You are a Republican "modern liberal" that want folks to justify their need of a firearm under the guise of common sense. That is not Right Leaning. SMH all you want.
OT: Reporter and camerman shot on live tv in Virginia
- Thread starter bac2therac
- Start date
You are a Republican "modern liberal" that want folks to justify their need of a firearm under the guise of common sense. That is not Right Leaning. SMH all you want.
He's a former navy seal. That fact has been disclosed on this board many times in the past.
And from his prior posting history... a right wing gun nut.
Last edited:
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
I guess you'd like me to call myself a liberal for not thinking that people have any reason to have anything more than a handgun and hunting rifle. Again, please let me reiterate, I AM NOT FOR THE BANNING OF WEAPONS, I simply just cannot see a rational reason why people need more than a hand gun and hunting rifle.
because some people just want them, assuming its legal, to feel safe, to shoot at a range, whatever.
why do people buy cars for 200k when a Toyota or Honda can get you there just the same
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
Umm assault weapons? LOL
I'm out of here man, this discussion is absurd. No talking rationally with irrational people.
And again, your right to having and disseminating your opinion ends my right to bear arms begins. I do not need to give you a rational reason for or in any way justify my need for purchasing certain guns. You're chasing your tail in circles, because the Constitution's Bill of Rights is clear here.
You aren't getting it. The mindset of requiring someone to justify the exercising of a human right under the guise of "common sense" is not a Conservative position. Maybe you feel "right leaning" around your NJ neighbors but you are not actually right leaning.
Second and I will really this time stop with this. For example if I want watch for no other reason other than that I want it, is that a ration reason or an irrational reason for wanting a watch. If you concede that wanting something just because you want it is rational then there is your rational reason for wanting a firearm other than a rifle or hand gun. See, it was right in front of you. And that is why your common sense / rational test fails.
And it fails because you aren't being honest about it being a rational reason test - it's because you think you know better. And you don't. And that too isn't a Conservative position to take.
Conservative Logic:
Gay Marriage? BAN IT!
Abortion? BAN IT!
Guns? look guys, banning things never really works, people find a way anyway...
Gay Marriage? BAN IT!
Abortion? BAN IT!
Guns? look guys, banning things never really works, people find a way anyway...
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
For example, my pops has an AR, I've shot with before. It has no practical use unless I wanted to go on a killing spree.
The right to bare arms is outdated and has no place in modern urban society (agrarian society is another matter). It was instituted at a time where militias were necessary for state security over TWO HUNDRED years ago. It's time to move on.
Change the Constitution then. Further do some research on what happens to disarmed societies.
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
I do think abortion should be banned but thats a whole different topic. Liberals want to ban guns to protect the innocent but theyre fine with murdering the innocent
Yeah...
The reason why you're "out of here" is because you don't have the intellectual background for the discussion.
You don't know what an "assault rifle" is. You couldn't accurately describe the difference between various gun platforms if your life depended on it.
Couldn't have said it better myself. And best of luck trying to change any of the 10 Amendments originally enumerated within the Bill of Rights.
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
Again, I DONT WANT TO BAN GUNS. Holy molyyyyy please learn to comprehend what people are writing.
Sure because living in a urban society is totally safe. No one gets shot in NYC or Chicago.
A
anon_0k9zlfz6lz9oy
Guest
You're right, I couldn't. You know why I can't. Talking about guns will not make me money, so I don't really concern myself with it. I would imagine an AR being an assault weapon based off just knowing what the word assault means
Your opinion means about as much as mine, and we're polar opposites so I'll defer to the Constitution, which upholds my right to bear arms. And if state militias are now obsolete, what exactly is the National Guard for?
Dumbass that was a response to someone else. I'm still waiting for your response to my earlier response to you.
Telling someone to learn to comprehend in a situation you misread the direction of the post is pretty ironic.
Further you don't understand what a "Right Leaning" political position is, you refuse to answer direct questions and are confused by how a message board works.
Another reason I am starting to change my mind is this story, which took place in NJ. A man's drone was shot by the neighbor, while it flew on the drone pilot's property. I am an avid RC enthusiast and I fly a drone as part of the hobby. If there is a law that brings harsh punishments to people who shoot at pricey model airplanes I am all for it.
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/20...hooting_down_drone_cops_say.html#incart_river
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/20...hooting_down_drone_cops_say.html#incart_river
It will change or it'll become as antiquated, useless and dangerous as the Quran or Bible. Laws that don't evolve with the societies they serve just become dangerous and warped overtime. Losing their original intent, meaning and context. All the Quran and Bible holy war bullshit was added in there during the crusades. There is no need for it anymore but those antiquated "laws" haven't been amended or removed leading to extremists from these intolerant religions to justify killing one another.
I don't think coconut trees should be cut down but I do feel a bit uncomfortable standing under them. Especially the ones with big loads of extra sharp, extra hard, extra pointy ones hanging from them with a bunch of monkeys up top playing with em...
You will spend years in jail in NJ if you do that - especially in a suburban or urban area.
lol...part of me wants to fill our friend kyk in on this, but another part of me would enjoy watching him try to figure it out with clues based on other posts.
Very Progressive of you. How do fundamental human rights change over time? In the case of the 2A did people suddenly stop trying to use force to make others do what they want?
So now you're advocating limits on free expression on religion, or just banning it all together as well?
What violent extremists use to justify their actions abroad and religious crusades are irrelevant to laws that are not only very much in effect today, but also the base upon which this country was founded. In your opinion, these constitutional amendments are antiquated; in my opinion, you're a progressive moron trying to take away my fundamental rights because you don't agree with them. Feel free to quit while you're already behind.
Cruise on over to the CE board and you will see that I totally agree with you, lock, stock and barrel.
My political leanings, while they are usually to the right of center, almost always err on the side of expanding rights, not restricting them. Even if that means a bunch of, what are they, anchor babies?
How about this? More Anchor Babies raised by Socialist Illegal Immigrant families eventually leads to a restriction of rights over the next few generations due to the new socialist voters shifting the government left. Do you still feel the same way about Anchor Babies?
See Dred Scott v. Sandford or Plessy v. Ferguson or the 14th Amendment or, most recently, Obergefell v. Hodges
Gun ownership is part of our Constitution. You can't change the Constitution just because it is outdated! What, are you going to want to take my slave property away from me next?
