Universal background checks... really?

[candycorn]

it’s not in the constitution. Neither is the Air Force. Neither is FEMA or NASA.

not sure what script you’re reading

How is the air force a "right"?

never made that argument.

I did point out that it too is unconstitutional.
Do try to keep up

????????????????????????? Sorry, response did not compute. Elaborate.

I’m not surprised

If you cannot explain your position, don't expect others to understand it for you.

I am not shocked at your lack of comprehension.

 

[iceberg]

show me in the constitution where it says background checks will be conducted.



suddenly we're going off script, aren't we?

it’s not in the constitution. Neither is the Air Force. Neither is FEMA or NASA.

not sure what script you’re reading

How is the air force a "right"?

never made that argument.

I did point out that it too is unconstitutional.
Do try to keep up

well we were discussing the constitution and our rights. if the air force is not a part of it, why the hell did you bring it up?

please try to make sense.

Pointing out things that are necessary are not in the Constitution.

While debating constitutional rights.

Bye.

 

[candycorn]

No what I believe is that rights have limits. So Background checks to buy weapons are perfectly constitutional.

STILL waiting for you to cite the ruling from the USSC to this effect.

Try holding your breath too. Lol

 

[candycorn]

it’s not in the constitution. Neither is the Air Force. Neither is FEMA or NASA.

not sure what script you’re reading

How is the air force a "right"?

never made that argument.

I did point out that it too is unconstitutional.
Do try to keep up

well we were discussing the constitution and our rights. if the air force is not a part of it, why the hell did you bring it up?

please try to make sense.

Pointing out things that are necessary are not in the Constitution.

While debating constitutional rights.

Bye.

yes.

your surrender is accepted

 

[iceberg]

How is the air force a "right"?

never made that argument.

I did point out that it too is unconstitutional.
Do try to keep up

well we were discussing the constitution and our rights. if the air force is not a part of it, why the hell did you bring it up?

please try to make sense.

Pointing out things that are necessary are not in the Constitution.

While debating constitutional rights.

Bye.

yes.

your surrender is accepted

Heh yea. That's what it is.

 

[candycorn]

never made that argument.

I did point out that it too is unconstitutional.
Do try to keep up

well we were discussing the constitution and our rights. if the air force is not a part of it, why the hell did you bring it up?

please try to make sense.

Pointing out things that are necessary are not in the Constitution.

While debating constitutional rights.

Bye.

yes.

your surrender is accepted

Heh yea. That's what it is.

Hey if the litmus test of something’s value to society is whether it’s in the Constitution…we have to start tossing all sorts of stuff overboard.

That you brought it up and are now running from it is delicious.

 

[iceberg]

well we were discussing the constitution and our rights. if the air force is not a part of it, why the hell did you bring it up?

please try to make sense.

Pointing out things that are necessary are not in the Constitution.

While debating constitutional rights.

Bye.

yes.

your surrender is accepted

Heh yea. That's what it is.

Hey if the litmus test of something’s value to society is whether it’s in the Constitution…we have to start tossing all sorts of stuff overboard.

That you brought it up and are now running from it is delicious.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

How is the air force a "right"?

never made that argument.

I did point out that it too is unconstitutional.
Do try to keep up

????????????????????????? Sorry, response did not compute. Elaborate.

I’m not surprised

If you cannot explain your position, don't expect others to understand it for you.

I am not shocked at your lack of comprehension.

Nobody here seems to be able to understand your gibberish; maybe it's you with the problem.

I was willing to read your thoughts to see if you had anything productive or worthwhile. Personal slights toward me were neither. Maybe you should try reading the Constitution and then come back and see if you have the capability to have a civil conversation.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Pointing out things that are necessary are not in the Constitution.

1: You cannot demonstrate the necessity of any of the inane restrictions you seek to lay on the law abiding
2: There is a very strong argument for the position that if it is not in the constitution, it is not necessary.

 

[M14 Shooter]

No what I believe is that rights have limits. So Background checks to buy weapons are perfectly constitutional.

STILL waiting for you to cite the ruling from the USSC to this effect.

Try holding your breath too. Lol

Thank you for demonstrating you cannot cite a ruling from the USSC to support your claim.
Concession accepted.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

How is the air force a "right"?

never made that argument.

I did point out that it too is unconstitutional.
Do try to keep up

well we were discussing the constitution and our rights. if the air force is not a part of it, why the hell did you bring it up?

please try to make sense.

Pointing out things that are necessary are not in the Constitution.

While debating constitutional rights.

Bye.

yes.

your surrender is accepted

So if people quit arguing against idiocy, you win?

 

[iceberg]

never made that argument.

I did point out that it too is unconstitutional.
Do try to keep up

well we were discussing the constitution and our rights. if the air force is not a part of it, why the hell did you bring it up?

please try to make sense.

Pointing out things that are necessary are not in the Constitution.

While debating constitutional rights.

Bye.

yes.

your surrender is accepted

So if people quit arguing against idiocy, you win?

Strange people who don't want to discuss issues but rather win some mythical internet trophy.

Fuck him.

 

[basquebromance]

i have 10 guns. if beto takes 10 guns from me, how many do i have left?

10! i have 10 guns left because i lied to that commie bastard!

 

[Porter Rockwell]

well we were discussing the constitution and our rights. if the air force is not a part of it, why the hell did you bring it up?

please try to make sense.

Pointing out things that are necessary are not in the Constitution.

While debating constitutional rights.

Bye.

yes.

your surrender is accepted

So if people quit arguing against idiocy, you win?

Strange people who don't want to discuss issues but rather win some mythical internet trophy.

Fuck him.

I fully agree with your assessment. I'm finding a few posters that use the same tactic and then are so dishonest that they then claim you agreed with them and they run off thinking they "won" something.

I'm looking in; I don't know you. So, it's not like I read that and had a bias toward you. That poster failed to state any kind of case and ended up losing any pretend debate and destroyed any hope of a civil conversation. Then, he / she destroyed their own credibility by unilaterally proclaiming victory when two people were asking that individual to make a point since none was made. Allegations and opinions don't equal facts.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

i have 10 guns. if beto takes 10 guns from me, how many do i have left?

10! i have 10 guns left because i lied to that commie bastard!

The difference between Beto and ALL the other candidates from both sides is that he was honest and gave up the end game. There are NO pro gun leaders or even current candidates that understand the Second Amendment. The few who proclaim to be pro-gun are always looking for novel ways to compromise on gun control when they have options to reduce shootings WITHOUT gun control. The fact that they will not entertain those options tells me they are willing to accept gun control on an incremental basis.

 

[basquebromance]

i have 10 guns. if beto takes 10 guns from me, how many do i have left?

10! i have 10 guns left because i lied to that commie bastard!

The difference between Beto and ALL the other candidates from both sides is that he was honest and gave up the end game. There are NO pro gun leaders or even current candidates that understand the Second Amendment. The few who proclaim to be pro-gun are always looking for novel ways to compromise on gun control when they have options to reduce shootings WITHOUT gun control. The fact that they will not entertain those options tells me they are willing to accept gun control on an incremental basis.

Beto should drop out and run in texas senate before later saying coulda woulda shoulda

 

[Porter Rockwell]

i have 10 guns. if beto takes 10 guns from me, how many do i have left?

10! i have 10 guns left because i lied to that commie bastard!

The difference between Beto and ALL the other candidates from both sides is that he was honest and gave up the end game. There are NO pro gun leaders or even current candidates that understand the Second Amendment. The few who proclaim to be pro-gun are always looking for novel ways to compromise on gun control when they have options to reduce shootings WITHOUT gun control. The fact that they will not entertain those options tells me they are willing to accept gun control on an incremental basis.

Beto should drop out and run in texas senate before later saying coulda woulda shoulda

Don't encourage him. Maybe someone with a brain will run.

 

[basquebromance]

i have 10 guns. if beto takes 10 guns from me, how many do i have left?

10! i have 10 guns left because i lied to that commie bastard!

The difference between Beto and ALL the other candidates from both sides is that he was honest and gave up the end game. There are NO pro gun leaders or even current candidates that understand the Second Amendment. The few who proclaim to be pro-gun are always looking for novel ways to compromise on gun control when they have options to reduce shootings WITHOUT gun control. The fact that they will not entertain those options tells me they are willing to accept gun control on an incremental basis.

Beto should drop out and run in texas senate before later saying coulda woulda shoulda

Don't encourage him. Maybe someone with a brain will run.

on the Democrat side? there arent any!

 

[candycorn]

never made that argument.

I did point out that it too is unconstitutional.
Do try to keep up

well we were discussing the constitution and our rights. if the air force is not a part of it, why the hell did you bring it up?

please try to make sense.

Pointing out things that are necessary are not in the Constitution.

While debating constitutional rights.

Bye.

yes.

your surrender is accepted

So if people quit arguing against idiocy, you win?

when you are proven incorrect using your own standards, you lose.

ive demonstrated that constitutional rights are not absolute.

So yes, I won.

thus there is a basis in law for expansion of the background check program.

 

[M14 Shooter]

when you are proven incorrect using your own standards, you lose.
ive demonstrated that constitutional rights are not absolute
So yes, I won.
thus there is a basis in law for expansion of the background check program.

Unsupportable nonsense.
As per the norm.