Massachusetts: This Is The Nation’s Toughest Gun Law

[danielpalos]

We should have no security problems in our free States. We have a Second Amendment.

So, the 2nd guarantees no security problems? Well, why do we have security problems? The 2nd didn't work....or you have misinterpreted it.

Which is more likely?

yes, it does. that which is declared Necessary to the security of a free State shall not be Infringed, when ensuring the security of our free States.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

yes, it does. that which is declared Necessary to the security of a free State shall not be Infringed, w

What the **** does that mean?

I swear to ******* Thor, you never explain ANYTHING. YOU JUST REPEAT SHIT.

EXPLAIN IT DUMBFUCK.

A - means one or sigpngular

Well-regulated - means properly functioning

militia - means a civilian army

Being - it is

Necessary - required

For- in favor of

The - the

Security - safety

Of - of

A- one

Free - liberated. Or don't cost nothing

State- a society organized under a government

The - the

Right - inalienable liberty that exists as part of an individual's being.

Of - of

The- the

People- individuals

To - to

Keep- possess

And - also

Bear - carry, hold. A big hairy mammal.

Arms- weapons

Shall - must

Not - not

Be - am, is are, was, were, become, feel, seem etc.

Infringed - limited, reduced, diminidhed


Now, reconstruct that to explai what the **** you think it means.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Reconstruction:

One properly-functioning civilian army is required for the safety of a liberated society organized under a government, the inalienable liberty of the individuals to possess and carry or hold weapons must not be diminished.

One heavily-restricted army of ordinary people is need to keep a society safe, the freedom to have weapons must be maintained.

An army of non-military individuals is needed to keep a free society safe, the freedom of humans to have weapons must not be fucked with.

So, how do we get to this bullshit:

An organized military is a requirement to secure a free state, the duty of the army of the group to take up weapons in definse of the U?S. must be enforced.

Is that what you're saying?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

A single healthy-constrained group of farmers are needed for the night guards of a no-cost condition of existence, the lateral position of the group of humans must not have tassels.

Is that ridiculous enough?

What abot this:

A no-cost condition of existence needs farmers who have a bunch of laws to obey, to their right-hand side, they can't have any of those tassley things.

I know. The 2nd is a Villiage People reference. The founders were Macho, Macho Men!!

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Or is it this:

States need properly functioning militia to remain free, so we (Congress) are not going to **** with the people's weapons (like the British Crown did with ours).

 

[Papageorgio]

Yes we do care of the law abiding poor can own a gun. Where they have to live they probably need it the most. The licensing fees, course fees, and other fees add up to hundreds of dollars and more.

Duh, how do you know they're "law abiding" if they don't meet the requirements to legally own a gun?

More of the guilty before proven innocent BS of the left.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

To remain free, States need well-armed citizens to make up a militia that is worth a shit, so we (Congress) will let civilians have any weapons they want.

 

[bgrouse]

States have the power to regulate arms.

Where in “…the right of the people…shall not be infringed.” do you find the authority for states to infringe the right thus addressed?

it specifically applies to well regulated militia of the People not the unorganized militia of the People.

Then it would say:

the right of the well regulated militia of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

But it doesn't. That red part exists only in your imagination and in the posts of people like me who like to ridicule retards like you.

The People are the Militia. You are either, well regulated or unorganized.

No, "people" is not the same as "militia." Try looking the two words up some time.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

A group of unpaid, amateur soldiers who are heavily restricted and taxed are necessary to guard no-cost the State, the obligation of the organized collective to be heavily restricted and taxed shall be maintained.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

No, "people" is not the same as "militia." Try looking the two words up some time.

This is an exercise in futility. He never looks at any sources or explains anything. He is a personified talking point.

 

[bgrouse]

We should have no security problems in our free States. We have a Second Amendment.

So, the 2nd guarantees no security problems? Well, why do we have security problems? The 2nd didn't work....or you have misinterpreted it.

Which is more likely?

that which is declared Necessary to the security of a free State shall not be Infringed

Then it would say simply:

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.

In fact, it would look like someone copied and pasted the right of the people to keep and bear Arms in the wrong place and forgot about it having not proofread the sentence. Your argument, unfortunately, falls apart given that there was no "copy and paste" when this was written, you clown!

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The right-hand side of the poeple's bodies can't have fringe tassles.

That MUST be the true meaning.

No injun clothing on the right side of your body. That was it.

 

[bgrouse]

No, "people" is not the same as "militia." Try looking the two words up some time.

This is an exercise in futility. He never looks at any sources or explains anything. He is a personified talking point.

It's only the anti-gun left that argues guns using something other than the second amendment text.

Tells you something doesn't it?

I wish they'd argue we should repeal the second amendment. I'd actually have a much harder time arguing against their position when their position isn't strictly cemented in delusions.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

A heavily taxed and red-taped group of unpaid non-pro mercenaries are needed to get free shit from government, no one shall use the pro-capitalist faction of the population's intellectual property or trade names without proper license.

That could work, no?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I am starting to run out of absurd possibilities that make more sense than danielpalos' buttfucked interpretation.

 

[bgrouse]

I am starting to run out of absurd possibilities that make more sense than danielpalos' buttfucked interpretation.

He should just post "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall be infringed."

That one is only off by one word.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I am starting to run out of absurd possibilities that make more sense than danielpalos' buttfucked interpretation.

He should just post "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall be infringed."

That one is only off by one word.

It is all an effort to circumvent, rather than face the near-impossible taks of amending.

It is the communist way.

 

[Skull Pilot]

You have to come out sometime

Completely safe right now. Floor it into the building, moron...

Nope I'll just drink a cup of coffee and wait here with the motor running like I said you have to come out sometime

We'll see how easy it is to avoid a truck with an 8 foot snow plow

Couldn’t be easier, hit the building if you wish.

So you're never coming out huh?

*****

Completely safe, sorry loser.

If you are completely safe why are you so afraid of guns?

*****

 

[Lakhota]

God bless Massachusetts!

 

[Pop23]

I am starting to run out of absurd possibilities that make more sense than danielpalos' buttfucked interpretation.

Oh, they got a million of em! and as soon as a late night comic uses one, they will be back.