Zone1 We need a left vs. right experiment

[Bitterhook]

Tell us about Arkansas.

You seem tube far more interested in Arkansas than Vermont for whatever stupid reason you find necessary.

While on the other hand I am not in the least bit compelled to entertain your absolute nonsense further than telling you to believe whatever you want, because I am fairly certain you will do whatever is necessary to accomplish that.

 

[Bitterhook]

Again, this country was founded by slave owners who wanted the right to exterminate the natives for their land.

you do have a point about other countries following our lead, though. When Hitler was devising Concentration Camps, he used Indian Reservations as a model.

Let's get off our high horse, and admit that we have a lot of problems. One of them is gun violence. The other is dysfunctional government.

Nobody is granting you nor the federal government to power to tell us what horse to ride you nitwit, so again just stop pretending we are any other nation on the face of the earth, because we aren't should never be and probably won't ever be unless authoritarian fascists progressive liberals like you take over and destroy our nation.

 

[Zincwarrior]

You seem tube far more interested in Arkansas than Vermont for whatever stupid reason you find necessary.

While on the other hand I am not in the least bit compelled to entertain your absolute nonsense further than telling you to believe whatever you want, because I am fairly certain you will do whatever is necessary to accomplish that.

Because Arkansas is a shit hole.

 

[Bitterhook]

Because Arkansas is a shit hole.

So are about twenty thousand or more other locations all over the nation, so what?

Frankly, there are some very nice places in Arkansas I visit on occasion, but guess what, I am not talking about Little Rock or even Hot Springs. There are some places I really like in Alabama as well, but you can rest assured I am damn sure not talking about Mobile.

Edit:
To be fair I really like Grand Isle, Vermont, and there is a great place to eat there on Lake Champlain but wouldn't be caught dead in Burlington not too far down the road. The same way I may go to Knoxville, Pigeon Forge or Gatlinburg, Tennessee, but I am damn sure skipping Memphis. I have even visited the Texas Hill Country a few times and never even thought about going to 'Keeping It Weird' Austin.

Nice places and shitholes everywhere, and they all tend to have something in common.

 

[postman]

unless they agreed to donate the money, which they did,,

womp womp,,

Read it again

The government is not holding the function because the center is not entirely funded by the government.
just stop making things up to support your complete misunderstanding of the law.

The argument is that if not entirely paid for by the government, it becomes non-government, or "private"

By that logic, when Trump builds his new Ballroom onto the White House. Whoever donated the money to build it, OWNS IT.

 

[Zincwarrior]

So are about twenty thousand or more other locations all over the nation, so what?

Frankly, there are some very nice places in Arkansas I visit on occasion, but guess what, I am not talking about Little Rock or even Hot Springs. There are some places I really like in Alabama as well, but you can rest assured I am damn sure not talking about Mobile.

No don't get me wrong, there are many beautiful places there. However economically, educationally and health care wise its at the bottom of rankings.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/arkansas

 

[Bitterhook]

No don't get me wrong, there are many beautiful places there. However economically, educationally and health care wise its at the bottom of rankings.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/arkansas

View attachment 1199117

You simply have not followed the conversation, or even attempted to do anything other than push what I have already addressed as absolute nonsense in regard to premise of the thread as discussed in the OP.

State statistics based on scores that include every location in the state, and individual locations not governed by state appointed officials, whether or not the state is blue or red, will do absolutely nothing about a completely shitty blue or red run metro area (or five for that matter), absolutely destroying the state's numbers with little to no representation of much of anything else going on in the state or it's statewide representation in legislature.

This is something you should have learned in statistics, it is not that hard to understand, and you keep trying to avoid it for no other point than to promote irresponsible and disingenuous political nonsense.

However, I am not blaming you as much as I am blaming the people who provide you with the insufficient data, the media that frames it into answering a question it doesn't, and promote it as intelligent research, whether or not the nitwits that give it to you even understand the fatal flaws in it.

Because I am certain that you honestly think you have a point to make, when I have already dismissed anything you are trying to express as being in the least bit meaningful in reference to addressing the subject of the OP.

 

[Bitterhook]

Read it again



The argument is that if not entirely paid for by the government, it becomes non-government, or "private"

The argument is simply the result of you wanting to argue a moot point, but that seems to be common in your case.

 

[progressive hunter]

Read it again



The argument is that if not entirely paid for by the government, it becomes non-government, or "private"

read what again??

are you ever going to tell us what you mean by regulate or what militias have to do with the peoples right to keep and bear arms??

 

[Bitterhook]

read what again??

are you ever going to tell us what you mean by regulate or what militias have to do with the peoples right to keep and bear arms??

How about this?

If a state passes a law establishing a militia, assigns a chain of command, and provides every state citizen over the age of 16 that can pass a federal background check with an AR-15 and ammunition, then requires them to attend and complete two weeks of training over an entire year whenever they can show up for it (with transportation provided), that would not violate the US Constitution, and it would be a hell of a lot closer to a well-regulated militia than simply taking everyone's guns away.

But I am pretty sure that's not what the heck the nitwits yacking about a well-regulated militia want, and that is generally because they are a bunch of disingenuous, gun grabbing, authoritarian fascist, progressive liberals who always lie about their true intents, and wrap it all up in caring and compassion like that will somehow excuse their nonsense.

Edit:
And before some absolute nitwit comes in here trying to argue about the firearm, and the age of the citizen in regard to federal law, federal laws address the purchase of a firearm, and the legal age for an American citizen to possess a longarm and ammunition is the day they are born, because it is a Constitutionally protected right, and those rights start the day you are born, look it up.

 

[progressive hunter]

How about this?

If a state passes a law establishing a militia, assigns a chain of command, and provides every state citizen over the age of 16 that can pass a federal background check with an AR-15 and ammunition, then requires them to attend and complete two weeks of training over an entire year whenever they can show up for it (with transportation provided), that would not violate the US Constitution, and it would be a hell of a lot closer to a well-regulated militia than simply taking everyone's guns away.

But I am pretty sure that's not what the heck the nitwits yacking about a well-regulated militia want, and that is generally because they are a bunch of disingenuous, gun grabbing, authoritarian fascist, progressive liberals who always lie about their true intents, and wrap it all up in caring and compassion like that will somehow excuse their nonsense.

Edit:
And before some absolute nitwit comes in here trying to argue about the firearm, and the age of the citizen in regard to federal law, federal laws address the purchase of a firearm, and the legal age for an American citizen to possess a longarm and ammunition is the day they are born, because it is a Constitutionally protected right, and those rights start the day you are born, look it up.

no need to pass a law establishing a state militia because it already exist,, background checks and requiring two weeks of training to own a gun violate the 2nd amendment,,

a well regulated militia has nothing to do with the peoples right to keep and bear arms,,

 

[Bitterhook]

no need to pass a law establishing a state militia because it already exist,, background checks and requiring two weeks of training to own a gun violate the 2nd amendment,,

a well regulated militia has nothing to do with the peoples right to keep and bear arms,,

You don't have to argue, because the background check would be required by federal law, and in regard to all the other stuff you want to argue about, I was talking about what if they did actually create what would be considered a well-regulated militia and not about gun rights.

Damn, how hard to you have to try and argue to completely miss the point?
It's okay though, I'll keep rowing the boat and don't care if you jump overboard and would rather swim.

 

[progressive hunter]

You don't have to argue, because the background check would be required by federal law, and in regard to all the other shit you want to argue about, I was talking about what if they did actually create what would be considered a well-regulated militia and not about gun rights.

Damn, how hard to you have to try and argue to completely miss the point?
It's okay though, I'll keep rowing the boat and don't care if you jump overboard and would rather swim.

they already have the ability to call up a militia and train accordingly,,
as I said its irrelevant to the peoples right to keep and bear arms,,

and background checks violate the 2nd amendment of the constitution of the united states,,

"SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" means exactly that

 

[Bitterhook]

they already have the ability to call up a militia and train accordingly,,
as I said its irrelevant to the peoples right to keep and bear arms,,

and background checks violate the 2nd amendment of the constitution of the united states,,

"SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" means exactly that

I know states can and said so in my post, there is nothing to disagree with there.

If you believe background checks are unconstitutional, you don't need to tell me because I do too.
Personally, I believe that when a convicted felon has severed their time, and is released from all probationary requirements, their constitutional right to bear arms is violated.

Otherwise, digging your heels in and continuously expressing a opinion that goes absolutely nowhere is useless.
So how about you contact your representatives in Congress and actually do something, if you haven't already.
We can also share ideas that are bit mor than the same vapid nonsense people like to insist is the only possible way to even look at the issues, and it's called critical thinking.

Likewise, it all reminds me of Libertarians.
For goodness sakes, three of them could standing in a group, one of them could catch fire and burn to death, while to other two argued about what was the most appropriate way to put the fire out,

"DO YOU TRULY UNDERSTAND ANYTHING?"
Care to take a wild guess at what that means?

 

[progressive hunter]

I know states can and said so in my post, there is nothing to disagree with there.

If you believe background checks are unconstitutional, you don't need to tell me because I do too.
Personally, I believe that when a convicted felon has severed their time, and is released from all probationary requirements, their constitutional right to bear arms is violated.

Otherwise, digging your heels in and continuously expressing a opinion that goes absolutely nowhere is useless.
So how about you contact your representatives in Congress and actually do something, if you haven't already.
We can also share ideas that are bit mor than the same vapid nonsense people like to insist is the only possible way to even look at the issues, and it's called critical thinking.

Likewise, it all reminds me of Libertarians.
For goodness sakes, three of them could standing in a group, one of them could catch fire and burn to death, while to other two argued about what was the most appropriate way to put the fire out,

"DO YOU TRULY UNDERSTAND ANYTHING?"
Care to take a wild guess at what that means?

if you dont like my answers why do you keep asking the stupid questions or presenting dumb scenarios??

sounds like youre the one that likes to argue,,

 

[Bitterhook]

if you dont like my answers why do you keep asking the stupid questions or presenting dumb scenarios??

sounds like youre the one that likes to argue,,

I would like you to answer the last two questions I asked you, and will accept any answer you feel compelled to give.

Otherwise, there is no need for to worry about what I may like or be doing, or even try to figure out some pithy answer, because I am asking you, encouraging you, and wondering if you even have the wherewithal to bring something worth talking about to the table. Understand that is not a question, it is a challenge, and you can either accept it or not.

Or are you going to post a lot more of nothing?
You can answer that question too if you desire.

 

[progressive hunter]

I would like you to answer the last two questions I asked you, and will accept any answer you feel compelled to give.

Otherwise, there is no need for to worry about what I may like or be doing, or even try to figure out some pithy answer, because I am asking you, encouraging you, and wondering if you even have the wherewithal to bring something worth talking about to the table. Understand that is not a question, it is a challenge, and you can either accept it or not.

Or are you going to post a lot more of nothing?
You can answer that question too if you desire.

I did answer them,,

you not liking the answer isnt my problem its yours,,

 

[Bitterhook]

I did answer them,,

you not liking the answer isnt my problem its yours,,

So, you refused the challenge and still have nothing to discuss.
Let me know when you are prepared to discuss the topic, anything loosely related to it, or even the weather.

 

[Greenbeard]

We already have all of the experiment we need. Just witness the difference in how blue states are run compared to red states.

Exactly. The United States is a first world country wrapped around a third world country. How much more experimentation is needed to spot the pattern?

 

[progressive hunter]

So, you refused the challenge and still have nothing to discuss.
Let me know when you are prepared to discuss the topic, anything loosely related to it, or even the weather.

you asked questions and I answered them,,

I didnt know it was a challenge,,

you are free to show me what I got wrong,,