'Hell, yes, we're going to take your AR-15, your AK-47' - Beto "Whitey" O'rourke

The Second Amendment and Heller v. D.C. protect the right for the non-militia to bear arms.
 
Last edited:
Yes. They started the fire to avoid capture by government agents. Agents who were obviously there to shoot them and bulldoze their home. Agents violating the Constitution of the United States.

They shot his wife and son, who no threat. All by government agents violating the Constitution of the United States.

McVeigh's attack was retaliatory in nature. It was an act of revenge.

Please convey that to Bigdog. He seems lost.
 
It is pretty funny, I don't know how many times I've seen gun huggers attempt to deflect in these gun exchanges by trying to turn it into an arguement on gun semantics, that the other is wrong close they don't know the difference weapons.
Inversion fallacy. That is what YOU are doing. It is the liberals that try to use buzzwords like 'assault weapons' (there is no such thing), or try to limit large magazines (an argument from randU. You can't even define 'large').
Bottom line, thier purpose by design is to kill a lot of people in a matter of seconds regardless of what you call them
For most guns. That is exactly right. You should think about that before you try to forcibly take them away from someone.
 
key point there being there "earl" "within the home," and Holder, and other cases attempting to use Holder as a precedent, went far beyond that, meaning guns can be regulated. Need proof, DC today is not an open gun city even though Holder centered upon DC gun laws

That is not a restriction, dumbass.

Washington DC is breaking the law.
 
Oh pleez, stop projecting, Stalinist Moron. :palm:

Just trying to help in your education. You seem to be at a complete loss as to what is going on around you. You seem completely oblivious of how important Waco was, and the resulting backlash that produced Timothy McVeigh.
 
Yes. They started the fire to avoid capture by government agents. Agents who were obviously there to shoot them and bulldoze their home. Agents violating the Constitution of the United States.

They shot his wife and son, who no threat. All by government agents violating the Constitution of the United States.

McVeigh's attack was retaliatory in nature. It was an act of revenge.

Wasn't this during BillyBob's Presidency and his AG Janet Reno? Why yes, it was. Democrats love their Fascism. ;)
 
I stole it from Inglorious Bastards.

Never really watched Game of Thrones.

In the sixth season, I believe, religious fanatics take over the city of Kings Landing and imprison and beat 'unbelievers' in their dungeons. The have a seven pointed star carved into their foreheads as a sign of their faith. Each point of this star represents one of the seven gods of the religion.
In the end, the religion and that temple where they operated from is destroyed by a powerful incendiary, called 'Wildfire' in an act of revenge.
 
Just trying to help in your education. You seem to be at a complete loss as to what is going on around you. You seem completely oblivious of how important Waco was, and the resulting backlash that produced Timothy McVeigh.

Oh pleez, it's obvious I am pro 2A.

You are just butthurt because, ... you hate guns. And it blew your tiny little mind when I asked you what kind of gun mcveigh used.
 
Just trying to help in your education. You seem to be at a complete loss as to what is going on around you. You seem completely oblivious of how important Waco was, and the resulting backlash that produced Timothy McVeigh.

The whole thing was quite unfortunate, but it was also indicative of the wrath people will have if someone tries to take their guns away. It also demonstrates quite well out of control government agents violating the Constitution of the United States.
 
Back
Top