Thank God for our RIGHT to keep and bear arms

[P@triot]

Now compare that to America: full of guns and the most gun deaths of any advanced society on earth.

Obviously if guns made one safer, we'd have almost no gun deaths. Instead we have, by far, the most of any of our peers.

Obviously, more guns only results in more gun deaths; nothing else.

Liberal "logic" at its finest. Ban guns, when people die where guns are banned, blame it on guns

It only happens where guns are banned. And you know it too....which is why you get so upset

Rott:

"People die where guns are banned."

Guns are not banned in America. Yet we have the most gun deaths of any advanced society.

Guns are banned in Australia and most of Europe. They have fewer gun deaths in decades than we have in years.

I win.

Guns are banned in New York and Chicago. You should really know what you're talking about before speaking.

 

[P@triot]

That shuts them up every time....

Really? Because I obliterated her ignorant "are you allowed to own nukes" question. Obliterated. To the point that she had no response.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The right to bear arms doens't go far enough in this country. The military is developing some pretty powerful weapons such as laser tanks. Why can't we have access to those things? What is the point of having the right to bear arms if the public's access to them is severely restricted?

Exactly. Our founders didn't say the right to bear "muskets". Or the right to bear "handguns". They said the right to bear arms. There are no limits on the type of weapons we can have. Of it's ok for the government to have them, and the government answers to the people, then it's sure as hell of for the people to have them.

Wrong.

You and other rightwing nitwits whine about the Second Amendment yet are completely ignorant as to its meaning and case law:

“Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

As a fact of settled and accepted law the Second Amendment right is not ‘absolute,’ the Constitution authorizes government to place reasonable restrictions on all manner of rights, including the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment.

Consequently, there are in fact limits on the type of weapons you may have.

And because of your ignorance and stupidity you and other rightwing morons reflect poorly on those of us who own firearms, enjoy the shooting sports, and seek to defend the Second Amendment right.

Thank you for posting that quote from arguably the most conservative justice and the right's best ally on the court , Justice Scalia.

“Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”

What, exactly, do you suppose all this means?

It means there's plenty of room under the 2ND to regulate the type of guns, gun sales and gun ownership. According to the most conservative justice on the court at the time.

 

[P@triot]

....I have no idea what the response was but I'm guessing

Story of your life Candy. For once you actually admitted that you really don't have any idea but you spend a whole lot of time guessing

 

[P@triot]

It means there's plenty of room under the 2ND to regulate the type of guns, gun sales and gun ownership. According to the most conservative justice on the court at the time.

Please show me where in the U.S. Constitution it sites "room" to "regulate". You can't. Game over.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It means there's plenty of room under the 2ND to regulate the type of guns, gun sales and gun ownership. According to the most conservative justice on the court at the time.

Please show me where in the U.S. Constitution it sites "room" to "regulate". You can't. Game over.

Did you read what I was responding to there Corky?

 

[paulitician]

Kill or be killed. That's the reality folks. The Police most often only arrive after the fact. They can't be everywhere at all times. They'll arrive after the bloody deed with their chalk and body bag.

So the fact is, it is you against the rabid beasts. It's your responsibility to protect your loved ones. Arming yourself and becoming proficient with your firearm, is a good way to do that. You owe it to your family to keep them safe. Don't let em down.

 

[P@triot]

Should I be able to go down to Wal Mart and buy landmines?

Uh...yes. Yes you should. Duh. What kind of a submissive coward would advocate that her government should own that kind of arms but not herself or her fellow citizens?

The U.S. Constitution never guaranteed you security sweetie. It guaranteed you liberty. If liberty is just too scary for you (and clearly, it is), then it's time for you to go bye-bye. Cuba has everything you've ever desired. Socialism. A disarmed population. A beautiful ocean view. Nice weather. It's time for you to go live your libtard "utopia". Ah buh-bye!

 

[P@triot]

Kill or be killed. That's the reality folks. The Police most often only arrive after the fact. They can't be everywhere at all times. They'll arrive after the bloddy deed with their chalk and body bag.

So the fact is, it is you against the rabid beasts. It's your responsibility to protect your loved ones. Arming yourself and becoming proficient with your firearm, is a good way to do that. You owe it to your family to keep them safe. Don't let em down.

Pauly.....what are you doing? Libtards like Candy don't understand logic. Plus, having been part of a faction that has been waging a war on women for decades, there is nothing she'd rather see than unarmed, helpless women raped and murdered at the end of a knife. It gets her off for some bizarre reason (theories abound).

 

[candycorn]

That shuts them up every time....

Really? Because I obliterated her ignorant "are you allowed to own nukes" question. Obliterated. To the point that she had no response.

You never answered the question.

 

[candycorn]

Should I be able to go down to Wal Mart and buy landmines?

Uh...yes. Yes you should. Duh. What kind of a submissive coward would advocate that her government should own that kind of arms but not herself or her fellow citizens?

The U.S. Constitution never guaranteed you security sweetie. It guaranteed you liberty. If liberty is just too scary for you (and clearly, it is), then it's time for you to go bye-bye. Cuba has everything you've ever desired. Socialism. A disarmed population. A beautiful ocean view. Nice weather. It's time for you to go live your libtard "utopia". Ah buh-bye!

Pure comedy

 

[candycorn]

Kill or be killed. That's the reality folks. The Police most often only arrive after the fact. They can't be everywhere at all times. They'll arrive after the bloddy deed with their chalk and body bag.

So the fact is, it is you against the rabid beasts. It's your responsibility to protect your loved ones. Arming yourself and becoming proficient with your firearm, is a good way to do that. You owe it to your family to keep them safe. Don't let em down.

So if I don't kill someone....I will be killed?

 

[candycorn]

Now compare that to America: full of guns and the most gun deaths of any advanced society on earth.

Obviously if guns made one safer, we'd have almost no gun deaths. Instead we have, by far, the most of any of our peers.

Obviously, more guns only results in more gun deaths; nothing else.

Liberal "logic" at its finest. Ban guns, when people die where guns are banned, blame it on guns

It only happens where guns are banned. And you know it too....which is why you get so upset

Rott:

"People die where guns are banned."

Guns are not banned in America. Yet we have the most gun deaths of any advanced society.

Guns are banned in Australia and most of Europe. They have fewer gun deaths in decades than we have in years.

I win.

Guns are banned in New York and Chicago. You should really know what you're talking about before speaking.

That's a great start. Now if we could do that nationwide we would be like Australia and have almost no gun deaths

 

[Jack4jill]

Can you own a nuke, yes or no? It's an arm, right?

That shuts them up every time...

Only the people who think nuclear weapons are firearms.
The rest of us? Not so much.
Nothing in any of that nonsense negates the fact that the 2nd protects any firearm suitable for any of the traditionally legal purposes for same.

It says, Bear Arms, not guns. Now what?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Kill or be killed. That's the reality folks. The Police most often only arrive after the fact. They can't be everywhere at all times. They'll arrive after the bloddy deed with their chalk and body bag.

So the fact is, it is you against the rabid beasts. It's your responsibility to protect your loved ones. Arming yourself and becoming proficient with your firearm, is a good way to do that. You owe it to your family to keep them safe. Don't let em down.

So if I don't kill someone....I will be killed?

If someone is going to attack you... maybe

If someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night... maybe

Those things happen and happen enough to enough people to at least think about some sort of self defense.
I view a gun as just another insurance policy and like any other insurance I own I hope to hell I never need it but on the chance that I do need it I will be glad I have it

 

[M14 Shooter]

What, exactly, do you suppose all this means?

It means there's plenty of room under the 2ND to regulate the type of guns, gun sales and gun ownership. According to the most conservative justice on the court at the time.

Like what, specifically?
Note the 2nd use of the word 'specific".

 

[paulitician]

Kill or be killed. That's the reality folks. The Police most often only arrive after the fact. They can't be everywhere at all times. They'll arrive after the bloddy deed with their chalk and body bag.

So the fact is, it is you against the rabid beasts. It's your responsibility to protect your loved ones. Arming yourself and becoming proficient with your firearm, is a good way to do that. You owe it to your family to keep them safe. Don't let em down.

Pauly.....what are you doing? Libtards like Candy don't understand logic. Plus, having been part of a faction that has been waging a war on women for decades, there is nothing she'd rather see than unarmed, helpless women raped and murdered at the end of a knife. It gets her off for some bizarre reason (theories abound).

For me, it isn't very complicated. It's kill or be killed. Women especially, should arm themselves and become proficient with their weapon. If not a firearm, then obtain some other weapon for defense. Women especially, are preyed on 24/7.

Most women aren't like Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton. They don't have 24/7 armed security, or live in well-secured mansions on massive secluded gated properties. Most are on their own against the rabid beasts. I think it's crazy a woman would even consider not arming and protecting herself. Not a wise safe decision.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Can you own a nuke, yes or no? It's an arm, right?

That shuts them up every time...

Only the people who think nuclear weapons are firearms.
The rest of us? Not so much.
Nothing in any of that nonsense negates the fact that the 2nd protects any firearm suitable for any of the traditionally legal purposes for same.

It says, Bear Arms, not guns. Now what?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Can you own a nuke, yes or no? It's an arm, right?

That shuts them up every time...

Only the people who think nuclear weapons are firearms.
The rest of us? Not so much.
Nothing in any of that nonsense negates the fact that the 2nd protects any firearm suitable for any of the traditionally legal purposes for same.

It says, Bear Arms, not guns. Now what?

The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

Nothing in any of that nonsense negates the fact that the 2nd protects any firearm suitable for any of the traditionally legal purposes for same.

 

[Jack4jill]

Kill or be killed. That's the reality folks. The Police most often only arrive after the fact. They can't be everywhere at all times. They'll arrive after the bloddy deed with their chalk and body bag.

So the fact is, it is you against the rabid beasts. It's your responsibility to protect your loved ones. Arming yourself and becoming proficient with your firearm, is a good way to do that. You owe it to your family to keep them safe. Don't let em down.

Pauly.....what are you doing? Libtards like Candy don't understand logic. Plus, having been part of a faction that has been waging a war on women for decades, there is nothing she'd rather see than unarmed, helpless women raped and murdered at the end of a knife. It gets her off for some bizarre reason (theories abound).

For me, it isn't very complicated. It's kill or be killed. Women especially, should arm themselves and become proficient with their weapon. If not a firearm, then obtain some other weapon for defense. Women especially, are preyed on 24/7.

Most women aren't like Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton. They don't have 24/7 armed security, or live in well-secured mansions on massive secluded gated properties. Most are on their own against the rabid beasts. I think it's crazy a woman would even consider not arming and protecting herself. Not a wise safe decision.

Rabid beasts? Most women who are raped, for example, know who is raping them, 3 out of 4 times. Explain how the gun was supposed to help them then? Self defense training might help but a gun? No.