Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
It also protects innocent gun owners!no one insists that proven terrorists not be penalized for their behavior...
the right conflates innocent people, who happen to be muslim, with terrorists.
your constitution protects those innocent muslims... (not just the liberals you blame for noticing)
weapons of war in the hands of violent extremists, of any stripe, is terrifying.
who is "punished" by laws that keep weapons of war out of the hands of terrorists??
if you think the answer is you... please explain how??
doesn't "the security of a free state" also provide the right to not be terrorized?
You don't get to define "feeling terrorized.". I feel terrorized by the wacko left every day.doesn't "the security of a free state" also provide the right to not be terrorized?
Because it was worded perfectly the first time. “Shall not be infringed...”aren't innocents in a free state "punished" by permitting public ownership of weapons of war?
why not petition our government to amend the 2nd amendment??
why not update according to what is currently necessary to the security of a free state?
why not amend the wording, complete with self-defense castle doctrine plus provisions for hunting and sport, preserving the right of the people to keep and bear arms for all lawful purposes, with permit levels for various scales of trained and certified ownership, including law enforcement.
who precisely would be "punished" by this ^
Why? It recognizes your right to defend yourself. EVERY living being has that right. Why do you deny us that?why not petition our government to amend the 2nd amendment??
Why? It recognizes your right to defend yourself. EVERY living being has that right. Why do you deny us that?why not petition our government to amend the 2nd amendment??
aren't innocents in a free state "punished" by permitting public ownership of weapons of war?
why not petition our government to amend the 2nd amendment??
why not update according to what is currently necessary to the security of a free state?
why not amend the wording, complete with self-defense castle doctrine plus provisions for hunting and sport, preserving the right of the people to keep and bear arms for all lawful purposes, with permit levels for various scales of trained and certified ownership, including law enforcement.
who precisely would be "punished" by this ^
Because it was worded perfectly the first time. “Shall not be infringed...”
So yourey THREATENING me without answering the question. Im feeling terrorized.Why? It recognizes your right to defend yourself. EVERY living being has that right. Why do you deny us that?why not petition our government to amend the 2nd amendment??
i noticed you cherry picked one sentence of many in my post. derrrp
people get infracted for doing that FYI
The right of self defense is inherit in all living creatures. You oppose the right of self defense.the prefatory clause speaks to what is necessary to the security of a free state.
weapons of war in the hands of violent extremists, of any stripe, is terrifying.
who is "punished" by laws that keep weapons of war out of the hands of terrorists??
if you think the answer is you... please explain how??
doesn't "the security of a free state" also provide the right to not be terrorized?
We have been terrorized by our own "government" going back to the 60's and they have terrorized other countries as well while toppling duly elected leaders and putting in their puppets. Cointelpro ring a bell? Operation Gladio, Operation Gladio B, Operation Northwoods, etc, etc. These false flag shooting events that are perfectly "legal" within the scope of this statutory law system now that the Smith-Mundt Act no longer applies making it legal for this corporate entity that we call "government" to legally spew propaganda.
Then we have chickenshit commies like you that wants the public disarmed which has always been a major plank in the communist agenda. It's not gonna happen in your lifetime.
The right of self defense is inherit in all living creatures. You oppose the right of self defense.the prefatory clause speaks to what is necessary to the security of a free state.
those were the days...
when a well regulated militia was necessary to the security of a free state.
but what is necessary to the security of a free state nowadays...........??
those were the days...
when a well regulated militia was necessary to the security of a free state.
but what is necessary to the security of a free state nowadays...........??
Lol please try and explain what you think that phrase means
weapons of war in the hands of violent extremists, of any stripe, is terrifying.
who is "punished" by laws that keep weapons of war out of the hands of terrorists??
if you think the answer is you... please explain how??
doesn't "the security of a free state" also provide the right to not be terrorized?
We have been terrorized by our own "government" going back to the 60's and they have terrorized other countries as well while toppling duly elected leaders and putting in their puppets. Cointelpro ring a bell? Operation Gladio, Operation Gladio B, Operation Northwoods, etc, etc. These false flag shooting events that are perfectly "legal" within the scope of this statutory law system now that the Smith-Mundt Act no longer applies making it legal for this corporate entity that we call "government" to legally spew propaganda.
Then we have chickenshit commies like you that wants the public disarmed which has always been a major plank in the communist agenda. It's not gonna happen in your lifetime.
we live by rule of law, not by rule of paranoid delusions...
Lol please try and explain what you think that phrase meansthose were the days...
when a well regulated militia was necessary to the security of a free state.
but what is necessary to the security of a free state nowadays...........??
Lol please try and explain what you think that phrase means
i've seen your posts regarding word derivation and the regulation of a clock.
which does not change my question as to what is necessary to the security of a free state NOWADAYS.
