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.
Grow the fuck up! You aren't defending the Constitution unless you are in the military, so enough of the fantasy. Your body count from your war past, present and future consists of thousands of Americans killed each year by you and your arms suppliers. You aren't a hero, you're an asshole, who has to live a fantasy life to justify his desire to spend money on guns, when you should be using it to support the family needs. Put it in an investment for a college fund or retirement!
There is no expiration date on a persons oath.
Take a look in the mirror, you are the enemy!
And just how in the fuck do YOU know that the poster you are addressing isn't taking care of their family, investing in college fund/s, or handling their personal responsibilty, and just spends all their money on guns?What we need is consistent law enforcement.
NOT people claiming govt authority trying to take guns away from others trying to defend the constitution. That is backwards.
I am as anti-war and pro-peace by consensus/conflict-resolution as you can get.
And I am FOR respecting the consent of gun owners and other people opposed to restrictions on gun laws that can be resolved in better ways without infringing ont he consent of the governed. You violate the social contract by imposing that way.
Defeats the whole purpose of having civil due process and democratic representation.
We are not a dictatorship.
Nor do we need to act like that and abuse power by bullying to get anything done.
if laws are written well, people naturally consent.
So solve the root problems and don't take shortcuts trying to make a political/social statement, such as banning the choice of abortion out of fear it is abused. Solve the problems of abortion without criminalizing it. Same with guns.
Grow the fuck up! You aren't defending the Constitution unless you are in the military, so enough of the fantasy. Your body count from your war past, present and future consists of thousands of Americans killed each year by you and your arms suppliers. You aren't a hero, you're an asshole, who has to live a fantasy life to justify his desire to spend money on guns, when you should be using it to support the family needs. Put it in an investment for a college fund or retirement!
Seriously, who the fuck are YOU to sit up here and preach your BS to any one, Slapdick?
But, thanks for your meltdown,....it was quite entertaining....One of the best of the day!
And just how in the fuck do YOU know that the poster you are addressing isn't taking care of their family, investing in college fund/s, or handling their personal responsibilty, and just spends all their money on guns?What we need is consistent law enforcement.
NOT people claiming govt authority trying to take guns away from others trying to defend the constitution. That is backwards.
I am as anti-war and pro-peace by consensus/conflict-resolution as you can get.
And I am FOR respecting the consent of gun owners and other people opposed to restrictions on gun laws that can be resolved in better ways without infringing ont he consent of the governed. You violate the social contract by imposing that way.
Defeats the whole purpose of having civil due process and democratic representation.
We are not a dictatorship.
Nor do we need to act like that and abuse power by bullying to get anything done.
if laws are written well, people naturally consent.
So solve the root problems and don't take shortcuts trying to make a political/social statement, such as banning the choice of abortion out of fear it is abused. Solve the problems of abortion without criminalizing it. Same with guns.
Grow the fuck up! You aren't defending the Constitution unless you are in the military, so enough of the fantasy. Your body count from your war past, present and future consists of thousands of Americans killed each year by you and your arms suppliers. You aren't a hero, you're an asshole, who has to live a fantasy life to justify his desire to spend money on guns, when you should be using it to support the family needs. Put it in an investment for a college fund or retirement!
Seriously, who the fuck are YOU to sit up here and preach your BS to any one, Slapdick?
But, thanks for your meltdown,....it was quite entertaining....One of the best of the day!
There is no expiration date on a persons oath.
Take a look in the mirror, you are the enemy!
Of course I am the enemy of anyone that would support a hitler style government of course I am the enemy of anyone that would support a stalin style government of course you being one of those I am your enemy. You are the enemy of the Republic.
No one said it gives one the right to wage war against the USA. Lie much? What is said and is correct is that the constitution protects our right to own guns to protect ourselves against a tyrannical gov't. The left denies that because they are socialists who does not believe in the constitution.Amazing, that is exactly what King George asked James Madison, Patrick Henry , Thomas Jefferson, et al.
I am sure that if you take your time you will find their response.
.The fucktards never cease to amaze me.
They certainly didn't write their response into the Constitution.
And the idea that we can take other writings of a few of the founders to justify a particular interpretation of what did make it into the Constitution is a fatally flawed argument.
The Constitution was clearly a document by committee. No one person's views are reflected exactly in the document that was ratified. The fact that these founders wrote about the ideas in other documents seems to indicate that they presented these ideas and that they were rejected (because they don't appear in the final document).
So this notion that the Constitution includes the 2nd Amendment because people have the right to wage war on the United States is absurd. It was rejected by the Constitutional Convention and it would (imho) certainly be rejected by any contemporary court.
The 2nd Amendment is clear to me - individuals do have the right to own guns. So why they have that right is only important if you are trying to stretch that right into owning ANY weapon you choose. And that notion has been rejected as well.
No one said it gives one the right to wage war against the USA. Lie much? What is said and is correct is that the constitution protects our right to own guns to protect ourselves against a tyrannical gov't. The left denies that because they are socialists who does not believe in the constitution.Amazing, that is exactly what King George asked James Madison, Patrick Henry , Thomas Jefferson, et al.
I am sure that if you take your time you will find their response.
.The fucktards never cease to amaze me.
They certainly didn't write their response into the Constitution.
And the idea that we can take other writings of a few of the founders to justify a particular interpretation of what did make it into the Constitution is a fatally flawed argument.
The Constitution was clearly a document by committee. No one person's views are reflected exactly in the document that was ratified. The fact that these founders wrote about the ideas in other documents seems to indicate that they presented these ideas and that they were rejected (because they don't appear in the final document).
So this notion that the Constitution includes the 2nd Amendment because people have the right to wage war on the United States is absurd. It was rejected by the Constitutional Convention and it would (imho) certainly be rejected by any contemporary court.
The 2nd Amendment is clear to me - individuals do have the right to own guns. So why they have that right is only important if you are trying to stretch that right into owning ANY weapon you choose. And that notion has been rejected as well.
No one said it gives one the right to wage war against the USA. Lie much? What is said and is correct is that the constitution protects our right to own guns to protect ourselves against a tyrannical gov't. The left denies that because they are socialists who does not believe in the constitution.They certainly didn't write their response into the Constitution.
And the idea that we can take other writings of a few of the founders to justify a particular interpretation of what did make it into the Constitution is a fatally flawed argument.
The Constitution was clearly a document by committee. No one person's views are reflected exactly in the document that was ratified. The fact that these founders wrote about the ideas in other documents seems to indicate that they presented these ideas and that they were rejected (because they don't appear in the final document).
So this notion that the Constitution includes the 2nd Amendment because people have the right to wage war on the United States is absurd. It was rejected by the Constitutional Convention and it would (imho) certainly be rejected by any contemporary court.
The 2nd Amendment is clear to me - individuals do have the right to own guns. So why they have that right is only important if you are trying to stretch that right into owning ANY weapon you choose. And that notion has been rejected as well.
The Founders talked about a tyrant taking over the government, such as the leader of a militia or standing army. They weren't talking about the federal government, because it didn't do much of anything.
No one said it gives one the right to wage war against the USA. Lie much? What is said and is correct is that the constitution protects our right to own guns to protect ourselves against a tyrannical gov't. The left denies that because they are socialists who does not believe in the constitution.They certainly didn't write their response into the Constitution.
And the idea that we can take other writings of a few of the founders to justify a particular interpretation of what did make it into the Constitution is a fatally flawed argument.
The Constitution was clearly a document by committee. No one person's views are reflected exactly in the document that was ratified. The fact that these founders wrote about the ideas in other documents seems to indicate that they presented these ideas and that they were rejected (because they don't appear in the final document).
So this notion that the Constitution includes the 2nd Amendment because people have the right to wage war on the United States is absurd. It was rejected by the Constitutional Convention and it would (imho) certainly be rejected by any contemporary court.
The 2nd Amendment is clear to me - individuals do have the right to own guns. So why they have that right is only important if you are trying to stretch that right into owning ANY weapon you choose. And that notion has been rejected as well.
It isn't in the Constitution. If you think the Constitution protects a right to shoot at government officials (wage war, however you want to word it) you're nuts. It's not in the Constitution anywhere.
Wonder why Timothy McVeigh didn't use that defense. He was fighting against "government tyranny" and so was Osama bin Laden for that matter. At least that's what they were doing if you were to have asked THEM.
No one said it gives one the right to wage war against the USA. Lie much? What is said and is correct is that the constitution protects our right to own guns to protect ourselves against a tyrannical gov't. The left denies that because they are socialists who does not believe in the constitution.
It isn't in the Constitution. If you think the Constitution protects a right to shoot at government officials (wage war, however you want to word it) you're nuts. It's not in the Constitution anywhere.
Wonder why Timothy McVeigh didn't use that defense. He was fighting against "government tyranny" and so was Osama bin Laden for that matter. At least that's what they were doing if you were to have asked THEM.
That would be the declaration of independents. You know the document that started this great nation.... Now go back home fascist.
It isn't in the Constitution. If you think the Constitution protects a right to shoot at government officials (wage war, however you want to word it) you're nuts. It's not in the Constitution anywhere.
Wonder why Timothy McVeigh didn't use that defense. He was fighting against "government tyranny" and so was Osama bin Laden for that matter. At least that's what they were doing if you were to have asked THEM.
That would be the declaration of independents. You know the document that started this great nation.... Now go back home fascist.
The Declaration of "Independents" sic, isn't law.
That would be the declaration of independents. You know the document that started this great nation.... Now go back home fascist.
The Declaration of "Independents" sic, isn't law.
You sure about that???????
It isn't in the Constitution. If you think the Constitution protects a right to shoot at government officials (wage war, however you want to word it) you're nuts. It's not in the Constitution anywhere.
.
It isn't in the Constitution. If you think the Constitution protects a right to shoot at government officials (wage war, however you want to word it) you're nuts. It's not in the Constitution anywhere.
.
Excuse me ding dong. Were you asleep during US History class?
The Constitution only delineates the authority of the federal government. We have 100% of the rights UNLESS THEY ARE SPECIFICALLY GRANTED TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. READ THE NINTH AMENDMENT.
.
Take a look in the mirror, you are the enemy!
Of course I am the enemy of anyone that would support a hitler style government of course I am the enemy of anyone that would support a stalin style government of course you being one of those I am your enemy. You are the enemy of the Republic.
You made yourself the enemy of this country by fucking up your own mind. Tell it to the judge if you get out of line!
the declaration of "independents" sic, isn't law.
you sure about that???????
why do you make these stupid comment? You are either trying to contradict established common sense facts or you would have to be a complete moron to suggest the declaration of independence is law.
Of course I am the enemy of anyone that would support a hitler style government of course I am the enemy of anyone that would support a stalin style government of course you being one of those I am your enemy. You are the enemy of the Republic.
You made yourself the enemy of this country by fucking up your own mind. Tell it to the judge if you get out of line!
I served this Republic that you want to destroy,, FUCK YOU. I don't goose step, I will stand up for my rights I will never submit to what you and your god damn president want to transform this country into. Once again YOU ARE THE ENEMY TOO THIS REPUBLIC.
you sure about that???????
why do you make these stupid comment? You are either trying to contradict established common sense facts or you would have to be a complete moron to suggest the declaration of independence is law.
you don't have any common sense.
I am not worried about my guns, even my assault rifle. The socialist in chief obamaturd will not get them, period.You made yourself the enemy of this country by fucking up your own mind. Tell it to the judge if you get out of line!
I served this Republic that you want to destroy,, FUCK YOU. I don't goose step, I will stand up for my rights I will never submit to what you and your god damn president want to transform this country into. Once again YOU ARE THE ENEMY TOO THIS REPUBLIC.
You're a great patriot in your own mind. If I was you, I'd be worried about my guns and those straight jackets.
