Thank God for our RIGHT to keep and bear arms

[P@triot]

Love it. One 3 word post from me gets you to post 3 times in response. That is what you call effectiveness.

And guess what, the 2nd Amendment still says “A well-regulated militia…” You can’t change it, you can’t ignore it….

Now spin the other way for me little man…. ChrisL I don’t think he likes dancing alone. Perhaps you should join in. I also hear his hand falls asleep while making love…. Perhaps you can help him out there too sweetie.

Oh I know you "love it". You're so desperate for my attention, I guarantee you're on cloud 9 with a 3-to-1 ratio. But one problem....you still haven't explained how it is that I legally own a small arsenal despite never having served as part of a "militia".

 

[M14 Shooter]

And guess what, the 2nd Amendment still says “A well-regulated militia…” You can’t change it, you can’t ignore it….

And guess what - you know this is irrelevant, because you know 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.

 

[ChrisL]

Love it. One 3 word post from me gets you to post 3 times in response. That is what you call effectiveness.

And guess what, the 2nd Amendment still says “A well-regulated militia…” You can’t change it, you can’t ignore it….

Now spin the other way for me little man…. ChrisL I don’t think he likes dancing alone. Perhaps you should join in. I also hear his hand falls asleep while making love…. Perhaps you can help him out there too sweetie.

That's awfully strange then, because since the creation of the Bill of Rights, people who were not part of a "militia" have owned guns. That proves you wrong right there, corn cob.

 

[ChrisL]

Love it. One 3 word post from me gets you to post 3 times in response. That is what you call effectiveness.

And guess what, the 2nd Amendment still says “A well-regulated militia…” You can’t change it, you can’t ignore it….

Now spin the other way for me little man…. ChrisL I don’t think he likes dancing alone. Perhaps you should join in. I also hear his hand falls asleep while making love…. Perhaps you can help him out there too sweetie.

Oh I know you "love it". You're so desperate for my attention, I guarantee you're on cloud 9 with a 3-to-1 ratio. But one problem....you still haven't explained how it is that I legally own a small arsenal despite never having served as part of a "militia".

I think corny is fantasizing about you! Lol.

 

[P@triot]

Love it. One 3 word post from me gets you to post 3 times in response. That is what you call effectiveness.

And guess what, the 2nd Amendment still says “A well-regulated militia…” You can’t change it, you can’t ignore it….

Now spin the other way for me little man…. ChrisL I don’t think he likes dancing alone. Perhaps you should join in. I also hear his hand falls asleep while making love…. Perhaps you can help him out there too sweetie.

Oh I know you "love it". You're so desperate for my attention, I guarantee you're on cloud 9 with a 3-to-1 ratio. But one problem....you still haven't explained how it is that I legally own a small arsenal despite never having served as part of a "militia".

I think corny is fantasizing about you! Lol.

Story of my life right there. Has to be someone like her instead of someone like you....

 

[ChrisL]

Love it. One 3 word post from me gets you to post 3 times in response. That is what you call effectiveness.

And guess what, the 2nd Amendment still says “A well-regulated militia…” You can’t change it, you can’t ignore it….

Now spin the other way for me little man…. ChrisL I don’t think he likes dancing alone. Perhaps you should join in. I also hear his hand falls asleep while making love…. Perhaps you can help him out there too sweetie.

Corny! Cool your jets! Thread's not about your weird sexual fantasies!

 

[Dragonlady]

Because you're a paranoid pussy who would wet his pants from fear without his gun to protect him. Why would anyone own a gun if not for fear of everyone around him.

There are literally dozens of traditionally legal purposes for a gun, and thus, reasons to own them.
Why don't you know this?

I do know there are legitimate purposes for owning firearms but doubt Rottweiler is a farmer, or a hunter for that matter.

My daughter has a rifle which she used to protect her chicken coup from from coyotes and foxes. My cousin goes moose hunting to feed his family. We had a rifle at our summer cottage, because of bears.

All of my farmer friends and neighbours who own livestock own a rifle, both for protection of their livestock from predators and for humanely putting down

There is no legitimate reason for an urban civilian to own a private arsenal of weapons.

Studies show that fewer and fewer American households, on a percentage basis, own guns. But those that do, are buying more and more weapons.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Because you're a paranoid pussy who would wet his pants from fear without his gun to protect him. Why would anyone own a gun if not for fear of everyone around him.

There are literally dozens of traditionally legal purposes for a gun, and thus, reasons to own them.
Why don't you know this?

I do know there are legitimate purposes for owning firearms but doubt Rottweiler is a farmer, or a hunter for that matter.

Funny then how you asked "Why would anyone own a gun if not for fear of everyone around him?"

There is no legitimate reason for an urban civilian to own a private arsenal of weapons.

Except for the dozens and dozens of traditionally legal uses for a firearm, including uses not related to farming and/or hunting.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Winding you two losers up and watching you spin for me is just an added bonus.

See what I mean ChrisL? Openly admitting doing anything she can to get my attention? She so wants to believe she can "wind me up" or that I would "spin" for her. Ahh the fantasies of cougars...

The second amendment says “well regulated militia”. IF you’re not in one, sorry, no gun for you.

Time for you to spin.

Wrong

District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), was a landmarkcase in which the Supreme Court of the United States held in a 5-4 decision that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution applies tofederal enclaves and protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. The decision did not address the question of whether the Second Amendment extends beyond federal enclaves to the states,[1] which was addressed later by McDonald v. Chicago (2010). It was the first Supreme Court case to decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.[2]

We’ll see after HRC puts some new justices on the court.

So now you agree that the second upholds the individual's right to bear arms?

So you were wrong?

And don't get too cock sure about what the Supreme court will do. No one knows if they'll even hear a second amendment case anytime soon

 

[candycorn]

Winding you two losers up and watching you spin for me is just an added bonus.

See what I mean ChrisL? Openly admitting doing anything she can to get my attention? She so wants to believe she can "wind me up" or that I would "spin" for her. Ahh the fantasies of cougars...

The second amendment says “well regulated militia”. IF you’re not in one, sorry, no gun for you.

Time for you to spin.

Wrong

District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), was a landmarkcase in which the Supreme Court of the United States held in a 5-4 decision that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution applies tofederal enclaves and protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. The decision did not address the question of whether the Second Amendment extends beyond federal enclaves to the states,[1] which was addressed later by McDonald v. Chicago (2010). It was the first Supreme Court case to decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.[2]

We’ll see after HRC puts some new justices on the court.

So now you agree that the second upholds the individual's right to bear arms?

So you were wrong?

And don't get too cock sure about what the Supreme court will do. No one knows if they'll even hear a second amendment case anytime soon

No.
I agree that a set of justices saw it one way.
Perhaps we will see what another, more enlightened, set of justices have to say about it.

The Roberts court seems to want to fix things. We’ll see if they take it up in a few years with the new and improved justices.

You’re 100% correct; nobody knows what you unleash with these people. I didn’t see how they could say Obama care was constitutional but they did.

 

[candycorn]

Love it. One 3 word post from me gets you to post 3 times in response. That is what you call effectiveness.

And guess what, the 2nd Amendment still says “A well-regulated militia…” You can’t change it, you can’t ignore it….

Now spin the other way for me little man…. ChrisL I don’t think he likes dancing alone. Perhaps you should join in. I also hear his hand falls asleep while making love…. Perhaps you can help him out there too sweetie.

Corny! Cool your jets! Thread's not about your weird sexual fantasies!

He opened the door by mentioning his micro-penis. Perhaps you could help him find his manhood (bring some binoculars and possibly an electron microscope).

 

[Skull Pilot]

See what I mean ChrisL? Openly admitting doing anything she can to get my attention? She so wants to believe she can "wind me up" or that I would "spin" for her. Ahh the fantasies of cougars...

The second amendment says “well regulated militia”. IF you’re not in one, sorry, no gun for you.

Time for you to spin.

Wrong

District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), was a landmarkcase in which the Supreme Court of the United States held in a 5-4 decision that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution applies tofederal enclaves and protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. The decision did not address the question of whether the Second Amendment extends beyond federal enclaves to the states,[1] which was addressed later by McDonald v. Chicago (2010). It was the first Supreme Court case to decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.[2]

We’ll see after HRC puts some new justices on the court.

So now you agree that the second upholds the individual's right to bear arms?

So you were wrong?

And don't get too cock sure about what the Supreme court will do. No one knows if they'll even hear a second amendment case anytime soon

No.
I agree that a set of justices saw it one way.
Perhaps we will see what another, more enlightened, set of justices have to say about it.

The Roberts court seems to want to fix things. We’ll see if they take it up in a few years with the new and improved justices.

You’re 100% correct; nobody knows what you unleash with these people. I didn’t see how they could say Obama care was constitutional but they did.

And you were wrong to say otherwise as those judges hold the last word on what the constitution means or doesn't mean.

I won't hold my breath waiting for any fundamental changes in the interpretation of the second but I encourage you and any other control freak who wants to tell people they don't have the right to own a firearm to take a deep breath and wait

 

[candycorn]

The second amendment says “well regulated militia”. IF you’re not in one, sorry, no gun for you.

Time for you to spin.

Wrong

District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), was a landmarkcase in which the Supreme Court of the United States held in a 5-4 decision that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution applies tofederal enclaves and protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. The decision did not address the question of whether the Second Amendment extends beyond federal enclaves to the states,[1] which was addressed later by McDonald v. Chicago (2010). It was the first Supreme Court case to decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.[2]

We’ll see after HRC puts some new justices on the court.

So now you agree that the second upholds the individual's right to bear arms?

So you were wrong?

And don't get too cock sure about what the Supreme court will do. No one knows if they'll even hear a second amendment case anytime soon

No.
I agree that a set of justices saw it one way.
Perhaps we will see what another, more enlightened, set of justices have to say about it.

The Roberts court seems to want to fix things. We’ll see if they take it up in a few years with the new and improved justices.

You’re 100% correct; nobody knows what you unleash with these people. I didn’t see how they could say Obama care was constitutional but they did.

And you were wrong to say otherwise as those judges hold the last word on what the constitution means or doesn't mean.

I won't hold my breath waiting for any fundamental changes in the interpretation of the second but I encourage you and any other control freak who wants to tell people they don't have the right to own a firearm to take a deep breath and wait

Time will tell.

 

[ChrisL]

Love it. One 3 word post from me gets you to post 3 times in response. That is what you call effectiveness.

And guess what, the 2nd Amendment still says “A well-regulated militia…” You can’t change it, you can’t ignore it….

Now spin the other way for me little man…. ChrisL I don’t think he likes dancing alone. Perhaps you should join in. I also hear his hand falls asleep while making love…. Perhaps you can help him out there too sweetie.

Corny! Cool your jets! Thread's not about your weird sexual fantasies!

He opened the door by mentioning his micro-penis. Perhaps you could help him find his manhood (bring some binoculars and possibly an electron microscope).

You seem to be obsessed with his pecker.

 

[candycorn]

Love it. One 3 word post from me gets you to post 3 times in response. That is what you call effectiveness.

And guess what, the 2nd Amendment still says “A well-regulated militia…” You can’t change it, you can’t ignore it….

Now spin the other way for me little man…. ChrisL I don’t think he likes dancing alone. Perhaps you should join in. I also hear his hand falls asleep while making love…. Perhaps you can help him out there too sweetie.

Corny! Cool your jets! Thread's not about your weird sexual fantasies!

He opened the door by mentioning his micro-penis. Perhaps you could help him find his manhood (bring some binoculars and possibly an electron microscope).

You seem to be obsessed with his pecker.

Yet here you are bringing it up.

 

[ChrisL]

Love it. One 3 word post from me gets you to post 3 times in response. That is what you call effectiveness.

And guess what, the 2nd Amendment still says “A well-regulated militia…” You can’t change it, you can’t ignore it….

Now spin the other way for me little man…. ChrisL I don’t think he likes dancing alone. Perhaps you should join in. I also hear his hand falls asleep while making love…. Perhaps you can help him out there too sweetie.

Corny! Cool your jets! Thread's not about your weird sexual fantasies!

He opened the door by mentioning his micro-penis. Perhaps you could help him find his manhood (bring some binoculars and possibly an electron microscope).

You seem to be obsessed with his pecker.

Yet here you are bringing it up.

You brought it up.

 

[ChrisL]

Love it. One 3 word post from me gets you to post 3 times in response. That is what you call effectiveness.

And guess what, the 2nd Amendment still says “A well-regulated militia…” You can’t change it, you can’t ignore it….

Now spin the other way for me little man…. ChrisL I don’t think he likes dancing alone. Perhaps you should join in. I also hear his hand falls asleep while making love…. Perhaps you can help him out there too sweetie.

Corny! Cool your jets! Thread's not about your weird sexual fantasies!

He opened the door by mentioning his micro-penis. Perhaps you could help him find his manhood (bring some binoculars and possibly an electron microscope).

You seem to be obsessed with his pecker.

Yet here you are bringing it up.

You're the only one here talking about sex! Lol.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I do know there are legitimate purposes for owning firearms but doubt Rottweiler is a farmer, or a hunter for that matter.

My daughter has a rifle which she used to protect her chicken coup from from coyotes and foxes. My cousin goes moose hunting to feed his family. We had a rifle at our summer cottage, because of bears.

All of my farmer friends and neighbours who own livestock own a rifle, both for protection of their livestock from predators and for humanely putting down

There is no legitimate reason for an urban civilian to own a private arsenal of weapons.

Studies show that fewer and fewer American households, on a percentage basis, own guns. But those that do, are buying more and more weapons.

I think what you should do is buy or rent a home in my area for a couple of years and then come back here and tell us there is no need for an urbanite to own firearms.

During the housing bubble with no money down needed and no credit check, the lowlifes from the inner-city moved into my suburb. One year, we had three murders all in less than a mile from my home.

I never owned a firearm until I came home one Saturday after work and found my door busted down. I knew the people who did it too. They didn't think I knew who it was, but I played the game.

So I let them know I just bought a gun. I even showed it to them. I told them that whoever the lowlife was that broke into my home, I was going to empty my barrel in them when they came back. I told them I quit answering my phone and have a friend come over from time to time to take my car away so it looked like I wasn't home just to lure them back in.

Guess what? They disappeared and never came back.

You see it doesn't matter how many guns or what kind of guns law abiding citizens have. It's the idea that our laws allow people to conceal and use firearms for protection with the blessing of our governments. That's what keeps people from attacking others or breaking into houses.

Take that away from people, and it will be a criminals paradise.

 

[Centinel]

These people are saying there are NO exceptions to the right to bear arms based on the fact there are no STATED exceptions in the text of the amendment.

Congress has NO legislative authority to enact a law limiting the acquisition or possession of arms by the people of the several states.

 

[P@triot]

Love it. One 3 word post from me gets you to post 3 times in response. That is what you call effectiveness.

And guess what, the 2nd Amendment still says “A well-regulated militia…” You can’t change it, you can’t ignore it….

Now spin the other way for me little man…. ChrisL I don’t think he likes dancing alone. Perhaps you should join in. I also hear his hand falls asleep while making love…. Perhaps you can help him out there too sweetie.

Corny! Cool your jets! Thread's not about your weird sexual fantasies!

He opened the door by mentioning his micro-penis. Perhaps you could help him find his manhood (bring some binoculars and possibly an electron microscope).

First - love the wording. "Opened the door". Corny thinks I invited her into some form of a relationship - which she desperately wants with me. Second - I've never mentioned anything about my body. What I did mention was how much you lived to bend over and take it in the butt. Man was that a mistake. Should have never fed into your fetish. Ever since then, it's all you can talk about. You really have a thing for anal sex and now me as well. I'm not sure there has ever been a cougar as desperate for companionship as you are. Maybe if you weren't such an unhinged liberal lunatic you might have more luck? Just a thought corny. Then again, it's been my experience that liberal women are as ugly on the outside as they are on the inside, so it probably wouldn't matter all that much.