Poor poor liberal gun grabbers.

[danielpalos]

exactly; why should gun lovers feel any sense of entitlement if they are unwilling to love their republic as much as they claim to love their guns.

well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment.

Rights aren't an entitlement. Entitlements are gifts, a right is something government can't take away (unless there's a good reason). Your definition of love is really strange.

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of any law, much less our supreme law of the land. well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment. it is only gun lovers who are not entitled to the character of a "well regulated militia" who are complaining.

That is going to require some explanation as to your interpretation.........

Interpretation of what? I don't need to be as disingenuous as the right simply because I do have a clue and a Cause.

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of any law, much less our supreme law of the land. well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment. it is only gun lovers who are not entitled to the character of a "well regulated militia" who are complaining.

 

[Ringel05]

exactly; why should gun lovers feel any sense of entitlement if they are unwilling to love their republic as much as they claim to love their guns.

well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment.

Miss-understood my "reaction" didn'tcha.........

only if you didn't mean; wtf, why aren't gun lovers loving their republic at least as much as they claim to love their guns.

When was the last time you had a CAT scan of your brain? Never! Make an appointment now!

don't need to; i just need to let the other fellows resort to fallacy for their Cause, first.

Then your interpretive ambiguity will be returned in kind.......

 

[Ringel05]

exactly; why should gun lovers feel any sense of entitlement if they are unwilling to love their republic as much as they claim to love their guns.

well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment.

Rights aren't an entitlement. Entitlements are gifts, a right is something government can't take away (unless there's a good reason). Your definition of love is really strange.

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of any law, much less our supreme law of the land. well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment. it is only gun lovers who are not entitled to the character of a "well regulated militia" who are complaining.

That is going to require some explanation as to your interpretation.........

Interpretation of what? I don't need to be as disingenuous as the right simply because I do have a clue and a Cause.

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of any law, much less our supreme law of the land. well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment. it is only gun lovers who are not entitled to the character of a "well regulated militia" who are complaining.

Your interpretation of well regulated militia based on your understanding of the Second Amendment (in it's historical context) and what differentiation you're making between so called gun lovers and said clause.

 

[PredFan]

When are gun lovers going to get serious about a serious relationship with their Republic?

Wtf are you babbling about? Do YOU even know?

 

[PredFan]

Poor liberal gun grabbers. Apparently losing so often lately has caused much confusion in their alleged brains.

 

[danielpalos]

exactly; why should gun lovers feel any sense of entitlement if they are unwilling to love their republic as much as they claim to love their guns.

well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment.

Miss-understood my "reaction" didn'tcha.........

only if you didn't mean; wtf, why aren't gun lovers loving their republic at least as much as they claim to love their guns.

When was the last time you had a CAT scan of your brain? Never! Make an appointment now!

don't need to; i just need to let the other fellows resort to fallacy for their Cause, first.

Then your interpretive ambiguity will be returned in kind.......

Nothing but diversion; I got it.

 

[danielpalos]

exactly; why should gun lovers feel any sense of entitlement if they are unwilling to love their republic as much as they claim to love their guns.

well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment.

Rights aren't an entitlement. Entitlements are gifts, a right is something government can't take away (unless there's a good reason). Your definition of love is really strange.

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of any law, much less our supreme law of the land. well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment. it is only gun lovers who are not entitled to the character of a "well regulated militia" who are complaining.

That is going to require some explanation as to your interpretation.........

Interpretation of what? I don't need to be as disingenuous as the right simply because I do have a clue and a Cause.

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of any law, much less our supreme law of the land. well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment. it is only gun lovers who are not entitled to the character of a "well regulated militia" who are complaining.

Your interpretation of well regulated militia based on your understanding of the Second Amendment (in it's historical context) and what differentiation you're making between so called gun lovers and said clause.

Nope; there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

 

[danielpalos]

When are gun lovers going to get serious about a serious relationship with their Republic?

Wtf are you babbling about? Do YOU even know?

I know you don't have a clue or a Cause.

 

[Ringel05]

Miss-understood my "reaction" didn'tcha.........

only if you didn't mean; wtf, why aren't gun lovers loving their republic at least as much as they claim to love their guns.

When was the last time you had a CAT scan of your brain? Never! Make an appointment now!

don't need to; i just need to let the other fellows resort to fallacy for their Cause, first.

Then your interpretive ambiguity will be returned in kind.......

Nothing but diversion; I got it.

Basically what I'm getting from you. Don't like it, don't do it. Couldn't be more simple.

 

[Ringel05]

Rights aren't an entitlement. Entitlements are gifts, a right is something government can't take away (unless there's a good reason). Your definition of love is really strange.

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of any law, much less our supreme law of the land. well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment. it is only gun lovers who are not entitled to the character of a "well regulated militia" who are complaining.

That is going to require some explanation as to your interpretation.........

Interpretation of what? I don't need to be as disingenuous as the right simply because I do have a clue and a Cause.

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of any law, much less our supreme law of the land. well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment. it is only gun lovers who are not entitled to the character of a "well regulated militia" who are complaining.

Your interpretation of well regulated militia based on your understanding of the Second Amendment (in it's historical context) and what differentiation you're making between so called gun lovers and said clause.

Nope; there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

Interesting considering there are primarily still two differing interpretations of "the law". Which one do you adhere to. It's an easy question, all it takes is a simple (forthright) answer as opposed to "I know what I mean and you should to" kindergarten tactics.
Oh and if you don't like your game being turned back on you.........

 

[danielpalos]

only if you didn't mean; wtf, why aren't gun lovers loving their republic at least as much as they claim to love their guns.

When was the last time you had a CAT scan of your brain? Never! Make an appointment now!

don't need to; i just need to let the other fellows resort to fallacy for their Cause, first.

Then your interpretive ambiguity will be returned in kind.......

Nothing but diversion; I got it.

Basically what I'm getting from you. Don't like it, don't do it. Couldn't be more simple.

Nope; it has to do with Appeals to Ignorance of the law being no form of excuse.

 

[danielpalos]

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of any law, much less our supreme law of the land. well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment. it is only gun lovers who are not entitled to the character of a "well regulated militia" who are complaining.

That is going to require some explanation as to your interpretation.........

Interpretation of what? I don't need to be as disingenuous as the right simply because I do have a clue and a Cause.

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of any law, much less our supreme law of the land. well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment. it is only gun lovers who are not entitled to the character of a "well regulated militia" who are complaining.

Your interpretation of well regulated militia based on your understanding of the Second Amendment (in it's historical context) and what differentiation you're making between so called gun lovers and said clause.

Nope; there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

Interesting considering there are primarily still two differing interpretations of "the law". Which one do you adhere to. It's an easy question, all it takes is a simple (forthright) answer as opposed to "I know what I mean and you should to" kindergarten tactics.
Oh and if you don't like your game being turned back on you.........

You haven't been turning any Thing back on me as long as you are the one resorting to fallacies.

 

[Ringel05]

That is going to require some explanation as to your interpretation.........

Interpretation of what? I don't need to be as disingenuous as the right simply because I do have a clue and a Cause.

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of any law, much less our supreme law of the land. well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment. it is only gun lovers who are not entitled to the character of a "well regulated militia" who are complaining.

Your interpretation of well regulated militia based on your understanding of the Second Amendment (in it's historical context) and what differentiation you're making between so called gun lovers and said clause.

Nope; there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

Interesting considering there are primarily still two differing interpretations of "the law". Which one do you adhere to. It's an easy question, all it takes is a simple (forthright) answer as opposed to "I know what I mean and you should to" kindergarten tactics.
Oh and if you don't like your game being turned back on you.........

You haven't been turning any Thing back on me as long as you are the one resorting to fallacies.

Pretty much the answer I thought I'd get back, dodge and evade, dodge and evade. How much time have you done in the "big house" as a con artist? (Senator in the Senate............. )

 

[Roadrunner]

In Target right now with my concealed weapon.

Mulon Labe mother fuckers!

Don't try that in an Ohio Wal-Mart.

If it is properly concealed, who would know?

 

[Roadrunner]

My son and granddaughter, last weekend or so:

that pic is classic, lol. She's wearing spurs, too.

Is that the Remington 700, subject to massive recall because some dumbasses trusted a mechanical device called a safety, and broke the #1 rule, do not point the muzzle at anything you do not want to shoot?

 

[danielpalos]

Interpretation of what? I don't need to be as disingenuous as the right simply because I do have a clue and a Cause.

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of any law, much less our supreme law of the land. well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment. it is only gun lovers who are not entitled to the character of a "well regulated militia" who are complaining.

Your interpretation of well regulated militia based on your understanding of the Second Amendment (in it's historical context) and what differentiation you're making between so called gun lovers and said clause.

Nope; there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

Interesting considering there are primarily still two differing interpretations of "the law". Which one do you adhere to. It's an easy question, all it takes is a simple (forthright) answer as opposed to "I know what I mean and you should to" kindergarten tactics.
Oh and if you don't like your game being turned back on you.........

You haven't been turning any Thing back on me as long as you are the one resorting to fallacies.

Pretty much the answer I thought I'd get back, dodge and evade, dodge and evade. How much time have you done in the "big house" as a con artist? (Senator in the Senate............. )

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of any law, much less our supreme law of the land. well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment. it is only gun lovers who are not entitled to the character of a "well regulated militia" who are complaining.

 

[Ringel05]

Your interpretation of well regulated militia based on your understanding of the Second Amendment (in it's historical context) and what differentiation you're making between so called gun lovers and said clause.

Nope; there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

Interesting considering there are primarily still two differing interpretations of "the law". Which one do you adhere to. It's an easy question, all it takes is a simple (forthright) answer as opposed to "I know what I mean and you should to" kindergarten tactics.
Oh and if you don't like your game being turned back on you.........

You haven't been turning any Thing back on me as long as you are the one resorting to fallacies.

Pretty much the answer I thought I'd get back, dodge and evade, dodge and evade. How much time have you done in the "big house" as a con artist? (Senator in the Senate............. )

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of any law, much less our supreme law of the land. well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment. it is only gun lovers who are not entitled to the character of a "well regulated militia" who are complaining.

Okay, shades of Dante.........

 

[Iceweasel]

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of any law, much less our supreme law of the land. well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment. it is only gun lovers who are not entitled to the character of a "well regulated militia" who are complaining.

Sorry but it's been to the highest court. You lost.

 

[koshergrl]

My son and granddaughter, last weekend or so:

that pic is classic, lol. She's wearing spurs, too.

Is that the Remington 700, subject to massive recall because some dumbasses trusted a mechanical device called a safety, and broke the #1 rule, do not point the muzzle at anything you do not want to shoot?

Freaking idiot.

 

[danielpalos]

Nope; there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

Interesting considering there are primarily still two differing interpretations of "the law". Which one do you adhere to. It's an easy question, all it takes is a simple (forthright) answer as opposed to "I know what I mean and you should to" kindergarten tactics.
Oh and if you don't like your game being turned back on you.........

You haven't been turning any Thing back on me as long as you are the one resorting to fallacies.

Pretty much the answer I thought I'd get back, dodge and evade, dodge and evade. How much time have you done in the "big house" as a con artist? (Senator in the Senate............. )

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of any law, much less our supreme law of the land. well regulated militias of the United States already enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment. it is only gun lovers who are not entitled to the character of a "well regulated militia" who are complaining.

Okay, shades of Dante.........

thank you for ceding the point and the argument, dear.