This Pride Sign Is at the Entrance of a WA School

Like anyone else in society, possessors of guns should only be doing that having passed a criminal and mental background check. So some teachers might be qualified to carry guns. Others may not.

I consider queers to be mentally deranged, but not really in any violent way. I guess I still would not trust them to carry a gun. They're just too unhinged. And they shouldn't be in schools, at all, in the first place.

1. There is no such thing as "sexual preferences". There are 2 sexes -male & female. Talking about "sexual preferences" is "really creepy."

I sense that you don't know how unhinged you are.

2. And when you say "only through due process" I dont know which of my 2 questions that is supposed to be answering.

Queer.

(of a person) homosexual.
 
Mmm. Who do you want to put into prison that is not being arrested and put into prison? And who do you want to let out?

How about violent people that are too much a danger to allow them to have a basic right protected by the Constitution. Those folks should be put into prison.

Those found with a bag of weed should be let out.
 
What are you suggesting?

I am not suggesting anything. I am saying that once people have served their sentence they should not continue to be punished. I am saying if they are too much a danger to be allowed a basic right protected by the Constitution they should not be allowed to walk around freely.
 
How about violent people that are too much a danger to allow them to have a basic right protected by the Constitution. Those folks should be put into prison.

Those found with a bag of weed should be let out.
Dufus says murderers and rapists should be allowed guns upon release.

All you need to know about Leftardism and why there’s so many problems right there.
 
How about violent people that are too much a danger to allow them to have a basic right protected by the Constitution. Those folks should be put into prison.

Those found with a bag of weed should be let out.


1. "Violent" is a potential. Everyone has the potential to be violent, in the right circumstances. If someone breaks into my house, I may very well kill them. That is not a sin by American traditional morals. Your standard seems vague and likely subjective. What specific example were you thinking of?

2. People are not put into prison for a bag of weed.
 
I am not suggesting anything. I am saying that once people have served their sentence they should not continue to be punished. I am saying if they are too much a danger to be allowed a basic right protected by the Constitution they should not be allowed to walk around freely.


And sayhing that they should not be "allowed to walk around freely" is suggesting something.


What are you suggesting?
 
1. "Violent" is a potential. Everyone has the potential to be violent, in the right circumstances. If someone breaks into my house, I may very well kill them. That is not a sin by American traditional morals. Your standard seems vague and likely subjective. What specific example were you thinking of?

I am thinking of the people you all wish to keep punishing once they have served their sentence. If they are in prison and they serve their time, then their punishment's should end at that point. If they are still a danger then their time in prison should not end.
 
And sayhing that they should not be "allowed to walk around freely" is suggesting something.


What are you suggesting?

I am SAYING, once they serve their sentence they should no longer keep being punished. I am not sure why this is so confusing for you.
 
I am thinking of the people you all wish to keep punishing once they have served their sentence. If they are in prison and they serve their time, then their punishment's should end at that point. If they are still a danger then their time in prison should not end.


You really want to just keep people in prison indefinitely just for being bad people?

I find it hard to believe you, and even if I did, it is not politically or economically feasible.
 

Forum List

Back
Top