Kamala Harris owns a gun. Are you surprised or mad?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:" border="0" class="embeddedImage" />

Here is Walz shooting skeet.

Wow one of those semiautomatic shotguns that have been around for about 125 years. Wonder if they will be on the banned list.

It’s not a semiautomatic gun, dummy. Stop being such an imbecile.

Really? There are 3 types of shotguns, break-action, pump-action and semiautomatic. It is not a break-action or pump-action so that leaves only one choice.

Your pedantic technical jargon is lost on normal people who DGAF about your gun nonsense. It’s not a semiautomatic gun, regardless of what gibberish you’re babbling about. If you have PROOF otherwise, then cite it. Otherwise STHU with your disruptive blathering.

Your insults are hilarious, though not as ridiculously hilarious as you openly displaying your complete ignorance of even the most basic firearms facts.

You are just so astoundingly stupid, I cannot help but throw you a bone out of pure pity for you:

Tim is holding a Beretta A400 Xcel, which is (say it with me):

- a SEMIAUTOMATIC SHOTGUN

it is NOT a semiautomatic, idiot!

- it's partly made of wood
- it doesn't have a high capacity clip
- it doesn't have a telescopic lens aiming device
- it doesn't have a handle underneath the bottom
- it looks absolutely nothing like a gun a army person would carry


All your buzzwords and technical jargon mean nothing, ok? Can you get that through your stupid trumper head?

^^^THIS, 100%^^^

Walz’s gun is NOT a semiautomatic!

And there is no fixing stupid.

Ok smartie, then tell us all why we’re wrong.

Ok, will keep it simple for you. A semiautomatic shotgun works a lot like an AR-15. Gas from the fired shell is captured and used to drive a bolt which then loads the next shell. One shot per trigger pull just like an AR-15. Less rounds than an AR-15 but same basic firing mechanism.

Except the gun Walz is holding looks absolutely NOTHING like an AR15. Which is why many of us here who are not gun fetishists like you seem to have a lot of trouble believing what you claim. It certainly doesn’t resemble what I would call a semiautomatic gun. Walz is holding what I presume is a typical hunting type rifle that legitimate hunters would use for dispatching deers or ducks or whatever. I admittedly know very little about guns, but I would presume and hypothesize that the projectile this type of hunting gun discharges is probably far less powerful than the ones coming from a AR15, because otherwise the meat would be destroyed rendering the animal useless. Am I correct in this assumption?

No, this is one of the things most frequently misunderstood about the AR-15 and most other guns that are called “assault rifles” in the media.

The AR-15 fires a round of only modest “power,” and for that reason it is actually illegal to use for hunting in some states, not because it is too powerful, but because it is insufficiently powerful to humanely dispatch an animal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:" border="0" class="embeddedImage" />

Here is Walz shooting skeet.

Wow one of those semiautomatic shotguns that have been around for about 125 years. Wonder if they will be on the banned list.

It’s not a semiautomatic gun, dummy. Stop being such an imbecile.

Name calling is so puerile, and even worse when driven by fundamental ignorance. The pictured firearm is most certainly and unequivocally a semiauto 12 gauge shotgun, most likely loaded with no. 8 birdshot if in fact he was using it for a shooting sport. Such shotguns are ubiquitous. It is unlikely, but not impossible, that any sort of “permit” would be required for the purchase of such a shotgun.

Why is this? It is a gun, is it not? How can there not be a permit required to purchase or own it?

If this is true - IF - then I find that very troubling indeed, and would say that it prima facia evidence that we are in desperate need of reasonable, common sense gun safety laws, if a permit or license is not required to own something like that.

Further, why would one possibly need 8 birdshots? If you cannot hit your target with one shot, then you shouldn't be in the woods hunting to begin with. No one needs 8 shots to kill a duck.

But, isn’t this the same type of gun Tim carried when he was in Afghanistan?

It does NOT look like the kind of gun I have ever seen army people carrying. That's why we can be sure it's not a semiautomatic.

“Army people”?

FFS

DP

What else do you call people who are in the army, dummy? They’re people. In the army.

Therefore: army people.


Is English your second language, perhaps?

I believe the generally accepted term is “soldiers”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Liberals think the Second Amendment was written just after the Founding Fathers just finished a 2-week hunting excursion...

It was written after they just finished fighting a tyrannical government in 1791, just years after the Revolutionary War.

Shall not be infringed.

"well regulated militia"

1) Not interpreted as an individual right till modern times.

2) The amount of gun crime and ease of straw purchasing makes the current status of "well regulated" questionable

3) Modern weapons mean individuals would need to own nukes, missiles, etc. to have the power to counteract the government. Nobody wants that and if you do, you're a lunatic and should have your sanity evaluated.

The Founders fought their government. Our entire country (the colonies) fought their government.

The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776


“I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788


“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."
- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."
- Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788


“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

You know the maga(t)s have lost when they start pulling out scripts written like 400 years ago by dead white men who owned slaves.



YOU LOST MAGA!!!! SUCK IT!!!!

Seriously. You want to used these quotes to defend your stance? Then you have the right bear all arms that were available to you in 1776.

Just the 1A only applies to the printing press.

Remarkable that one amendment can adapt with evolving society and not another, isn’t it? It’s almost like one of them is the bread and butter of a gian$ lo$$y organi$ation and g$n manu$acture$.

Is Mr Vocab just going to keep dodging this?

Appears so. He’s just a troll distracting with gibberish. Has no actual defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:" border="0" class="embeddedImage" />

Here is Walz shooting skeet.

Wow one of those semiautomatic shotguns that have been around for about 125 years. Wonder if they will be on the banned list.

It’s not a semiautomatic gun, dummy. Stop being such an imbecile.

Really? There are 3 types of shotguns, break-action, pump-action and semiautomatic. It is not a break-action or pump-action so that leaves only one choice.

Your pedantic technical jargon is lost on normal people who DGAF about your gun nonsense. It’s not a semiautomatic gun, regardless of what gibberish you’re babbling about. If you have PROOF otherwise, then cite it. Otherwise STHU with your disruptive blathering.

Your insults are hilarious, though not as ridiculously hilarious as you openly displaying your complete ignorance of even the most basic firearms facts.

You are just so astoundingly stupid, I cannot help but throw you a bone out of pure pity for you:

Tim is holding a Beretta A400 Xcel, which is (say it with me):

- a SEMIAUTOMATIC SHOTGUN

it is NOT a semiautomatic, idiot!

- it's partly made of wood
- it doesn't have a high capacity clip
- it doesn't have a telescopic lens aiming device
- it doesn't have a handle underneath the bottom
- it looks absolutely nothing like a gun a army person would carry


All your buzzwords and technical jargon mean nothing, ok? Can you get that through your stupid trumper head?

^^^THIS, 100%^^^

Walz’s gun is NOT a semiautomatic!

And there is no fixing stupid.

Ok smartie, then tell us all why we’re wrong.

Ok, will keep it simple for you. A semiautomatic shotgun works a lot like an AR-15. Gas from the fired shell is captured and used to drive a bolt which then loads the next shell. One shot per trigger pull just like an AR-15. Less rounds than an AR-15 but same basic firing mechanism.

Except the gun Walz is holding looks absolutely NOTHING like an AR15. Which is why many of us here who are not gun fetishists like you seem to have a lot of trouble believing what you claim. It certainly doesn’t resemble what I would call a semiautomatic gun. Walz is holding what I presume is a typical hunting type rifle that legitimate hunters would use for dispatching deers or ducks or whatever. I admittedly know very little about guns, but I would presume and hypothesize that the projectile this type of hunting gun discharges is probably far less powerful than the ones coming from a AR15, because otherwise the meat would be destroyed rendering the animal useless. Am I correct in this assumption?

No, this is one of the things most frequently misunderstood about the AR-15 and most other guns that are called “assault rifles” in the media.

The AR-15 fires a round of only modest “power,” and for that reason it is actually illegal to use for hunting in some states, not because it is too powerful, but because it is insufficiently powerful to humanely dispatch an animal.

Correct. Hunting with AR-15s is banned in at least 10 states I believe due to its lack of ballistic punch on medium sized game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:" border="0" class="embeddedImage" />

Here is Walz shooting skeet.

Wow one of those semiautomatic shotguns that have been around for about 125 years. Wonder if they will be on the banned list.

It’s not a semiautomatic gun, dummy. Stop being such an imbecile.

Really? There are 3 types of shotguns, break-action, pump-action and semiautomatic. It is not a break-action or pump-action so that leaves only one choice.

Your pedantic technical jargon is lost on normal people who DGAF about your gun nonsense. It’s not a semiautomatic gun, regardless of what gibberish you’re babbling about. If you have PROOF otherwise, then cite it. Otherwise STHU with your disruptive blathering.

Your insults are hilarious, though not as ridiculously hilarious as you openly displaying your complete ignorance of even the most basic firearms facts.

You are just so astoundingly stupid, I cannot help but throw you a bone out of pure pity for you:

Tim is holding a Beretta A400 Xcel, which is (say it with me):

- a SEMIAUTOMATIC SHOTGUN

it is NOT a semiautomatic, idiot!

- it's partly made of wood
- it doesn't have a high capacity clip
- it doesn't have a telescopic lens aiming device
- it doesn't have a handle underneath the bottom
- it looks absolutely nothing like a gun a army person would carry


All your buzzwords and technical jargon mean nothing, ok? Can you get that through your stupid trumper head?

^^^THIS, 100%^^^

Walz’s gun is NOT a semiautomatic!

And there is no fixing stupid.

Ok smartie, then tell us all why we’re wrong.

Ok, will keep it simple for you. A semiautomatic shotgun works a lot like an AR-15. Gas from the fired shell is captured and used to drive a bolt which then loads the next shell. One shot per trigger pull just like an AR-15. Less rounds than an AR-15 but same basic firing mechanism.

Except the gun Walz is holding looks absolutely NOTHING like an AR15. Which is why many of us here who are not gun fetishists like you seem to have a lot of trouble believing what you claim. It certainly doesn’t resemble what I would call a semiautomatic gun. Walz is holding what I presume is a typical hunting type rifle that legitimate hunters would use for dispatching deers or ducks or whatever. I admittedly know very little about guns, but I would presume and hypothesize that the projectile this type of hunting gun discharges is probably far less powerful than the ones coming from a AR15, because otherwise the meat would be destroyed rendering the animal useless. Am I correct in this assumption?

No, this is one of the things most frequently misunderstood about the AR-15 and most other guns that are called “assault rifles” in the media.

The AR-15 fires a round of only modest “power,” and for that reason it is actually illegal to use for hunting in some states, not because it is too powerful, but because it is insufficiently powerful to humanely dispatch an animal.

Correct. Hunting with AR-15s is banned in at least 10 states I believe due to its lack of ballistic punch on medium sized game.

You could but with an ar10 most larger game since is uses .308. doubt most of the anti gun posters would tell the difference visually.

[Anonymous]

Well that was quick.



September 10th Debate...

KAMALA: “We're not taking anybody's guns away, so stop with the continuous lying about this stuff."

(FACT CHECK: Harris previously supported mandatory buyback programs for certain firearms. She has since flip-flopped on the issue.)




September 14th...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well that was quick.



September 10th Debate...

KAMALA: “We're not taking anybody's guns away, so stop with the continuous lying about this stuff."

(FACT CHECK: Harris previously supported mandatory buyback programs for certain firearms. She has since flip-flopped on the issue.)




September 14th...

Trump accused her of planning to “take all your guns away”. That’s not what reinstating an assault rifle ban is. You NRA nuts are just sad you’ll lose money. Sick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Liberals think the Second Amendment was written just after the Founding Fathers just finished a 2-week hunting excursion...

It was written after they just finished fighting a tyrannical government in 1791, just years after the Revolutionary War.

Shall not be infringed.

"well regulated militia"

1) Not interpreted as an individual right till modern times.

2) The amount of gun crime and ease of straw purchasing makes the current status of "well regulated" questionable

3) Modern weapons mean individuals would need to own nukes, missiles, etc. to have the power to counteract the government. Nobody wants that and if you do, you're a lunatic and should have your sanity evaluated.

The Founders fought their government. Our entire country (the colonies) fought their government.

The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776


“I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788


“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."
- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."
- Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788


“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

You know the maga(t)s have lost when they start pulling out scripts written like 400 years ago by dead white men who owned slaves.



YOU LOST MAGA!!!! SUCK IT!!!!

Seriously. You want to used these quotes to defend your stance? Then you have the right bear all arms that were available to you in 1776.

Just the 1A only applies to the printing press.

Remarkable that one amendment can adapt with evolving society and not another, isn’t it? It’s almost like one of them is the bread and butter of a gian$ lo$$y organi$ation and g$n manu$acture$.

Still crickets from the gun nuts here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Liberals think the Second Amendment was written just after the Founding Fathers just finished a 2-week hunting excursion...

It was written after they just finished fighting a tyrannical government in 1791, just years after the Revolutionary War.

Shall not be infringed.

"well regulated militia"

1) Not interpreted as an individual right till modern times.

2) The amount of gun crime and ease of straw purchasing makes the current status of "well regulated" questionable

3) Modern weapons mean individuals would need to own nukes, missiles, etc. to have the power to counteract the government. Nobody wants that and if you do, you're a lunatic and should have your sanity evaluated.

The Founders fought their government. Our entire country (the colonies) fought their government.

The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776


“I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788


“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."
- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."
- Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788


“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

You know the maga(t)s have lost when they start pulling out scripts written like 400 years ago by dead white men who owned slaves.



YOU LOST MAGA!!!! SUCK IT!!!!

Seriously. You want to used these quotes to defend your stance? Then you have the right bear all arms that were available to you in 1776.

Just the 1A only applies to the printing press.

Remarkable that one amendment can adapt with evolving society and not another, isn’t it? It’s almost like one of them is the bread and butter of a gian$ lo$$y organi$ation and g$n manu$acture$.

Still crickets from the gun nuts here.

Since you seem to think the 1A covers inventions postdating the printing press, I see no reason that the 2A can't also cover modern armaments. The 2A did evolve much like the 1A and like the 1A it didn't become more narrow in scope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well that was quick.



September 10th Debate...

KAMALA: “We're not taking anybody's guns away, so stop with the continuous lying about this stuff."

(FACT CHECK: Harris previously supported mandatory buyback programs for certain firearms. She has since flip-flopped on the issue.)




September 14th...

Done in 1986 with the ironically named Firearm Owners' Protection Act. But in August of this year a District Judge, citing New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, threw out charges against a Kansas man for illegal machine gun possession as unconstitutional under the second amendment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Liberals think the Second Amendment was written just after the Founding Fathers just finished a 2-week hunting excursion...

It was written after they just finished fighting a tyrannical government in 1791, just years after the Revolutionary War.

Shall not be infringed.

"well regulated militia"

1) Not interpreted as an individual right till modern times.

2) The amount of gun crime and ease of straw purchasing makes the current status of "well regulated" questionable

3) Modern weapons mean individuals would need to own nukes, missiles, etc. to have the power to counteract the government. Nobody wants that and if you do, you're a lunatic and should have your sanity evaluated.

The Founders fought their government. Our entire country (the colonies) fought their government.

The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776


“I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788


“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."
- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."
- Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788


“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

You know the maga(t)s have lost when they start pulling out scripts written like 400 years ago by dead white men who owned slaves.



YOU LOST MAGA!!!! SUCK IT!!!!

Seriously. You want to used these quotes to defend your stance? Then you have the right bear all arms that were available to you in 1776.

Just the 1A only applies to the printing press.

Remarkable that one amendment can adapt with evolving society and not another, isn’t it? It’s almost like one of them is the bread and butter of a gian$ lo$$y organi$ation and g$n manu$acture$.

Still crickets from the gun nuts here.

Since you seem to think the 1A covers inventions postdating the printing press, I see no reason that the 2A can't also cover modern armaments. The 2A did evolve much like the 1A and like the 1A it didn't become more narrow in scope.

Oh, of COURSE you have a different idea what it means to evolve. Neanderthal as expected. Columbine, Sandy Hook and annual slaughters of school children and you see “no reason”. What a guy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Liberals think the Second Amendment was written just after the Founding Fathers just finished a 2-week hunting excursion...

It was written after they just finished fighting a tyrannical government in 1791, just years after the Revolutionary War.

Shall not be infringed.

"well regulated militia"

1) Not interpreted as an individual right till modern times.

2) The amount of gun crime and ease of straw purchasing makes the current status of "well regulated" questionable

3) Modern weapons mean individuals would need to own nukes, missiles, etc. to have the power to counteract the government. Nobody wants that and if you do, you're a lunatic and should have your sanity evaluated.

The Founders fought their government. Our entire country (the colonies) fought their government.

The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776


“I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788


“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."
- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."
- Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788


“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

You know the maga(t)s have lost when they start pulling out scripts written like 400 years ago by dead white men who owned slaves.



YOU LOST MAGA!!!! SUCK IT!!!!

Seriously. You want to used these quotes to defend your stance? Then you have the right bear all arms that were available to you in 1776.

Just the 1A only applies to the printing press.

Remarkable that one amendment can adapt with evolving society and not another, isn’t it? It’s almost like one of them is the bread and butter of a gian$ lo$$y organi$ation and g$n manu$acture$.

Still crickets from the gun nuts here.

Since you seem to think the 1A covers inventions postdating the printing press, I see no reason that the 2A can't also cover modern armaments. The 2A did evolve much like the 1A and like the 1A it didn't become more narrow in scope.

You’re comparing apples to oranges.

The first amendment covers modern communication and expression because they are evolutions from the printing press because those modern inventions still convey the same freedom of expression.

The second amendment does not cover modern guns because they didn’t exist. Totally different scenario.


See the difference, dummy? Or has the NRA brainwashed your ability to use logic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well that was quick.



September 10th Debate...

KAMALA: “We're not taking anybody's guns away, so stop with the continuous lying about this stuff."

(FACT CHECK: Harris previously supported mandatory buyback programs for certain firearms. She has since flip-flopped on the issue.)




September 14th...

Trump accused her of planning to “take all your guns away”. That’s not what reinstating an assault rifle ban is. You NRA nuts are just sad you’ll lose money. Sick.

Exactly. She’s not taking ALL of them, just some of them.

“Some” =/= “All”


But hopefully she’ll change her mind after she’s elected and get them all. Because I’m looking forward to hearing all the gun nutters crying and shrieking when they have to turn them in. It’s going to be soooooo delicious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Liberals think the Second Amendment was written just after the Founding Fathers just finished a 2-week hunting excursion...

It was written after they just finished fighting a tyrannical government in 1791, just years after the Revolutionary War.

Shall not be infringed.

"well regulated militia"

1) Not interpreted as an individual right till modern times.

2) The amount of gun crime and ease of straw purchasing makes the current status of "well regulated" questionable

3) Modern weapons mean individuals would need to own nukes, missiles, etc. to have the power to counteract the government. Nobody wants that and if you do, you're a lunatic and should have your sanity evaluated.

The Founders fought their government. Our entire country (the colonies) fought their government.

The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776


“I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788


“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."
- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."
- Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788


“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

You know the maga(t)s have lost when they start pulling out scripts written like 400 years ago by dead white men who owned slaves.



YOU LOST MAGA!!!! SUCK IT!!!!

Seriously. You want to used these quotes to defend your stance? Then you have the right bear all arms that were available to you in 1776.

Just the 1A only applies to the printing press.

Remarkable that one amendment can adapt with evolving society and not another, isn’t it? It’s almost like one of them is the bread and butter of a gian$ lo$$y organi$ation and g$n manu$acture$.

Still crickets from the gun nuts here.

Since you seem to think the 1A covers inventions postdating the printing press, I see no reason that the 2A can't also cover modern armaments. The 2A did evolve much like the 1A.

Because you’re a compete moron. That’s why you seem to think this. It’s nothing of the sort. Just a bunch of rubbish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Liberals think the Second Amendment was written just after the Founding Fathers just finished a 2-week hunting excursion...

It was written after they just finished fighting a tyrannical government in 1791, just years after the Revolutionary War.

Shall not be infringed.

"well regulated militia"

1) Not interpreted as an individual right till modern times.

2) The amount of gun crime and ease of straw purchasing makes the current status of "well regulated" questionable

3) Modern weapons mean individuals would need to own nukes, missiles, etc. to have the power to counteract the government. Nobody wants that and if you do, you're a lunatic and should have your sanity evaluated.

The Founders fought their government. Our entire country (the colonies) fought their government.

The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776


“I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788


“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."
- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."
- Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788


“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

You know the maga(t)s have lost when they start pulling out scripts written like 400 years ago by dead white men who owned slaves.



YOU LOST MAGA!!!! SUCK IT!!!!

Seriously. You want to used these quotes to defend your stance? Then you have the right bear all arms that were available to you in 1776.

Just the 1A only applies to the printing press.

Remarkable that one amendment can adapt with evolving society and not another, isn’t it? It’s almost like one of them is the bread and butter of a gian$ lo$$y organi$ation and g$n manu$acture$.

Still crickets from the gun nuts here.

Since you seem to think the 1A covers inventions postdating the printing press, I see no reason that the 2A can't also cover modern armaments. The 2A did evolve much like the 1A and like the 1A it didn't become more narrow in scope.

Yes or no: should 2a cover individual right for mosr common citizens to own nuclear weapons or weapons with a similar scale of destruction? Able to wipe out an entire city in one go. No snark, straightforward yes or no answer.