Registration of firearms leads to confiscation

[bigrebnc1775]

Criminals versus laws your turn.

Rights Trump's it all

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I hope you realize how ridiculous that statement is.

So, actually, you don't care about the well-being of the American population as long as it is governed by "the right".

Fuck your well being

 

[GLASNOST]

So, actually, you don't care about the well-being of the American population as long as it is governed by "the right".

Fuck your well being

It's not my well-being - it's yours - and it is high time that you admit to yourself that you are a Fascist sympathiser. You'd have loved Adolf Hiter and Benito Mussolini.

 

[Auld Phart]

It's not my well-being - it's yours - and it is high time that you admit to yourself that you are a Fascist sympathiser. You'd have loved Adolf Hiter and Benito Mussolini.

You'd have loved Adolf Hiter and Benito Mussolini.

not nearly as much as you would have...

After all, the three of you share the same views on gun ownership

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It's not my well-being - it's yours - and it is high time that you admit to yourself that you are a Fascist sympathiser. You'd have loved Adolf Hiter and Benito Mussolini.

F U C K your well being get in reality and buy a gun to defend yourself.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

not nearly as much as you would have...

After all, the three of you share the same views on gun ownership

Pretty much on target.

 

[GLASNOST]

F U C K your well being get in reality and buy a gun to defend yourself.

Why would I need to defend myself? The only would-be threat anywhere in the vicinity of my LZ is you, and a paper clip is all I need to neutralize you.

 

[beagle9]

You are lost in your own "escape route". If you remove the gun "in time" you'll have saved the lives of all of those people I referred to in my earlier post. Yes, even if removing the gun ends up killing the owner because of his resistance to giving it up voluntarily. That's one life taken ..... untold numbers of lives saved.

The subject of "killing a lot of people" in the process of removing guns isn't mine. I am merely responding to it by logic. But then it wasn't you who introduced the notion of "killing a lot of people" either. Maybe he's the one who should be defending himself, not you.

Think about where Putin might be if the citizen's in Russia were armed to the teeth. He might be in his own gulag by now........ Do you think that he'd be easily manipulating that citizenry to not stand up to him and his war mongering if they were armed like American's are, and do you think that he would be successful at locking all those anti-war protestor's up so easily ? This is why part of America's check's and balances included a well armed regulated militia in the constitution, and it also said that the citizen's right to bear arms was not to be infringed upon. End of story.

 

[GLASNOST]

Think about where Putin might be if the citizen's in Russia were armed to the teeth.

OK, I’m thinking …..

He might be in his own gulag by now........

Why is that?

Do you think that he'd be easily manipulating that citizenry to not stand up to him and his war mongering if they were armed like American's are ...

Oh, my goodness! That’s a bad analogy and you’ve just shot yourself in the foot and disproved your own logic. “War mongering”, you say? Now, what country can you think of that is the worst “war-mongerer” as we speak? ……..... Time is up, the answer is the USA. B-b-b-b-b-but Americans are “armed to the teeth” so how is it that the president isn’t “in his own gulag by now”? There is something extremely wrong with your logic. Don’t you agree?

This is why part of America's check's and balances included a well armed regulated militia in the constitution ...

This makes no sense at all.

... it also said that the citizen's right to bear arms was not to be infringed upon.

So, you believe that if the Constitution (or that particular clause) were to be amended that you would still have a “citizen's right to bear arms” and that it would be “uninfringe upon”? Excuse me for laughing but that kind of belief is awfully childish. Do you not know what an “amendment” is? What about "repeal”, do you know what that means?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Why would I need to defend myself? The only would-be threat anywhere in the vicinity of my LZ is you, and a paper clip is all I need to neutralize you.

Good luck nutbag.

 

[GLASNOST]

Good luck nutbag.

You don't know as much as you think you do. I guess you've never heard of "experience".

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You don't know as much as you think you do. I guess you've never heard of "experience".

Sure it's called law enforcement and military experience.

 

[GLASNOST]

Sure it's called law enforcement and military experience.

I've got the military experience and you've got a hankering to disobey the law so you're screwed either way. It's criminals like you who ought to be denied access to guns in the first place and it is you OF COURSE who is screaming to keep your pop gun. It's as typcial as anyone can expect.

 

[Auld Phart]

OK, I’m thinking …..

Why is that?

Oh, my goodness! That’s a bad analogy and you’ve just shot yourself in the foot and disproved your own logic. “War mongering”, you say? Now, what country can you think of that is the worst “war-mongerer” as we speak? ……..... Time is up, the answer is the USA. B-b-b-b-b-but Americans are “armed to the teeth” so how is it that the president isn’t “in his own gulag by now”? There is something extremely wrong with your logic. Don’t you agree?

This makes no sense at all.

So, you believe that if the Constitution (or that particular clause) were to be amended that you would still have a “citizen's right to bear arms” and that it would be “uninfringe upon”? Excuse me for laughing but that kind of belief is awfully childish. Do you not know what an “amendment” is? What about "repeal”, do you know what that means?

What about "repeal”, do you know what that means?

Yes,

it means 2/3s of each house of Congress, (66 members the Senate, 290 members of the House) and 2/3s of the states, (38). have agreed to make a change to a current amendment.


Not going to happen
do you understand how hard that would be?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Yes,

it means 2/3s of each house of Congress, (66 members the Senate, 290 members of the House) and 2/3s of the states, (35). have agreed to make a change to a current amendment.

3/4 of the states. 38.
The 13 states most likely to vote against a repeal of the 2nd hold about 7% of the US population.

 

[GLASNOST]

3/4 of the states. 38.
The 13 states most likely to vote against a repeal of the 2nd hold about 7% of the US population.

Did you say what you think you said?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Did you say what you think you said?

What part did you choose to not understand?

 

[Auld Phart]

What part did you choose to not understand?

the more he responds, the more I'm convinced he's a troll.

 

[GLASNOST]

What part did you choose to not understand?

I have misunderstood NOTHING, neither intentionally nor unintentionally. I am asking if what you wrote is what you really wanted to say. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't know how you found something confrontational in my question.

 

[M14 Shooter]

the more he responds, the more I'm convinced he's a troll.

It -is- painfully obvious.