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.
Thank God this U.S. citizen has the right to keep and bear arms...
Store owner held at gunpoint flips the script, grabs own gun, sends crook sprinting from premises
We don’t have to piss on the U.S. Constitution to ensure children are safe...
School-security companies are thriving in the era of mass shootings
Crime plummets wherever citizens are permitted to carry firearms.Snitsar added that she might drop the class but still wondered if the professor “is aware crime on campus is down in the wake of the [campus carry] policy?”
We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems in our free States.
Seems like a legislative management problem.
None of that makes any sense.We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems in our free States.
Seems like a legislative management problem.
None of that makes any sense.We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems in our free States.
Seems like a legislative management problem.
The 2nd Amendment does not guarantee security. It simply limits the power of congress, and the states via the 14th amendment (apparently).
It orders the meaning of the words. The first clause expresses the context. It is not about individual liberty or natural rights.See, that’s your problem. You think words order other words to do something. The constitution orders the federal government, not the words ordering words. Words don’t do anything but convey a message. Words can’t tell other words what to do.Yes, it does.So, the first clause orders the second clause?Our Second Amendment has Always been about what the First Clause orders the Second Clause, to do.
The constitution direct the federal government and the states. Ultimately, it orders people, individuals, how to act or behave, for the benefit of individuals.
Did we forget the purpose of society?
It orders the meaning of the words. The first clause expresses the context. It is not about individual liberty or natural rights.See, that’s your problem. You think words order other words to do something. The constitution orders the federal government, not the words ordering words. Words don’t do anything but convey a message. Words can’t tell other words what to do.Yes, it does.So, the first clause orders the second clause?Our Second Amendment has Always been about what the First Clause orders the Second Clause, to do.
The constitution direct the federal government and the states. Ultimately, it orders people, individuals, how to act or behave, for the benefit of individuals.
Did we forget the purpose of society?
It orders the meaning of the words. The first clause expresses the context. It is not about individual liberty or natural rights.See, that’s your problem. You think words order other words to do something. The constitution orders the federal government, not the words ordering words. Words don’t do anything but convey a message. Words can’t tell other words what to do.Yes, it does.So, the first clause orders the second clause?Our Second Amendment has Always been about what the First Clause orders the Second Clause, to do.
The constitution direct the federal government and the states. Ultimately, it orders people, individuals, how to act or behave, for the benefit of individuals.
Did we forget the purpose of society?
You claim the amendments don't protect individual rights, yet won't deal with how the first obviously protects your rights as an individual to speak without being part of a regulated group.
each amendment is separate.It orders the meaning of the words. The first clause expresses the context. It is not about individual liberty or natural rights.See, that’s your problem. You think words order other words to do something. The constitution orders the federal government, not the words ordering words. Words don’t do anything but convey a message. Words can’t tell other words what to do.Yes, it does.So, the first clause orders the second clause?Our Second Amendment has Always been about what the First Clause orders the Second Clause, to do.
The constitution direct the federal government and the states. Ultimately, it orders people, individuals, how to act or behave, for the benefit of individuals.
Did we forget the purpose of society?
You claim the amendments don't protect individual rights, yet won't deal with how the first obviously protects your rights as an individual to speak without being part of a regulated group.
It's about the limit of congressional power.It orders the meaning of the words. The first clause expresses the context. It is not about individual liberty or natural rights.
That is bullshit.each amendment is separate.
There are no individual rights in our Second Amendment; they are plural and collective.
It's about the limit of congressional power.It orders the meaning of the words. The first clause expresses the context. It is not about individual liberty or natural rights.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.“I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials.”
— George Mason
Only in right wing fantasy, do collective rights not exist. It is about context. There are no individual rights. They are Plural and Collective.That is bullshit.each amendment is separate.
There are no individual rights in our Second Amendment; they are plural and collective.
There are no collective rights. Only idiots believe in collective rights that exist separate and distinct from individual rights.
The 2nd Amendment limits the power of congress and the federal government. Nothing more.
This has been the universal result every time conceal carry is approved...
Crime plummets wherever citizens are permitted to carry firearms.Snitsar added that she might drop the class but still wondered if the professor “is aware crime on campus is down in the wake of the [campus carry] policy?”
Guns allowed on campus leads prof to cancel office hours, declare ‘I no longer feel safe’: student
Na, not reallyeach amendment is separate.It orders the meaning of the words. The first clause expresses the context. It is not about individual liberty or natural rights.See, that’s your problem. You think words order other words to do something. The constitution orders the federal government, not the words ordering words. Words don’t do anything but convey a message. Words can’t tell other words what to do.Yes, it does.So, the first clause orders the second clause?
The constitution direct the federal government and the states. Ultimately, it orders people, individuals, how to act or behave, for the benefit of individuals.
Did we forget the purpose of society?
You claim the amendments don't protect individual rights, yet won't deal with how the first obviously protects your rights as an individual to speak without being part of a regulated group.
There are no individual rights in our Second Amendment; they are plural and collective.
People kill people not firearmsThis has been the universal result every time conceal carry is approved...
Crime plummets wherever citizens are permitted to carry firearms.Snitsar added that she might drop the class but still wondered if the professor “is aware crime on campus is down in the wake of the [campus carry] policy?”
Guns allowed on campus leads prof to cancel office hours, declare ‘I no longer feel safe’: student
Your article has nothing to do with showing crime on campus is down. No comprehensive study has ever concluded that more or less guns has anything to do with the increase or the decrease of gun crimes. But there was one historical time when life taught a very valuable lesson where almost everyone was armed on the streets and this is why cities and towns passed laws forbidding open carry and automatic hanging offense for using holdout weapons. Fewer guns has no affect at all. More guns within reason has no affect either. More Guns outside of reason will increase the murder rate. Learn from History or be doomed to repeat it.
Only in right wing fantasy, right wingers. They can't be the same or they would have the same words.Na, not reallyeach amendment is separate.It orders the meaning of the words. The first clause expresses the context. It is not about individual liberty or natural rights.See, that’s your problem. You think words order other words to do something. The constitution orders the federal government, not the words ordering words. Words don’t do anything but convey a message. Words can’t tell other words what to do.Yes, it does.
The constitution direct the federal government and the states. Ultimately, it orders people, individuals, how to act or behave, for the benefit of individuals.
Did we forget the purpose of society?
You claim the amendments don't protect individual rights, yet won't deal with how the first obviously protects your rights as an individual to speak without being part of a regulated group.
There are no individual rights in our Second Amendment; they are plural and collective.
The Second Amendment just like the First Amendment is all about individual rights and the privacy of those rights
