Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 4:00:46 PM   
BlackSinMaster


Posts: 89
Joined: 11/15/2012
Status: offline
No complaints with him myself. Ask bamad a question he answers with depth and he knows fine well I hate guns

(in reply to itsSIRtou)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 4:02:19 PM   
Nnanji


Posts: 4552
Joined: 3/29/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
It is not a free society or a democracy when the will of a minority is the driving force for the whole.

No argument with that, but the NRA and all of the other government lobbyists who pervert the practice of democracy by bribing the Congress, senate and occasionally even the third house of Government* are all representing minorities as well.

*(I'm not implying btw, that the NRA's conduct as lobbyists is even close to being as blatantly contemptuous for everybody in the country as the oil, wheat or electricity lobbyists. Whatever else you can say against them, they're not a part of the plutocracy.)

There he is again. Some straw man named NRA.

(in reply to WhoreMods)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 4:05:55 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery



3) If you believe a bunch of US citizens with firearms are any match for the US military, no logic will ever permeate your bizarre fantasy. For starters (let alone firepower and training), military brass is far smarter than to have a Rambo-esque shoot 'em up with a bunch of weekend cowboys. They'd take a far more strategic approach, and it would be largely over before people rang the bells and had a chance to start shooting.

Come on. You aren't stupid. If you want to discuss this, let's have an honest, real discussion.



As I stated, should the US government become such that the citizens will not stand for it, do you honestly think that government would have the backing of 100% of the US military?

Second point, the Afghan rebels beat the Soviet Mechanized army to the point that after 10 years, the Soviets gave up on Afghanistan and got the hell out. While the US did supply shoulder launched anti aircraft missiles, and provide some training, the majority of the rebel forces were poorly armed, not trained and made it too costly for the Soviet military to stay in place.

Third point, while armed citizens may not stand as a match against the US military, I have to point out that the US military is still stuck in the idea and philosophy of a symmetrical battle zone, i.e, the enemy has set lines etc, with the exceptions being the units created and trained in counter guerilla tactics.

And the final point, which goes back to the 'do you honestly think that if the US citizens rebelled against an oppressive Federal government in force, the entire military would follow that government?" Thanks to President Bush sr, and the elected presidents that followed, many reserve and even national guard units have been equipped with equipment that is nearly equivalent to the regular forces.

The last part of this point is extremely simple, since the court-martials of those involved in Mai Lai, during the Vietnam conflict, one of the primary focus with training is that personnel are trained that they are only required to follow legitimate legal orders of superior officers. At the point where those orders are to occupy US cities and towns with due to resistance to a tyrannical government, a good percentage would refuse such orders.

So, while the armed civilians would not alone be enough to stand against the military, I do believe that enough of the military would balk at firing on American citizens and desert with their equipment to make a significant difference in the eventual outcome.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 4:09:57 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou

To Me when the 2nd amemedment was written:

it took 60 men with guns to kill or injure 60 other men and generally the only reason that happened was a declared battle was being waged.

every gun owner used their weapon to bring food home, and protect that home, and all gun owners were on the same page of responsibility of gun ownership.

now u can have one man kill 60 people outright, and injure 500+ with one weapon. With an agenda he didn't bother to tell the people he shot up that he was waging a battle with them.

I don't know why we bother debating this issue again on here, because, I hate to put it in these terms..... but to be blunt, only when enough conservative white people get killed by whites,.......will anything even remotely change.

yes I FULLY know its racist, but its also political truth. until the white male dominated gun lobby starts losing its own members to its own policies, and possibly by the hands of its own members...... will a damn thing change....

(note: I have no idea if the vegas shooter was an NRA member....and not saying he was....)



Not a political truth, just racist.


(read My finished post....)

alright then...... I dare u to step out of that ivory gun turret ur alabaster butt's parked in, and give facts to the contrary.

prove the NRA government lobby isn't a majority or singly white. same with who pays them. Same the NRA's hierarchy.

otherwise, ur just flappin ur gums as usual.


By your logic BLM (and the school I graduated from) are both racist because
both the membership and the supporters are mainly black.
I don't have to prove anything.


spoken like the lack of fact man u are....

but thank u for proving ur gums do indeed flap.......

so then u have proof that BLM has Black lobbyists comparatively financially capable and solely focused of buying the votes of lawmakers to not let Blacks and women be killed by police officers

Like the NRA does to let white men continue to buy the weapons capable of killing massive numbers other white people at country music festivals. right??










Did you read Bountys post?
There is no way to tell how many blacks are NRA members.
Do you actually believe Whoopi Goldburg would join a racist organization?
Which law that the NRA supports says only white people can buy guns.
The Klan doesn't have lobbyists so by your logic the must not be racist either .
Why would BLM pay anyone to talk for them when they have Maxine waters.
You have already admitted to being racist so your view is of no importance.


_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to itsSIRtou)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 4:12:28 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlackSinMaster

Bamad is one of the most honest people on here. And you are what fukwit?


correct and accurate.....and he knows it.

No, you believe you are but your judgement is clouded by your racist fantasies.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to itsSIRtou)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 4:15:54 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline
FR

In one major sense, I really don't care. I'm not going to visit the USA (as a fair few people here, no doubt, will be immensely cheered to hear ). I could have been at that gig - I have pretty eclectic musical tastes and, were I to visit the USA, I'd say 'yes' to an invite to some good old country stuff were my host to suggest it. An intensive dose of 'Americana' in a night? Yes, I'd be up for that. However if I'd got shot and killed at said venue, I *know* what my family and friends would have said, here in England: "What the fuck was he doing? You go to the USA, you risk being on the arse end of some American fruitcake who loves shooting his gun too much."

I mean, Jesus Christ ... of all the harmless, ordinary things anyone could do ... go to an open air gig, sink a few pints of pissy weak
American beer, listen to some probably crap music, dance around to it ... the last thing you'd ever expect is to *get a fucking bullet put through you*.

British society is somewhat fucked up. American society, on the other hand, is outright insane. I would recommend y'all sort it out.

There it is. Get on with it.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to itsSIRtou)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 4:16:48 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery



3) If you believe a bunch of US citizens with firearms are any match for the US military, no logic will ever permeate your bizarre fantasy. For starters (let alone firepower and training), military brass is far smarter than to have a Rambo-esque shoot 'em up with a bunch of weekend cowboys. They'd take a far more strategic approach, and it would be largely over before people rang the bells and had a chance to start shooting.

Come on. You aren't stupid. If you want to discuss this, let's have an honest, real discussion.



As I stated, should the US government become such that the citizens will not stand for it, do you honestly think that government would have the backing of 100% of the US military?

Second point, the Afghan rebels beat the Soviet Mechanized army to the point that after 10 years, the Soviets gave up on Afghanistan and got the hell out. While the US did supply shoulder launched anti aircraft missiles, and provide some training, the majority of the rebel forces were poorly armed, not trained and made it too costly for the Soviet military to stay in place.

Third point, while armed citizens may not stand as a match against the US military, I have to point out that the US military is still stuck in the idea and philosophy of a symmetrical battle zone, i.e, the enemy has set lines etc, with the exceptions being the units created and trained in counter guerilla tactics.

And the final point, which goes back to the 'do you honestly think that if the US citizens rebelled against an oppressive Federal government in force, the entire military would follow that government?" Thanks to President Bush sr, and the elected presidents that followed, many reserve and even national guard units have been equipped with equipment that is nearly equivalent to the regular forces.

The last part of this point is extremely simple, since the court-martials of those involved in Mai Lai, during the Vietnam conflict, one of the primary focus with training is that personnel are trained that they are only required to follow legitimate legal orders of superior officers. At the point where those orders are to occupy US cities and towns with due to resistance to a tyrannical government, a good percentage would refuse such orders.

So, while the armed civilians would not alone be enough to stand against the military, I do believe that enough of the military would balk at firing on American citizens and desert with their equipment to make a significant difference in the eventual outcome.

I find it amazing that every civilian uprising in the world (according to the left) is invicable. except American Conservatives.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 4:18:26 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery



3) If you believe a bunch of US citizens with firearms are any match for the US military, no logic will ever permeate your bizarre fantasy. For starters (let alone firepower and training), military brass is far smarter than to have a Rambo-esque shoot 'em up with a bunch of weekend cowboys. They'd take a far more strategic approach, and it would be largely over before people rang the bells and had a chance to start shooting.

Come on. You aren't stupid. If you want to discuss this, let's have an honest, real discussion.



As I stated, should the US government become such that the citizens will not stand for it, do you honestly think that government would have the backing of 100% of the US military?

Second point, the Afghan rebels beat the Soviet Mechanized army to the point that after 10 years, the Soviets gave up on Afghanistan and got the hell out. While the US did supply shoulder launched anti aircraft missiles, and provide some training, the majority of the rebel forces were poorly armed, not trained and made it too costly for the Soviet military to stay in place.

Third point, while armed citizens may not stand as a match against the US military, I have to point out that the US military is still stuck in the idea and philosophy of a symmetrical battle zone, i.e, the enemy has set lines etc, with the exceptions being the units created and trained in counter guerilla tactics.

And the final point, which goes back to the 'do you honestly think that if the US citizens rebelled against an oppressive Federal government in force, the entire military would follow that government?" Thanks to President Bush sr, and the elected presidents that followed, many reserve and even national guard units have been equipped with equipment that is nearly equivalent to the regular forces.

The last part of this point is extremely simple, since the court-martials of those involved in Mai Lai, during the Vietnam conflict, one of the primary focus with training is that personnel are trained that they are only required to follow legitimate legal orders of superior officers. At the point where those orders are to occupy US cities and towns with due to resistance to a tyrannical government, a good percentage would refuse such orders.

So, while the armed civilians would not alone be enough to stand against the military, I do believe that enough of the military would balk at firing on American citizens and desert with their equipment to make a significant difference in the eventual outcome.




sure but the damage a bunch of pissed of citizens could do to the infrastructure is mind boggling, in the trillions.

while congress can call out the militia as well as the states, nowhere does it give the gubmint the authority to regulate the militia, if it did that would be a direct contradiction of terms since the gubmint has no authority to 'infringe in any way fashion or manner not only the peoples right to own but also the peoples right to 'BEAR' arms, and gubmint regulation would infrine on the peoples right to "BEAR", the same way well far worse than taxing infringes on 'arms' ownership


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 4:18:42 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

FR

In one major sense, I really don't care. I'm not going to visit the USA (as a fair few people here, no doubt, will be immensely cheered to hear ). I could have been at that gig - I have pretty eclectic musical tastes and, were I to visit the USA, I'd say 'yes' to an invite to some good old country stuff were my host to suggest it. An intensive dose of 'Americana' in a night? Yes, I'd be up for that. However if I'd got shot and killed at said venue, I *know* what my family and friends would have said, here in England: "What the fuck was he doing? You go to the USA, you risk being on the arse end of some American fruitcake who loves shooting his gun too much."

I mean, Jesus Christ ... of all the harmless, ordinary things anyone could do ... go to an open air gig, sink a few pints of pissy weak
American beer, listen to some probably crap music, dance around to it ... the last thing you'd ever expect is to *get a fucking bullet put through you*.

British society is somewhat fucked up. American society, on the other hand, is outright insane. I would recommend y'all sort it out.

There it is. Get on with it.

Or take a subway in London.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 4:22:18 PM   
itsSIRtou


Posts: 836
Joined: 3/20/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BlackSinMaster

No complaints with him myself. Ask bamad a question he answers with depth and he knows fine well I hate guns


I personally don't hate all guns,..... I like hunting and target shooting Myself. I'm just tired of the indiscriminate sales of "people killer weapons",

the lack of responsibility of too many gun owners whos stolen weapons wind up in poor neighborhoods as currency for drugs.

bama just hates the fact that his race, his political views, etc...... are the problem... and that fact being pointed out.

and he has nothing to counterpoint with other than to lamely try to lump other groups in with it.


_____________________________

I will allways be a knight, instead of a prince.

What would the internet be like if we couldn't say trump is a moron?

The Republican party complains government doesnt work for people, and then makes darn sure it cannot.

(in reply to BlackSinMaster)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 4:24:31 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

Or take a subway in London.


Eh? What have you read? I've been using the London Underground for a quarter of a century - I've never even seen any violence.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 4:26:00 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlackSinMaster

No complaints with him myself. Ask bamad a question he answers with depth and he knows fine well I hate guns


I personally don't hate all guns,..... I like hunting and target shooting Myself. I'm just tired of the indiscriminate sales of "people killer weapons",

the lack of responsibility of too many gun owners whos stolen weapons wind up in poor neighborhoods as currency for drugs.

bama just hates the fact that his race, his political views, etc...... are the problem... and that fact being pointed out.

and he has nothing to counterpoint with other than to lamely try to lump other groups in with it.


You blame gun theft on the NRA. And because people steal, among other things guns. that makes the NRA racist, and you think I read race into things?

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to itsSIRtou)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 4:45:53 PM   
itsSIRtou


Posts: 836
Joined: 3/20/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlackSinMaster

Bamad is one of the most honest people on here. And you are what fukwit?


correct and accurate.....and he knows it.

No, you believe you are but your judgement is clouded by your racist fantasies.


AGAIN bama..... FACTS bamad....... SHOW FACTS not hyperbole, insults or lame ass comparison's to other groups.

u get off ur ass and prove what I said is wrong. I fucking dare u.

http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=5079611 there's My post - so u, as the NRA likes to say.... "stand and fight" or STFU.









_____________________________

I will allways be a knight, instead of a prince.

What would the internet be like if we couldn't say trump is a moron?

The Republican party complains government doesnt work for people, and then makes darn sure it cannot.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 4:45:56 PM   
Edwird


Posts: 3558
Joined: 5/2/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
I believe this passage might help explain things....
    quote:

    Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
    Bold Mine


'parently, evils have yet to cross that line between sufferable and insufferable for enough people.


Right. We used modified turkey shooters to throw off the Brits, so now more modification of modern already 1,000-X more proficient arms as then is sufficient to worm our way around pertinent legislation and keep neighbors of nutjobs out of the discussion entirely is accomplished thereby.

Fantastic.



(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 54
[Awaiting Approval]
WickedsDesire


Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline
[Awaiting Approval]
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 4:56:47 PM   
itsSIRtou


Posts: 836
Joined: 3/20/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlackSinMaster

No complaints with him myself. Ask bamad a question he answers with depth and he knows fine well I hate guns


I personally don't hate all guns,..... I like hunting and target shooting Myself. I'm just tired of the indiscriminate sales of "people killer weapons",

the lack of responsibility of too many gun owners whos stolen weapons wind up in poor neighborhoods as currency for drugs.

bama just hates the fact that his race, his political views, etc...... are the problem... and that fact being pointed out.

and he has nothing to counterpoint with other than to lamely try to lump other groups in with it.


You blame gun theft on the NRA. And because people steal, among other things guns. that makes the NRA racist, and you think I read race into things?


u forgot to take ur beer glasses off before u read that post right? otherwise, deflect elsewhere please.







_____________________________

I will allways be a knight, instead of a prince.

What would the internet be like if we couldn't say trump is a moron?

The Republican party complains government doesnt work for people, and then makes darn sure it cannot.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 5:09:35 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

Or take a subway in London.


Eh? What have you read? I've been using the London Underground for a quarter of a century - I've never even seen any violence.

There have been several attacks there.
I have lived in the US for over 60years and never seen a shooting, or stabbing, or
baseball bating.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 5:11:56 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlackSinMaster

No complaints with him myself. Ask bamad a question he answers with depth and he knows fine well I hate guns


I personally don't hate all guns,..... I like hunting and target shooting Myself. I'm just tired of the indiscriminate sales of "people killer weapons",

the lack of responsibility of too many gun owners whos stolen weapons wind up in poor neighborhoods as currency for drugs.

bama just hates the fact that his race, his political views, etc...... are the problem... and that fact being pointed out.

and he has nothing to counterpoint with other than to lamely try to lump other groups in with it.


You blame gun theft on the NRA. And because people steal, among other things guns. that makes the NRA racist, and you think I read race into things?




(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 5:14:56 PM   
MercTech


Posts: 3706
Joined: 7/4/2006
Status: offline
If you don't think a group of conventionally armed persons can't hamstring a mechanized military; you have forgotten the Vietnam Conflict.
quote:

Guerrilla warfare is a form of irregular warfare in which a small group of combatants, such as paramilitary personnel, armed civilians, or irregulars, use military tactics including ambushes, sabotage, raids, petty warfare, hit-and-run tactics, and mobility to fight a larger and less-mobile traditional military.


The "Militia" in the U.S. originally was every able bodied man between the ages of 18 and 45. During the Civil War; during the Lincoln Administration that concept was conflated to mandatory federal service of the draft. Opponents to the Draft Act of 1863 had the thesis that militia service was under State Law and the Federal Government only had the right to call up the militia for 90 days unless an act of congress called for volunteers to augment the federal troops. This was never tested in the courts and protests were met with cannon fire.
http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h249.html

Prior to the Civil War; the U.S. Military was kept intentionally small so as to not be a burden on the public coffers and to preclude a military coup from affecting the government as so many other countries had to contend with.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_(United_States)

Many don't realize that direct taxation of the individual was unconstitutional. It took the 16th amendment, passed in 1913, to open the door of the huge federal government directly taxing the individual. Prior to the 16th amendment; the national debt was apportioned to the individual states based on population. The individual states decided how their state would pay their portion of the National Debt. Many opponents to the 16th ammendment made the case that direct taxation was opening a gate to runaway inflation and excessive Federal debt. The proponents of the 16th amendment sold it to the public as being a "temporary measure to pay off the war debt from the Spanish American War". I guess we can see who was right in hindsight.

Historical context can be interesting.

The founders of this country considered the right to keep and bear arms by the individual necessary to:
1> Discourage a military coup taking over the government.
2> Provide for a readily called up militia consisting of all able bodied men of an appropriate age to defend the country.
3> Provide for a last ditch preventative measure of governmental tyranny.
4> Provide for a force to be called up by State Governors to keep order in an emergency.

Personally, I have trouble refuting the classical reasons for the 2nd amendment guaranteeing individual right to firearms. And, with the modern legal interpretations and actual real conditions; there are two more reasons for personal firearm ownership.
1> The police have no mandate nor legal requirement to protect the individual.
http://tribunist.com/news/supreme-court-ruling-police-have-no-duty-to-protect-the-general-public/
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html

2> Away from overcrowded urban areas; a police response in less than half an hour is unusual. In some areas it will be the next day.

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment - 10/6/2017 5:15:01 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlackSinMaster

Bamad is one of the most honest people on here. And you are what fukwit?


correct and accurate.....and he knows it.

No, you believe you are but your judgement is clouded by your racist fantasies.


AGAIN bama..... FACTS bamad....... SHOW FACTS not hyperbole, insults or lame ass comparison's to other groups.

u get off ur ass and prove what I said is wrong. I fucking dare u.

http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=5079611 there's My post - so u, as the NRA likes to say.... "stand and fight" or STFU.









Since no racial figures are kept on NRA members I can't give you the %.
I have pointed out that not one of the laws supported by the NRA has anything to do with race.
You want me to make up numbers since they do not exist.
That is what you have to do to show how few black members they have.
Can you do that? you made the claim so prove it.

_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to itsSIRtou)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The original arguments FOR the second amendment Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.053