the OP?
You didn't read the link.

the word OPINION was the first word of the Link.

Did you MISS that?
Not the one I posted.

Odd, I was responding to the OP.

Which CLEARLY says 'Opinion'.
If you'd bothered to follow the thread instead of just spewing nonsense for a change you'd have actually read the post that you quoted, which was mine and not the OP.

tRumplings, I swear.

I quoted Dr Love, you responded to me.

Maybe if YOU read the thread...
Once more, for the hard of thinking.

I posted a link to a scholarly article that wasn't an opinion when I quoted you. You then quoted me, obviously without bothering to read the link, quite possibly without even reading the two word post it was attached to.

tRumplings... Sigh.

For the IQ impaired..


I quoted Dr, the OP said it was an opinion.

you said it wasn't, and posted another link.

I corrected you, stating that the OP claimed it was an opinion.


(try the purple crayons next, they taste like grapes)

In you’re case - SOUR grapes :)

What do I have to be sour about?

The free & fair election we just conducted that you LOST? :lol:

How long is it going to take you low IQ meatbags to understand that I didn't vote in 2020, or 2016?

There was no one worth voting FOR

Well then you have no right to whine - About ANYTHING

I have EVERY right....

" 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. "
 
Behold Truth (ya Loons :~)

Your link says it's an opinion.

what makes it 'truth'?
It's not an opinion.



Tenn. Const. art. I, § 24. Military subordinate to civil authority That the sure and certain defense of a free people, is a well regulated militia;
State organized. "Subordinate to civilian authority".

That's not a private military.

Next.
Militia police and private security are all subordinate to civil authority. You have a point?
Yes. Do you think the paramilitary groups that showed up on January 6th knew they were subordinate to civilian authority while they were beating police officers to death and chanting "hang Mike Pence"?

Who did they beat to death? Only one cop died, and that was hours afterward, of a stroke.
 
Behold Truth (ya Loons :~)

Your link says it's an opinion.

what makes it 'truth'?
It's not an opinion.



Tenn. Const. art. I, § 24. Military subordinate to civil authority That the sure and certain defense of a free people, is a well regulated militia;
State organized. "Subordinate to civilian authority".

That's not a private military.

Next.
Militia police and private security are all subordinate to civil authority. You have a point?
Yes. Do you think the paramilitary groups that showed up on January 6th knew they were subordinate to civilian authority while they were beating police officers to death and chanting "hang Mike Pence"?

Who did they beat to death? Only one cop died, and that was hours afterward, of a stroke.
Beating one over the head can often cause strokes.
 

Forum List

Back
Top