evince
Truthmatters
The constitition doesn’t promise you weapons of war you stupid fucking Russo bot hole on Q ness drugs
And now we have Tuesday’s mass shooting,
- Thread starter archives
- Start date
The constitition doesn’t promise you weapons of war you stupid fucking Russo bot hole on Q ness drugs
Yakuda
Verified User
I own a 5 shot .38 special revolver that could conceivably be used to kill 5 people in one location which is one shot more than the FBIs definition of a mass shooting, should it be "heavily regulated"?
Goddam fucking lying shit stain.
Lying commie son of a whore.
Yakuda
Verified User
It also doesn't guarantee you the ability to kill babies in the womb.
I did, specifically, “no one is coming to grab your whatever,” you can keep it if it as long as you complied with all the prerequisites
JUST DIASARM LIKELY DEMOCRAT VOTERS = MURDER RATE CUT BY 80%....
Don’t have to emigrate, I have dual citizenship, two passports, but I live here
SmarterthanYou
rebel
you don't know how to read the Constitution, moron. It doesn't give anybody rights, it limits government power, which also happens to tell them that they have no authority to infringe on our right to weapons of war
Oh, well that makes it all better, tell that to the dead and injured
SmarterthanYou
rebel
lighten up francis. he's correct. whenever you buy a firearm from a licensed dealer, you fill out a 4473.....what do you think happens to that form?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
so you'll accept other prerequisites to exercise all other rights, correct?
Into the Night
Contributor
Yes it is.
It always has been.
The State can regulate use of vehicles (include horse and carriage) on public roads, but it cannot outlaw it.
It is not a privilege. It is a right. Anyone that can handle a car safely and can demonstrate that to the State must be given a license.
A gun needs no such demonstration. Like any weapon, they can be owned and carried by anyone. Their use is regulated, using such laws as assault and murder laws.
Correct. This is stated in the Declaration of Independents and alluded to again in the Constitution.
Because Democrats do not recognize the Constitution of the United States nor any State constitution.
Been down this road hundred times, quickly, one fact, no Constitutional right is absolute, never was, never will be, they are all regulated, and please, don’t waste everyone’s time and return with the inherent right bullshit
Yakuda
Verified User
So if I can own one weapon capable or a "mass shooting" what logic can you use to prevent me from owning another type of weapon with the same ability? Is it just matter of how many people can be killed in one location? What if a person took an AR 15 to 10 different location and only killed 3 at each? That wouldn't be considered a mass shooting.
Ah, so what are you up to, half dozen over ten years? Really want to compare the numbers?
Yakuda
Verified User
Sorry misread that
Airstrip One
Completely Effed
Stay there, and fuck up the other country. Isn't it safer there?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
1. wrong..........rights were considered absolute by the framers and the people who ratified the constitution. 2. It was later decided that rights can be regulated because people didn't like the freedom of others.
the debate minutes of the constitution, as well as the papers, have several of the framers talking about rights that the government would have zero power or authority over............is there a secret document that denotes that they lied to the people?
Into the Night
Contributor
What about the right of the aborted child to his body? Murder for convenience is murder, twit.
Yes they do. The right of self defense is inherent.
It is YOU that fails to recognize the Constitution of the United States no any State constitution.
It is YOU that supports the Democrats that have successfully (for now) executed a coup and are converting the federal government into an oligarchy.
It is YOU that supports fascism and communism.
It is YOU that supports treason.