Legally Armed Man Protesting at 0bama Townhall
- Thread starter Cerise
- Start date
MrBishop
Well-Known Member
Soo...what you're saying, Gonz is that there's absolutely nothing wrong with someone who insists on owning a score of weapons for 'personal defense'?
IMHO...buddy with the arsenal in the above picture is nuttier than a Skippy™ warehouse, and just lookin' for an excuse to shoot someone like a REAL man.
IMHO...buddy with the arsenal in the above picture is nuttier than a Skippy™ warehouse, and just lookin' for an excuse to shoot someone like a REAL man.
catocom
Well-Known Member
That is what I'm saying (provided there is no evidence proving him dangerous)
Tacoma - Good thing an armed citizen was around to intervene
Stockton - 20 years ago.....not (relatively) recent. However, to play along, let's see content of the story
Well, sumbitch, a history of problems which makes him ineligible to own firearms.
Between my hubby and myself we have a lot of firearms (and ammo) and we've never shot anyone. Owning firearms doesn't make you a killer. Killing makes you a killer.
The ideas behind the Constitution was to keep the government afraid of the people. When it's the other way around (i.e., GW Bush administration) it's always bad for the rights of the citizens in every way. Allowing citizens to own guns ensured a certain protection of citizens from their government going fascist on them and also protected the borders from invasion (which was a real threat at the time).
We may not need to protect ourselves from the British or Spanish anymore, but we still need to let our Government know who is boss.
As for the guy in the picture with the flag behind him and the bible on the floor surrounded by arms and ammo... he's just a freak at one end of the spectrum. We've got other freaks at the other end of the spectrum.
spike
New Member
His rights would be infringed if he's ineligible.
2minkey
bootlicker
who was shot and killed. don't bring a pistol to a rifle fight. he would have been better attempting to flee. well then, maybe everybody should just carry an assault rifle at the mall. yeah.
(for me that would be fine. i never set foot in malls. i hate malls and the people in them. hopefully they'd all blast each other to kingdom come, and help purify the gene pool.)
MrBishop
Well-Known Member
Valk..with all due respect. If your GVT goes back to being fascist like a year ago, you could own as many handguns and longarms as you'd like, but it ain't going to stop your GVT from running railroad all over you. By the time enough people got organized enough to actually revolt, they'd be met at the front door by enough cops and security people to stop ten times their number in their tracks.
That's what Bush's Homeland Security is all about... protect America from all comers..foreign or domestic. Protect the status quo.
That's what Bush's Homeland Security is all about... protect America from all comers..foreign or domestic. Protect the status quo.
We're on the same page there
MrBishop
Well-Known Member
Does anyone here actually think that if the running GVT (whatever side of the aisle s/he came from) decided to give fascism a try that they would ever have a shot at it? D'ya you really think that the President has THAT much power over the minds and hearts of the military to convince them to effectively overthrow everything that America stands for, imprisoning it's populace, enforce death camps for dissenters and push through facism?
That President wouldn't even get past his secretary before s/he was shut down, impeached and imprisoned before the ink was dry on the laser-printed memo.
This would happen regardless of whether the right to bear arms was intact or not. You could physically take away every firearm from every American citizen not counting the cops and the military, and a sitting President could still not pull that off.
The "Right to bear arms" to protect us v. our own GVT is an NRA wet dream...and everyone's lining up for the sleeping pills. It'll Never Happen. Even if you lived 1000 years.
*Edit: Ya know what your greatest weapons against your own GVT is, and ever shall be? A pen and a voting booth.
That President wouldn't even get past his secretary before s/he was shut down, impeached and imprisoned before the ink was dry on the laser-printed memo.
This would happen regardless of whether the right to bear arms was intact or not. You could physically take away every firearm from every American citizen not counting the cops and the military, and a sitting President could still not pull that off.
The "Right to bear arms" to protect us v. our own GVT is an NRA wet dream...and everyone's lining up for the sleeping pills. It'll Never Happen. Even if you lived 1000 years.
*Edit: Ya know what your greatest weapons against your own GVT is, and ever shall be? A pen and a voting booth.
2minkey
bootlicker
yeah.
bush made some bad moves and the wave the flag cuz you're scared of them towelheads and let's invade iraq bitches bullshit was way too much, but dammit bishop where you getting these crazy ideas? maybe you should leave this to us red blooded 'mericans heh? and by the way us americans with guns vastly outnumber folks in uniform with guns, so unless they carpet bomb every neighborhood in the land, there ain't gonna be no wacky military takeover scenario yee fucking haw.
spike
New Member
Mirlyn
Well-Known Member
Frodo
Member
I can speculate that he jerks off with gun oil?
Tell me..what's the difference between that guy and these?
These photos were not staged by liberal hacks posing as gun nuts?
Gato_Solo
Out-freaking-standing OTC member
Nice try, but machine pistols are a different breed entirely. Different kind of rounds, but, then, you knew that. You're just trying to be deliberately obtuse in order to make my argument faulty. You can argue that the 1994 'definition' is more viable than mine, but, truth-be-told, that newer definition is nothing more than doublespeak. It means nothing at all. To be honest, a 12-guage shotgun is a lot more deadly than anything that the legislature can deem an 'assault weapon'.
Cerise
Well-Known Member
The answer is:
What are radical Muslims, explosive belts, RPGs and Korans?
These guys are implying they would kill infidels in the name of Allah.
That other guy is simply exercising his 2nd amendment right under the U.S. Constitution.
