Monday, March 06, 2017

Gun Stuff


18 Comments:

At 9:30 AM, Blogger Henchman Of Justice said...

AKA,

POLICE STATE FOR 2 PARTY AGENDAS......

 
At 10:09 AM, Blogger Bob Wallace said...

Gun control does not mean an elimination of gun ownership.

Gun control means setting reasonable limits to the types of firearms that can be owned and who can own them.

 
At 11:35 AM, Anonymous Rusty said...

25 States allow anyone to buy a gun, strap it on, and walk down the street with no permit of any kind: some say it's crazy. However, four out of five US murders are committed in the other half of the country: so who's crazy?” Andrew Ford.

Statistical distortion but still a fun fact.

 
At 11:37 AM, Blogger Rick Wentworth said...

second amendment of the constitution of the united states has 4 little words at the end
" SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED "

 
At 12:30 PM, Blogger Bob Wallace said...

We're already infringing.

It's illegal to own fully automatic weapons (except for a few Tommy guns that were grandfathered in).

It's illegal to carry firearms into the offices of your Congress members and some other places.

What we're really debating is not whether firearms should be totally banned or should be allowed without restraint but where to draw the line.

 
At 2:33 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

An unconstitutional law is no law at all.
Gun control is unconstitutional.

 
At 3:07 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,....."

Curious how those rabid "shall not be infringed" folks seem to forget the first part of the Second Amendment.

 
At 4:13 PM, Blogger Rick Wentworth said...

anon 3:07
you left off the next segment of second amendment .
" the right of the people to keep and bear arms "
and they are separated by a coma , that means 2 separate items , militia is separate from the people

 
At 4:23 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The second amendment gives 'the people' the right to own and bear muzzle loading flintlocks and swords.

 
At 4:28 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I interpret that sentence to mean the original intent of the 2nd amendment was to provide for the security of the individual states, a well-regulated militia was required, hence the right to keep and bear arms. If the states have a well-regulated militia (i.e. The National Guard), then the right to keep and bear arms can be infringed. This is the interpretation that has allowed for existing restrictions on who can and cannot possess certain types of guns.

 
At 9:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

3:07, regulated meant trained, skilled & willing to defend against tyrants. The Constitution restricted govt from delegating any delegated duty to others. There was no ATF, EPA, EPA, IRS, or Depts of tyranny in the delegated duties.
Hence, those regulatory agencies are unconstitutional, not weapon parts & pieces.

 
At 6:49 AM, Blogger Henchman Of Justice said...

Sure it does Bobby 🛂👮🗽🚓🚔🔫🇺🇸, gun by gun.........

 
At 6:53 AM, Blogger Henchman Of Justice said...

Not we're,

just Bobby the popo loving narck who reads into stuff invisible language not ever in existence.......

 
At 6:54 AM, Blogger Henchman Of Justice said...

True true

 
At 6:55 AM, Blogger Henchman Of Justice said...

And catapults, chemical ied's, tear gas,bazookas (potato guns even), etc.....anything really.....

 
At 10:36 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

That's such an obviously erroneous meme argument. Suppose I support personal ownership of handguns and rifles, but not assault weapons? Whoops, I don't quite fit the meme's absurd paradigm.

Radicals have a black-and-white view of a very gray world. In the meme's view, all guns are the same, and that claim is just so absurdly insulting to the person it's being told to, insulting to their intelligence. Sorry, no.

 
At 2:28 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...



Fact is, those who use firearms are criminals or hunters or recreationists.

You see the hypocrisy is funny with Democrats in that when it comes to immigration Democrats don’t think about crime in the sense of exclusion, no they think of it as the Immigrant hasn’t committed a crime yet, so let them in.

If Democrats applied the same logic to guns as they do immigration then Democrats would be saying you can have a gun it’s okay until you become a criminal then we take it away.

In other words be consistent if you’re going to let immigrants in because immigrants haven’t done anything wrong yet, then you’re arguing on behalf of letting all Americans who are not criminals the ability to own whatever firearm they want until they commit a crime.

Immigrant move to USA……. commit a capital crime…….. get kicked out.

As posted not in its entirety by HOJ BOOM! sohum parlance

 
At 10:17 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You nailed it HOJ. They do not want the Constitution to survive, they want to destroy it (which they can't, because it's a compact, not an "idealology").
Their intent is to turn America over to the UN which is run by Saudi Arabia, and all the enemies of our Constitution whom Congress keeps giving money to while the people fight amongst each other over political issues paid for by politicians to distract us. The media narrates what the politicians & lobbyists pay for.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home