Reagan Was Against Open Carry

[Muhammed]

Liar.

It's not a simple question? Looks simple to me.

Here it is again:

Why didn't they just write:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

What's not simple about that question?

Obviously it isn't very simple to extremely unintelligent people, such as yourself.

 

[Synthaholic]

Liar.

It's not a simple question? Looks simple to me.

Here it is again:

Why didn't they just write:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

What's not simple about that question?

Obviously it isn't very simple to extremely unintelligent people, such as yourself.

I've stumped you. I understand.

 

[Muhammed]

Liar.

It's not a simple question? Looks simple to me.

Here it is again:

Why didn't they just write:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

What's not simple about that question?

Obviously it isn't very simple to extremely unintelligent people, such as yourself.

I've stumped you. I understand.

Liar.

You are stumped.

 

[Synthaholic]

Liar.

It's not a simple question? Looks simple to me.

Here it is again:

Why didn't they just write:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

What's not simple about that question?

Obviously it isn't very simple to extremely unintelligent people, such as yourself.

I've stumped you. I understand.

Liar.

You are stumped.

Dude, give it up. You run away from the simplest questions while declaring victory.

Pathetic.

 

[The Rabbi]

Liar.

It's not a simple question? Looks simple to me.

Here it is again:

Why didn't they just write:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

What's not simple about that question?

Obviously it isn't very simple to extremely unintelligent people, such as yourself.

I've stumped you. I understand.

Liar.

You are stumped.

Dude, give it up. You run away from the simplest questions while declaring victory.

Pathetic.

No, pathetic is you trying to use the same argument you got your ass kicked on about ten times previously.
There is no requirement to belong to any formal militia in the 2A. The clause announces a general purpose but does not limit the right in any way.
You are stupid and ugly and smell funny.

 

[Contumacious]

Liar.

It's not a simple question? Looks simple to me.

Here it is again:

Why didn't they just write:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

What's not simple about that question?

Obviously it isn't very simple to extremely unintelligent people, such as yourself.

I've stumped you. I understand.

I have stumped. I understand



It is irrelevant that Reagan was a "conservative", ie, a right wing fascist

Even though no authority has ever been granted to fedgov to regulate firearms the following statutes are in the books


The Gun Control Act of 1968

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 (Brady Act)

The Gun-Free School Zones Act (GFSZA), as amended,

National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934, as amended 26 USC 53

Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968

Conservatives legislators and "justices" have had since, at least 1934, the opportunity to INVALIDATE those laws. They have failed or refused to do so.


.

 

[Synthaholic]

It's not a simple question? Looks simple to me.

Here it is again:

What's not simple about that question?

Obviously it isn't very simple to extremely unintelligent people, such as yourself.

I've stumped you. I understand.

Liar.

You are stumped.

Dude, give it up. You run away from the simplest questions while declaring victory.

Pathetic.

No, pathetic is you trying to use the same argument you got your ass kicked on about ten times previously.
There is no requirement to belong to any formal militia in the 2A. The clause announces a general purpose but does not limit the right in any way.
You are stupid and ugly and smell funny.

It hasn't been answered once, never mind ten times.

I didn't bother asking you the question because you're incapable of answering it.

 

[Synthaholic]

Liar.

It's not a simple question? Looks simple to me.

Here it is again:

Why didn't they just write:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

What's not simple about that question?

Obviously it isn't very simple to extremely unintelligent people, such as yourself.

I've stumped you. I understand.

I have stumped. I understand



It is irrelevant that Reagan was a "conservative", ie, a right wing fascist

Even though no authority has ever been granted to fedgov to regulate firearms the following statutes are in the books


The Gun Control Act of 1968

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 (Brady Act)

The Gun-Free School Zones Act (GFSZA), as amended,

National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934, as amended 26 USC 53

Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968

Conservatives legislators and "justices" have had since, at least 1934, the opportunity to INVALIDATE those laws. They have failed or refused to do so.


.

You keep regurgitating the same responses instead of answering my simple question.

 

[The Rabbi]

Obviously it isn't very simple to extremely unintelligent people, such as yourself.

I've stumped you. I understand.

Liar.

You are stumped.

Dude, give it up. You run away from the simplest questions while declaring victory.

Pathetic.

No, pathetic is you trying to use the same argument you got your ass kicked on about ten times previously.
There is no requirement to belong to any formal militia in the 2A. The clause announces a general purpose but does not limit the right in any way.
You are stupid and ugly and smell funny.

It hasn't been answered once, never mind ten times.

I didn't bother asking you the question because you're incapable of answering it.

It's a troll question based on misinformation and ignorance. WHich is all you are capable of.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Someone tell the op Reagan is dead please.

 

[Contumacious]

Liar.

It's not a simple question? Looks simple to me.

Here it is again:

Why didn't they just write:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

What's not simple about that question?

Obviously it isn't very simple to extremely unintelligent people, such as yourself.

I've stumped you. I understand.

I have stumped. I understand



It is irrelevant that Reagan was a "conservative", ie, a right wing fascist

Even though no authority has ever been granted to fedgov to regulate firearms the following statutes are in the books


The Gun Control Act of 1968

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 (Brady Act)

The Gun-Free School Zones Act (GFSZA), as amended,

National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934, as amended 26 USC 53

Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968

Conservatives legislators and "justices" have had since, at least 1934, the opportunity to INVALIDATE those laws. They have failed or refused to do so.


.

You keep regurgitating the same responses instead of answering my simple question.

Stop stonewalling and answer the fucking questions.





It is irrelevant that Reagan was a "conservative", ie, a right wing fascist

Even though no authority has ever been granted to fedgov to regulate firearms the following statutes are in the books


The Gun Control Act of 1968

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 (Brady Act)

The Gun-Free School Zones Act (GFSZA), as amended,

National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934, as amended 26 USC 53

Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968

Conservatives legislators and "justices" have had since, at least 1934, the opportunity to INVALIDATE those laws. They have failed or refused to do so.

 

[Desperado]

Most of the time Reagan was a douche. No denying it.

 

[Muhammed]

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

 

[Muhammed]

Liar.

It's not a simple question? Looks simple to me.

Here it is again:

Why didn't they just write:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

What's not simple about that question?

Obviously it isn't very simple to extremely unintelligent people, such as yourself.

I've stumped you. I understand.

I have stumped. I understand



It is irrelevant that Reagan was a "conservative", ie, a right wing fascist

Even though no authority has ever been granted to fedgov to regulate firearms the following statutes are in the books


The Gun Control Act of 1968

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 (Brady Act)

The Gun-Free School Zones Act (GFSZA), as amended,

National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934, as amended 26 USC 53

Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968

Conservatives legislators and "justices" have had since, at least 1934, the opportunity to INVALIDATE those laws. They have failed or refused to do so.


.

You keep regurgitating the same responses instead of answering my simple question.

Get a library card.


The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

 

[Synthaholic]

I've stumped you. I understand.

Liar.

You are stumped.

Dude, give it up. You run away from the simplest questions while declaring victory.

Pathetic.

No, pathetic is you trying to use the same argument you got your ass kicked on about ten times previously.
There is no requirement to belong to any formal militia in the 2A. The clause announces a general purpose but does not limit the right in any way.
You are stupid and ugly and smell funny.

It hasn't been answered once, never mind ten times.

I didn't bother asking you the question because you're incapable of answering it.

It's a troll question based on misinformation and ignorance. WHich is all you are capable of.

What's trolling about asking:

Why didn't they just write:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

?????????????????????????????

 

[Synthaholic]

Someone tell the op Reagan is dead please.

Please point to where you've said the same thing to PoliticalChic when she starts long copy/paste hit pieces on FDR.

Liberals aren't keeping Reagan alive and trying to make him relevant. Conservatives bring him up constantly. I heard Rafael Cruz just today extolling Reagan.

 

[Synthaholic]

Stop stonewalling and answer the fucking questions.

Why? You won't answer my question:

Why didn't they just write:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

 

[Synthaholic]

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Why isn't that sentence the extent of the 2nd amendment?

 

[The Rabbi]

Liar.

You are stumped.

Dude, give it up. You run away from the simplest questions while declaring victory.

Pathetic.

No, pathetic is you trying to use the same argument you got your ass kicked on about ten times previously.
There is no requirement to belong to any formal militia in the 2A. The clause announces a general purpose but does not limit the right in any way.
You are stupid and ugly and smell funny.

It hasn't been answered once, never mind ten times.

I didn't bother asking you the question because you're incapable of answering it.

It's a troll question based on misinformation and ignorance. WHich is all you are capable of.

What's trolling about asking:

Why didn't they just write:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

?????????????????????????????

Nothing is trolling about asking that.
But that's been answered a dozen times. Are you stupid?

 

[FA_Q2]

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Why isn't that sentence the extent of the 2nd amendment?

Irrelevant. You cannot answer why the didn't to the extent that you are able to justify chaining the plain meaning of the rest of the amendment. Postulate what you will about the first section, the plain words that follow are crystal clear.

In order to ignore them you are the one that must claim supernatural information on why the prefatory clause was written.