quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
In other words, if bounty or bosco so desires to post something I consider little more than rehashing of FOX news talking points, which, in my opinion is basically just as biased...

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Bountys bubbles dont rise to the top,

He can post on topic, rather than be nothing more than a troll. So...

I don't expect liberals to accept anything conservative or libertarian that I post---but unfortunately, im continually finding they also are incapable of rational thought.

not that I want to convert any of them---but when an argument is well made, or well said, or supported, or a counter argument is well critiqued, or whatever "well"---they aren't even capable of acknowledging or understanding that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

If only they'd all stayed home. Everyone would be fine with the firearms then.

yeh thats what the constitution is for right?

You can have free speech at home, right to assmble at home, petition th egubmint at home, exercise your religion at home democracy at home brilliant!

Bosco is right about one thing a whole board full or howlers.

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
The car ramming the antifa crowd wasn't terrorism, it was a part of a gang fight wherein both sides were using deadly force

I find myself wondering why people want to make the distinction between "terrorism" and "vehicular homicide?"

(or maybe we'll end up with manslaughter even)

ive only seen one quick clip of the car scene, but as I reflect on it more, I also wonder if the guy was bent on inflicting as much harm as possible on the protestors, why he didn't keep driving. he could have killed and injured many more.


now please brain dead lefties---try not to turn that into my stating that's what I wished would have happened. think you could do that??

I just assumed he was scared of being dragged out of his car and beaten to death if he carried on driving so he got the hell out of there.

Funny how a white supremacist driving a car at his political opponents is labelled a gang fight and not terrorism.

Intent to maim or kill. Check.

Causing panic or terror in a public place. Check

Politically motivated. Check.

Terrorism. Check.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

Your assumption is that they want to understand. They don't. They live on emotional energy and that's why they like graphics so much.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: longwayhome

At the risk of being shot down in flames, I have to point out that the United States of America is just about the only place in the world that it is deemed acceptable to bring offensive weapons to a public march.

I know that you guys have a unique perspective on this subject, and I respect that, but almost everywhere in the world that the rule of law holds being part of an armed group on the streets would practically guarantee a forceful police or military response. I'm not a big fan of private citizens carrying guns, except when hunting or involved in sport, but when it is as part of an armed group claiming to be demonstrating peacefully it seems a bit absurd. Carrying a gun for self protection is very different from making it clear that you are armed while you are demonstrating.

Just one other thought. A car rams into a crowd of people with the explicit intent of causing serious injury in Europe and it is terrorism. I am struggling to see why this is any different.

I've legally carried guns for years. I believe the city, county, state has every right to exclude carrying guns at any gathering they permit. Well, unless it was a Faternal Order of Police picnic. I have no problem with them checking of guns among protesters. I have no problem with your concept of the rule of law of armed groups on the streets. Anyone that wanted an armed group for a demonstration then could decide whether or not to attend the "peaceful" demonstration. As an aside, where I live, if the sheriff showed up on my property and expected me not to be armed he'd be foolish.

well then you have a fucked up belief system since the gubmint has no rights what so ever, they have 'authority' granted by the people, not one spec more.

So you are part of the problem not the solution, and promote the destruction of the constitution for some unknown whatever you think is better with complete disregard to the fact that the bill of rights is fire tested over thousands of years how to prevent the overlords from taking over, and you just hand it to them on a platter.

The second applies liberty, thqat is the carrying of arms outside your property.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick
The government cannot tell you where you can or cannot carry a gun, but a private entity can (at least on their property).

I'm guessing you've never lived on a military base.

quote:

Or DC or Chicago

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Meanwhile, back at the topic: First vs. Second Amendment.

quote:

First vs. second amendment.

quote:

Issues raised in the article in the OP.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

i don't disagree that the left bases their decisions more on feelings than on rational thought and that's one of the things that makes conversing with them absolutely maddening.

however that said, at some point, if one never progresses much past "because feelings" we remain perpetually mired in a state akin to a teen-age girl going through puberty.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThatDizzyChick

quote:

First vs. second amendment.

There is no conflict.

quote:

Issues raised in the article in the OP.

Superfluous and irrelevant.

quote:

ORIGINAL: stef

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
The car ramming the antifa crowd wasn't terrorism, it was a part of a gang fight wherein both sides were using deadly force

I find myself wondering why people want to make the distinction between "terrorism" and "vehicular homicide?"

(or maybe we'll end up with manslaughter even)

ive only seen one quick clip of the car scene, but as I reflect on it more, I also wonder if the guy was bent on inflicting as much harm as possible on the protestors, why he didn't keep driving. he could have killed and injured many more.


now please brain dead lefties---try not to turn that into my stating that's what I wished would have happened. think you could do that??

He drove until he smashed into two cars...idiot

Looks like Bounty has finally gone full retard. I guess he can be added to the ignore bin with the rest of the deplorables.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Bountys bubbles dont rise to the top,

He can post on topic, rather than be nothing more than a troll. So...

I dare you both to name anyone (including myself) that has posted anything but extremist views on either side of the argument.

Christ, even when someone we dont agree with or wouldnt piss on if they were on fire posts a logical argument pro or con, none of us on the boards can accept it.

However, the essence of free speech is to accept that people have the right to say or post anything they wish, even if we disagree with it with every fiber of our existence and if we actually believe in that right, have an obligation to defend their right to be offensive assholes (as a matter of personal opinion) if they so choose.

In other words, if bounty or bosco so desires to post something I consider little more than rehashing of FOX news talking points, which, in my opinion is basically just as biased toward the right as MSNBC and others are to the left, then let them post it.

I have, by the same right, can post arguments to the contrary.

However, with few exceptions, I am going to endeavor to keep personal insults out of future replies.

The exceptions being a poster from Singapore and some dumb bitch that took great pains to tell me that my dog getting hit by a car was my fault (regardless of the fact I spent almost 4 grand trying to make an escape proof fencing system, or the fact that witnesses saw someone swerve off the road to actually hit the dog as she stood next to a fence.)