Virginia - This Is Only The Beginning

[alang1216]

I don't want to live where anyone can legally walk into my school or office carrying a ma deuce. It would make me very unhappy (an inalienable right I have).

So then speech that makes you unhappy should be illegal as well? Until someone slanders you with their speech, they are free to say what they want. A person should be able to posses gun. If they hurt you with the gun they will have to answer to the courts as to why. We can't ban guns just because some people are scared of them.

So you include a ma deuce in your definition of a 'gun' should be able to possess?

 

[alang1216]

There are extremists on both sides, I'm not one of them. If you can pass a background check that verifies you don't have a criminal mental health history, and you've been through some training in the safe use of your weapons, I can't imagine any law I'd support that would take away your guns.

I know of a cop who was very well trained in gun safety. He was a decorated cop (received recognition and awards.) He no doubt passed at least one "background" check and who knows what other kinds of psychological exams. . .

We was married to an extremely good looking, smart, LOVED police officer, friend of my whole family.

They divorced.

She was scared of him.

She got a restraining order.

He broke into her house, shot her in the head and then offed himself.

I have no faith or security in your much blathered about "background" checks.

Perfect is the enemy of good

 

[alang1216]

Well it doesn't matter what you consider there is no written or implied right to safety in the Constitution.

Pretty arrogant considering gun manufacturing in this country is protected by a law that can be repealed by voters just like me. If that law goes, so do the manufacturers.

Even if this nonsense were true it does nothing to remove the 400+ million firearms that are already in private hands, dingus. Whatcha gonna do about those?

Not a thing.

 

[alang1216]

You have no argument for normal people owning and carrying guns.....since normal people owning and carrying guns does not increase gun crime.....

That is the point...

Correct, I don't have an argument against normal people owning guns. My point is that I would just like to know that there is some mechanism to ensure that only "normal" people own guns. Locking people up after they have committed a crime is not preferable to preventing that crime in the first place.

 

[alang1216]

If they hurt you with the gun they will have to answer to the courts as to why.

Doesn't do me much good now does it?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You have no argument for normal people owning and carrying guns.....since normal people owning and carrying guns does not increase gun crime.....

That is the point...

Correct, I don't have an argument against normal people owning guns. My point is that I would just like to know that there is some mechanism to ensure that only "normal" people own guns. Locking people up after they have committed a crime is not preferable to preventing that crime in the first place.

What is "normal"? How do you determine it? How do you go about denying someone a Constitutionally protected right without them committing an action worthy of such a thing?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The comments are the most interesting part. I believe Northam and friends truly do not realize what they will awaken.

Dems deliver how-to lesson in 'quid pro quo' ... on guns - WND

Kill a commie for mommy. That is the only solution.

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

You have no argument for normal people owning and carrying guns.....since normal people owning and carrying guns does not increase gun crime.....

That is the point...

Correct, I don't have an argument against normal people owning guns. My point is that I would just like to know that there is some mechanism to ensure that only "normal" people own guns. Locking people up after they have committed a crime is not preferable to preventing that crime in the first place.

So, preemptive prosecution is your preference?

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

If they hurt you with the gun they will have to answer to the courts as to why.

Doesn't do me much good now does it?

Arm yourself or shut the **** up.



We would all be better off of some people would SHUT THE **** UP, but that's not the best way to defeat their bullshit speech

Why do you hate freedom and/or refuse to take precautions necessary for freedom to prevail? Do you want us all living in jail cells so we can be safe?

.

 

[Norman]

The comments are the most interesting part. I believe Northam and friends truly do not realize what they will awaken.

Dems deliver how-to lesson in 'quid pro quo' ... on guns - WND

They won't get the guns.

They will get good portion of the bullets.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Well it doesn't matter what you consider there is no written or implied right to safety in the Constitution.

Pretty arrogant considering gun manufacturing in this country is protected by a law that can be repealed by voters just like me. If that law goes, so do the manufacturers.

So, you want to undo centuries of tort jurisprudence so you can file suits against gun manufactures for...what? Making a product that performs as advertised?

Your entire way of thinking is completely fucked up and retarded. Please never vote.

.

 

[Flash]

There will be thousands of people from out of state supporting their brothers and sisters from Virginia attending the freedom rally on Friday.

There are a couple of dozen from my area, many more from the rest of Florida.

It is going to be a huge armed rally. We need to send a message to this Democrat filth that they can't take away our Constitutional rights without dire consequences.

God bless the people in Virginia for standing up to this destruction of Liberty by the Democrats.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

There are extremists on both sides, I'm not one of them. If you can pass a background check that verifies you don't have a criminal mental health history, and you've been through some training in the safe use of your weapons, I can't imagine any law I'd support that would take away your guns.

I know of a cop who was very well trained in gun safety. He was a decorated cop (received recognition and awards.) He no doubt passed at least one "background" check and who knows what other kinds of psychological exams. . .

We was married to an extremely good looking, smart, LOVED police officer, friend of my whole family.

They divorced.

She was scared of him.

She got a restraining order.

He broke into her house, shot her in the head and then offed himself.

I have no faith or security in your much blathered about "background" checks.

Perfect is the enemy of good

Preemption is the enemy of liberty.

.

 

[alang1216]

You have no argument for normal people owning and carrying guns.....since normal people owning and carrying guns does not increase gun crime.....

That is the point...

Correct, I don't have an argument against normal people owning guns. My point is that I would just like to know that there is some mechanism to ensure that only "normal" people own guns. Locking people up after they have committed a crime is not preferable to preventing that crime in the first place.

What is "normal"? How do you determine it? How do you go about denying someone a Constitutionally protected right without them committing an action worthy of such a thing?

Normal people don't have a history of crime or violence. Normal people don't belong to terrorist or hate groups. Normal people don't have a history of mental issues.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You have no argument for normal people owning and carrying guns.....since normal people owning and carrying guns does not increase gun crime.....

That is the point...

Correct, I don't have an argument against normal people owning guns. My point is that I would just like to know that there is some mechanism to ensure that only "normal" people own guns. Locking people up after they have committed a crime is not preferable to preventing that crime in the first place.

What is "normal"? How do you determine it? How do you go about denying someone a Constitutionally protected right without them committing an action worthy of such a thing?

Normal people don't have a history of crime or violence. Normal people don't belong to terrorist or hate groups. Normal people don't have a history of mental issues.

What sort of mental issues?

 

[Flash]

You have no argument for normal people owning and carrying guns.....since normal people owning and carrying guns does not increase gun crime.....

That is the point...

Correct, I don't have an argument against normal people owning guns. My point is that I would just like to know that there is some mechanism to ensure that only "normal" people own guns. Locking people up after they have committed a crime is not preferable to preventing that crime in the first place.

The problem is that you don't want the stupid Liberals defining who is "normal" and who is not.

For instance, according to a report filed by that asshole Obama's Justice Department in 2009 White gun owning Christian veterans are potential terrorists.

The root of all gun control is racism with Whites determining that Blacks should not be normal gun owners because they are a potential threat.

We don't need more gun control. In fact we should repeal most of what we already have. What we need is for the filthy government to stop infringing upon our Constitutional rights.

We also need for the chickenshit courts to start applying strict scrutiny to the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms like they apply to other individual Constitutional rights. That would fix a lot of this stupid government infringement.

 

[alang1216]

There will be thousands of people from out of state supporting their brothers and sisters from Virginia attending the freedom rally on Friday.

There are a couple of dozen from my area, many more from the rest of Florida.

It is going to be a huge armed rally. We need to send a message to this Democrat filth that they can't take away our Constitutional rights without dire consequences.

God bless the people in Virginia for standing up to this destruction of Liberty by the Democrats.

Why don't you let the people of Virginia decide what is best for Virginia and let the people of Florida decide what is best for Florida?

 

[alang1216]

Normal people don't have a history of crime or violence. Normal people don't belong to terrorist or hate groups. Normal people don't have a history of mental issues.

What sort of mental issues?

Ones that might make them a danger to others. If you want more detail consult a doctor.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Normal people don't have a history of crime or violence. Normal people don't belong to terrorist or hate groups. Normal people don't have a history of mental issues.

What sort of mental issues?

Ones that might make them a danger to others. If you want more detail consult a doctor.

Why don't we just assume that everyone has the potential to snap, and everybody arm up. The founders did.

.

 

[SweetTea]

You have no argument for normal people owning and carrying guns.....since normal people owning and carrying guns does not increase gun crime.....

That is the point...

Correct, I don't have an argument against normal people owning guns. My point is that I would just like to know that there is some mechanism to ensure that only "normal" people own guns. Locking people up after they have committed a crime is not preferable to preventing that crime in the first place.

What is "normal"? How do you determine it? How do you go about denying someone a Constitutionally protected right without them committing an action worthy of such a thing?

Normal people don't have a history of crime or violence. Normal people don't belong to terrorist or hate groups. Normal people don't have a history of mental issues.

What sort of mental issues?

Gender dysphoria (GID) is mental disorder. Should they be on the no-gun list? The list of what are considered mental disorders is very fluid and, like it or not, politics play a role.