Send a postcard, you leftist lemmings
- Thread starter Superman
- Start date
My elected officials already know where I stand. I don't need some stinking post card.
Not one More!!!...in a state with some of the strictest gun laws in the country.
Not one More!!!...in a state where the shooter had to pass a background check - and did.
Not one More!!!...in a state where the shooter had to oblige the legal wait time - and did.
Not one More!!!...in a state where large magazines are illegal and he perpetrated his crime with a 10 magazine gun, legally purchased.
How about Not One More!!! stupid Left-wing Liberal believes that gun control can possible work when we have enough evidence from DC to Chicago to California to show - it is a failed (utterly flawed) approach.
Morons.
Not one More!!!...in a state where the shooter had to pass a background check - and did.
Not one More!!!...in a state where the shooter had to oblige the legal wait time - and did.
Not one More!!!...in a state where large magazines are illegal and he perpetrated his crime with a 10 magazine gun, legally purchased.
How about Not One More!!! stupid Left-wing Liberal believes that gun control can possible work when we have enough evidence from DC to Chicago to California to show - it is a failed (utterly flawed) approach.
Morons.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 1,337
- Reaction score
- 1,680
- Points
- 113
With all due respect and sympathy to the Martinez family, and I mean that with utmost sincerity, the issue here is not guns per se, but an angry and indulged child that had within his means to acquire weapons, any weapons, to indulge his angry fantasies. The result was 6 dead from a variety of weapons, and 13 wounded by gun fire.
We have the requisite laws in place to "prevent" this sort of mayhem, and as Tim noted, young Elliot was in compliance. The incidents are within predictable margins given the size and dynamics of our population. No law(s) would have prevented it or will prevent the next incidents.
The "gun" issue is irrelevant. The second amendment isn't about keeping the Adams and Elliots of the world from going off or about duck hunting. It is about the security of free states. That's why is reads "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.".
I would prefer to see laws that prevent the "president" from arming our enemies and enabling the mayhem and destruction they wreak on places like Libya and Syria.
We have the requisite laws in place to "prevent" this sort of mayhem, and as Tim noted, young Elliot was in compliance. The incidents are within predictable margins given the size and dynamics of our population. No law(s) would have prevented it or will prevent the next incidents.
The "gun" issue is irrelevant. The second amendment isn't about keeping the Adams and Elliots of the world from going off or about duck hunting. It is about the security of free states. That's why is reads "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.".
I would prefer to see laws that prevent the "president" from arming our enemies and enabling the mayhem and destruction they wreak on places like Libya and Syria.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 18,561
- Reaction score
- 29,871
- Points
- 113
- Location
- The nearest Steelers bar.
Well, yeah, but it's not as if a specific Constitutional provision clearly and expressly mandated, in as clear language as can be imagined, that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
I mean, if our laws had such an incredibly specific provision guaranteeing that all have the right to "keep and bear [that means to have on your person, Polo] arms," then **** it, no debate would be needed.
I mean, if our laws had such an incredibly specific provision guaranteeing that all have the right to "keep and bear [that means to have on your person, Polo] arms," then **** it, no debate would be needed.
