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.
Why not nukes? Otherwise, your rights would be infringed upon, wouldn't they? Or do you agree that some limits are ok?
Run along now little Boy.
Your attempt at reducing the argument to the ridiculous has failed.
This thread is about carrying a firearm for self defense not about nuking anyone.
You agree that some limits are ok. That's cool.
And aren't mental cases 2nd Amendment rights being violated with background mental health checks?
.
Run along now little Boy.
Your attempt at reducing the argument to the ridiculous has failed.
This thread is about carrying a firearm for self defense not about nuking anyone.
You agree that some limits are ok. That's cool.
And aren't mental cases 2nd Amendment rights being violated with background mental health checks?
.
Speaking of mental health checks. How are you doing today?
Your "well-regulated militia" would need nukes to take out your tyrannical government which has some, and any attempt of said government to deny you your constitutional rights to bera arms unhindered, would just be more tyranny.You don't have to take it out.
And don't be a fucking idiot with the nuclear weapon shit.
Why not nukes? Otherwise, your rights would be infringed upon, wouldn't they? Or do you agree that some limits are ok?
Run along now little Boy.
Your attempt at reducing the argument to the ridiculous has failed.
This thread is about carrying a firearm for self defense not about nuking anyone.
You agree that some limits are ok. That's cool.
And aren't mental cases 2nd Amendment rights being violated with background mental health checks?
.
Speaking of mental health checks. How are you doing today?
I'm fine. Now please address my comment... if you can.
Your "well-regulated militia" would need nukes to take out your tyrannical government which has some, and any attempt of said government to deny you your constitutional rights to bera arms unhindered, would just be more tyranny.Why not nukes? Otherwise, your rights would be infringed upon, wouldn't they? Or do you agree that some limits are ok?
Run along now little Boy.
Your attempt at reducing the argument to the ridiculous has failed.
This thread is about carrying a firearm for self defense not about nuking anyone.
Your "well-regulated militia" would need nukes to take out your tyrannical government which has some, and any attempt of said government to deny you your constitutional rights to bera arms unhindered, would just be more tyranny.Why not nukes? Otherwise, your rights would be infringed upon, wouldn't they? Or do you agree that some limits are ok?
Run along now little Boy.
Your attempt at reducing the argument to the ridiculous has failed.
This thread is about carrying a firearm for self defense not about nuking anyone.
You defend the 2nd for any reason, you're defending all of it.Your "well-regulated militia" would need nukes to take out your tyrannical government which has some, and any attempt of said government to deny you your constitutional rights to bera arms unhindered, would just be more tyranny.Run along now little Boy.
Your attempt at reducing the argument to the ridiculous has failed.
This thread is about carrying a firearm for self defense not about nuking anyone.
Hey Idiot let's get this straight
I have never once in any post talked about taking down the government.
My only concern is self defense and allowing people the absolute inalienable right to protect their own lives or the lives of their loved ones from those that would do them harm.
A firearm whether it be a shotgun rifle or handgun is THE most effective tool for that.
Period, end of story.
Your "well-regulated militia" would need nukes to take out your tyrannical government which has some, and any attempt of said government to deny you your constitutional rights to bera arms unhindered, would just be more tyranny.Run along now little Boy.
Your attempt at reducing the argument to the ridiculous has failed.
This thread is about carrying a firearm for self defense not about nuking anyone.
You're assuming the military would side with the government and not the Constitution and "we the people".
Your "well-regulated militia" would need nukes to take out your tyrannical government which has some, and any attempt of said government to deny you your constitutional rights to bera arms unhindered, would just be more tyranny.
You're assuming the military would side with the government and not the Constitution and "we the people".
So if they do side with the government, the tyranny continues until you get nukes and take them out.
Your "well-regulated militia" would need nukes to take out your tyrannical government which has some, and any attempt of said government to deny you your constitutional rights to bera arms unhindered, would just be more tyranny.
You're assuming the military would side with the government and not the Constitution and "we the people".
So if they do side with the government, the tyranny continues until you get nukes and take them out.
You're assuming the military would side with the government and not the Constitution and "we the people".
So if they do side with the government, the tyranny continues until you get nukes and take them out.
Lol, if you think anyone would ever use nukes on their own countrymen you are as dumb as a sack of bricks.
So if they do side with the government, the tyranny continues until you get nukes and take them out.
Lol, if you think anyone would ever use nukes on their own countrymen you are as dumb as a sack of bricks.
The FFs thought that you might need to fight the government, and if not on equal terms, then how? I guess you're smarter than they are.
Lol, if you think anyone would ever use nukes on their own countrymen you are as dumb as a sack of bricks.
The FFs thought that you might need to fight the government, and if not on equal terms, then how? I guess you're smarter than they are.
If it ever came to a shooting revolt, using a nuke to 'save' the country would be stupid and typically libtard thing to do, as you guys are so enamored of massive bloodshed, from the Jacobins to Pol Pot.
A shooting war would be won by us only if the LEOs and former military agreed that there was no other option, not at the ballot box not by waiting them out and breeding our way to a win.
It would be over within a month, just like the Soviet Union, and not one used nukes either, did they, idiot.
The FFs thought that you might need to fight the government, and if not on equal terms, then how? I guess you're smarter than they are.
If it ever came to a shooting revolt, using a nuke to 'save' the country would be stupid and typically libtard thing to do, as you guys are so enamored of massive bloodshed, from the Jacobins to Pol Pot.
A shooting war would be won by us only if the LEOs and former military agreed that there was no other option, not at the ballot box not by waiting them out and breeding our way to a win.
It would be over within a month, just like the Soviet Union, and not one used nukes either, did they, idiot.
You could nuke Washington DC and cripple the government VERY badly in one shot.
Geez, I hope you guys have some better military minds then what I'm seeing on this board, if not you folks are in trouble!
You defend the 2nd for any reason, you're defending all of it.Your "well-regulated militia" would need nukes to take out your tyrannical government which has some, and any attempt of said government to deny you your constitutional rights to bera arms unhindered, would just be more tyranny.
Hey Idiot let's get this straight
I have never once in any post talked about taking down the government.
My only concern is self defense and allowing people the absolute inalienable right to protect their own lives or the lives of their loved ones from those that would do them harm.
A firearm whether it be a shotgun rifle or handgun is THE most effective tool for that.
Period, end of story.
You defend the 2nd for any reason, you're defending all of it.Your "well-regulated militia" would need nukes to take out your tyrannical government which has some, and any attempt of said government to deny you your constitutional rights to bera arms unhindered, would just be more tyranny.
Hey Idiot let's get this straight
I have never once in any post talked about taking down the government.
My only concern is self defense and allowing people the absolute inalienable right to protect their own lives or the lives of their loved ones from those that would do them harm.
A firearm whether it be a shotgun rifle or handgun is THE most effective tool for that.
Period, end of story.
Speaking of mental health checks. How are you doing today?
I'm fine. Now please address my comment... if you can.
Oh I can and have already commented on it.
Look no further than D.C. v. Heller.
Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should 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.
Your "well-regulated militia" would need nukes to take out your tyrannical government which has some, and any attempt of said government to deny you your constitutional rights to bera arms unhindered, would just be more tyranny.Run along now little Boy.
Your attempt at reducing the argument to the ridiculous has failed.
This thread is about carrying a firearm for self defense not about nuking anyone.
You're assuming the military would side with the government and not the Constitution and "we the people".
Police: Texting argument in movie theater sparks fatal shooting - CNN.com
It is more of a mental health issue. This was a retired cop, but it could have been anyone with a carry permit. Pretty sad
