IRS.FBI.NSA.CIA.EPA.FCC.DHS.ObamaCare.gov
XPost: alt.atheism, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
XPost: alt.law-enforcement, alt.prisons, alt.revisionism
XPost: alt.atheism, alt.conspiracy, alt.politics.immigration
XPost: alt.true-crime, alt.politics.guns, misc.survivalism
XPost: soc.culture.usa, alt.survival
From: I-WAS-JUST-GANG-PROBED-BY-THE-ObamaRegime-SPY-NETWORK@IRS.
BI.NSA.CIA.EPA.FCC.DHS.ObamaCare.gov
> "Gray" wrote in message
> news:mruufa56eik59oq73f0f96ucl0g74g6vuj@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 10 Mar 2015 03:21:47 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 09 Mar 2015 20:23:39 -0400, Gray
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 08 Mar 2015 08:11:55 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 08 Mar 2015 11:00:42 -0400, Gray
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, 7 Mar 2015 20:06:27 -0500, "Scout"
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Gray" wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:jqrlfahf48q9nsm4ujeijig968f8bn2qrk@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 07 Mar 2015 03:38:24 -0800, Klaus Schadenfreude
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 06 Mar 2015 20:28:24 -0700, Snout@smack.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 06 Mar 2015 18:31:59 -0800, Klaus Schadenfreude
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Worse---is the idea that it was a "founders" fear of our
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that put the "RKB" in the constitution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of course it was.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Not. No such fear prompted the 2nd amendment, you dimwitted fool
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Of course there was.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Then either you've never read it or you suffer from a severe
>>>>>>>>>>>> reading
>>>>>>>>>>>> comprehension deficit.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Apparently you've never read the part about
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "the right of the people... shall not be infringed."
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The "right" (2nd amendment) had nothing to do with people
>>>>>>>>>> having/owning guns.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Of course it did. That's why it says, "the right of the people."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Now, I know liberals are dumb. And I know that liberals think
>>>>>>>>> that YOU
>>>>>>>>> are dumb. So that makes you really, REALLY dumb.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But even a really REALLY dumb person like yourself must feel
>>>>>>>>> awfully
>>>>>>>>> stupid saying what you just said.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Again---The "right" to have a fucking gun---was NOT at issue---
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [chuckle]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I know you want to convince yourself of this, Gary. Unfortunately,
>>>>>>>>> you're wrong, like you are about most things.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Why were they worried about the right of the people being
>>>>>>>>>>> infringed?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> They were not
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You can't find any "fear" in any recorded papers or writing
>>>>>>>>>> prior to
>>>>>>>>>> the onset of the Revolutionary war----where citizens "Feared"
>>>>>>>>>> the loss
>>>>>>>>>> of personal guns.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Of course you can. Are you ALWAYS this stupid, or are you
>>>>>>>>> trying to
>>>>>>>>> impress some liberal girl?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He certainly impresses me (although I'm a lesbian "girl") a lot
>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>> than you do, loser.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So you're a man who likes being screwed in the ass....that
>>>>>>> explains why you
>>>>>>> are trying to get everyone here to do that to you by being such a
>>>>>>> moron.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, you idiot. I'm a real female who's a lesbian.
>>>>>
>>>>> So then you *ARE* trying to impress some liberal girl.
>>>>>
>>>>> I nailed it.
>>>>
>>>> Funny.
>>>
>>> Did I make you laugh?
>>>
>>
>> I appreciated the humor, put it that way.
>>
>>>> Less piece means more peace. Ban guns now.
>>>
>>> Ooooh! You changed your sig! So you want to ban guns except for
>>> criminals now?
>>>
>>
>> Of course I don't want criminals to have guns, but they won't be able
>> to get them if there aren't any.
Yet you say that approach won't work for sex and abstinence and little
tiny human lives dying, you contend it's a ridiculous approach. Bans
have also failed for Heroin which is banned most every where on the
planet and some places it's the death penalty and isn't that what you
wanted to stop... people dying?
Looks like banning guns is like banning sex, banning Heroin, and banning
Alcohol (yes we had Prohibition that banned all but religious wine).
That ban on all alcohol didn't work so well, it's said thet there were
more barstools during prohibition than there ever were before
prohibition. A gun ban is guaranteed to fail and the people being
killed will only be more defenseless and helpless than before the gun
ban because they will have to break the law to survive just as average
people became criminals over alcohol during prohibition. And once
you're a felon for anything you might as well not worry about your good
name and reputation so you can and probably will be more likely to drift
into a life of crime.
Passing laws and trying to ban items and activities is pretty much a
losing battle and should be your last resort before society is all but
falling into anarchy.
People follow most laws that are reasonable but like Prohibition, when a
law is bullshit then the people turn on that law and ignore it and
Prohibition created more crime and wife beating than the proponents
claimed it could ever stop. Prohibition created or enhanced the income
of Al Capone and the gangland style of criminals.
Face it, Liberalism is a failure, always was and always will be.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
