If Liberals/Democrats Still Can't See the Need for an ARMED Population, They're Beyond Help

[Edgetho]

Only a coward needs an AR-15 with a large capacity magazine…..or someone who wants to shoot up a school full of six year olds

So you're calling everybody that owns one a coward? That's what you wrote. Or did you mean our Soldiers and Sailors that carry them?

I know a lot of men that would love for you to say that to their faces. A couple of them are Cops. One is a retired SEAL Team 6 (DEVGRU) operator. A couple are retired UFC fighters (not gonna drop any names) but I love how brave you are in the anonymity of a Message Board.

You are a scumbag. A total piece of shit that should be banned as a service to human decency. And as an improvement to the Message Board

 

[BrokeLoser]

Only a coward needs an AR-15 with a large capacity magazine…..or someone who wants to shoot up a school full of six year olds

Only a total pussy or deranged sicko with bad intentions doesn’t trust himself with an AR-15 with a high-capacity magazine.
Us legit folks NEED whatever we think we need.
Remember, there is nothing confusing about “shall not be infringed”

bdtex

 

[BrokeLoser]

Has no bearing on what I posted

Your whining is noted

Huh…WTF?
It is a perfect mockery of your loony-ass post.
You are trying to frame the 2nd in such a way that would limit your rights.
What fucked in the head wacko wants fewer rights?

bdtex

 

[Curried Goats]

Only a total pussy or deranged sicko with bad intentions doesn’t trust himself with an AR-15 with a high-capacity magazine.
Us legit folks NEED whatever we think we need.
Remember, there is nothing confusing about “shall not be infringed”

bdtex

Nothing really confusing about the words "A well regulated militia......" either.

 

[rightwinger]

So you're calling everybody that owns one a coward?

Yes

 

[rightwinger]

Only a total pussy or deranged sicko with bad intentions doesn’t trust himself with an AR-15 with a high-capacity magazine.
Us legit folks NEED whatever we think we need.
Remember, there is nothing confusing about “shall not be infringed”

bdtex

Comes in handy for hunting squirrels or slaughtering young children

 

[Edgetho]

Comes in handy for hunting squirrels or slaughtering young children

You're too closed-minded, not to mention fucking stupid, to bother with anymore. Say 'hello' to Lakhota in my ignore room.

 

[rightwinger]

You're too closed-minded, not to mention fucking stupid, to bother with anymore. Say 'hello' to Lakhota in my ignore room.

Please…..PLEASE
Not that!

 

[BrokeLoser]

Comes in handy for hunting squirrels or slaughtering young children

Republicans hunt squirrels….Democrats, particularly dark Democrats hunt people.

bdtex

 

[rightwinger]

Republicans hunt squirrels….Democrats, particularly dark Democrats hunt people.
View attachment 843940
bdtex

not biting

 

[BrokeLoser]

not biting

I wouldn’t if I were you…you’ll just lose more credibility.

bdtex

 

[rightwinger]

I wouldn’t if I were you…you’ll just lose more credibility.
View attachment 843941
bdtex

Sorry Skippy
Still not biting

 

[Edgetho]

Republicans hunt squirrels….Democrats, particularly dark Democrats hunt people.

bdtex

A lot of those people were born without hope.

dimocrap scum ran Black Men out of the household with the welfare rules in the 60's that are still with us today in large part.

If there is a man in the house, it is very difficult to get welfare benefits. So Mama kicks Daddy out and she gets more money.

In the 50's Blacks had roughly the same Out-of-Wedlock birth rate and about the same divorce rate.

Without a Man in the house to control a young boy (young man) he's going to run wild. It's happening in White neighborhoods now, too. bigly

dimocrap scum destroyed the family unit on purpose with the goal of displacing it with The All-Powerful State.

They're working on destroying Churches too. And replacing them with The State.

dimocraps are NOT communists, they are Fascists. Which is similar to communism with some notable distinctions. The most glaring of which is communism doesn't allow for government at all. None. It is supposed to have 'withered' away.

dimocrap scum WANTED communism but they got distracted long the way and went full-fascist on us in 1982. Fascists LOVE Big Government. True communists actually hate government

 

[BrokeLoser]

Nothing really confusing about the words "A well regulated militia......" either.

Our great founders were referring to We The Armed People as that well regulated militia, they wanted you to be armed to prevent a government from turning tyrannical.
A "militia" is comprised of civilians whom are NOT under the command of government. We all learned that by third grade...you didn't?
The founders intent is made crystal clear by the third and fourth phrase.
“the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Let me know what else you’d like me to teach you?

rightwinger

 

[sartre play]

If every democrat or liberal thought like you there would be no Dem or libs with guns yet that is not the case.

AGREE, ALSO IF GUN OWNERs Were WELL TRAINED & HAD RESEPCT FOR GUNS, and awareness that not every one is able to be responsible enough to own one.

 

[rightwinger]

Our great founders were referring to We The Armed People as that well regulated militia, they wanted you to be armed to prevent a government from turning tyrannical.

Bull Shit
Our Founders knew exactly what a “Well Regulated Militia” was and it wasn’t a bunch of random gun owners.
Well Regulated Militias were used throughout the Revolution. They were organized, trained and had supplies to fight if needed. They were under the control of their communities and state. They were not independent fighting units.

And no, the role of the militia was not to overturn a tyrannical government

 

[BrokeLoser]

Bull Shit
Our Founders knew exactly what a “Well Regulated Militia” was and it wasn’t a bunch of random gun owners.
Well Regulated Militias were used throughout the Revolution. They were organized, trained and had supplies to fight if needed. They were under the control of their communities and state. They were not independent fighting units.

And no, the role of the militia was not to overturn a tyrannical government

LefTard Logic:
”Listen here freedom lover….As a freedom denier I know exactly what our framers intent was….how dare you expect rights.”

Again….the founders intent is made crystal clear by the third and fourth phrase.
“the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

 

[rightwinger]

Again….the founders intent is made crystal clear by the third and fourth phrase.
“the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

If that was their intent they would have left it at that

They were clearly talking about the need to arm their militias given there was no standing Army

 

[Curried Goats]

Our great founders were referring to We The Armed People as that well regulated militia, they wanted you to be armed to prevent a government from turning tyrannical.
A "militia" is comprised of civilians whom are NOT under the command of government. We all learned that by third grade...you didn't?
The founders intent is made crystal clear by the third and fourth phrase.
“the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Let me know what else you’d like me to teach you?

rightwinger

The idea that the Founders wanted to arm the populace in the event that the populace decided that the Founders themselves were Tyrants is stupid. It says.... "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,"..... not "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free country or free Republic".

The concern for people like George Mason, (Virginia's second largest Plantation owner, i.e. slave owner right behind George Washington) who argued on behalf of the second amendment, was that this country had no standing army and that southern slave owning States couldn't wait for the federal government to convene and raise a militia in time to put down slave revolts.

The government protecting the right of citizens to arm themselves to fight the government doesn't make a lick of sense but the necessity of having an armed populace when you're keeping millions of people in forced servitude and bondage is immediately clear. Especially when being advocated for by slavers.

 

[BrokeLoser]

The idea that the Founders wanted to arm the populace in the event that the populace decided that the Founders themselves were Tyrants is stupid. It says.... "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,"..... not "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free country or free Republic".

The concern for people like George Mason, (Virginia's second largest Plantation owner, i.e. slave owner right behind George Washington) who argued on behalf of the second amendment, was that this country had no standing army and that southern slave owning States couldn't wait for the federal government to convene and raise a militia in time to put down slave revolts.

The government protecting the right of citizens to arm themselves to fight the government doesn't make a lick of sense but the necessity of having an armed populace when you're keeping millions of people in forced servitude and bondage is immediately clear. Especially when being advocated for by slavers.

That’s a cool feel good theory for rightwinger and the rest of the freedom haters…but no, our founders fled monarchy and tyranny, they fought wars, they knew that the people of a nation run by the people had to be armed to keep themselves from being controlled by rogue government and the armies of a rogue government.