Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 13:45:54 GMT -5
Does Mike think his 1A rights are guaranteed if his 2A rights are taken away? Well I still have 1A rights right now without ever exercising my 2A rights |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 13:47:23 GMT -5
A lot nicer (maybe more PC) than what most of us think he is... Well I've had a lot of people tell me recently they have positive thoughts about me. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 14:01:29 GMT -5
Does Mike think his 1A rights are guaranteed if his 2A rights are taken away? Well I still have 1A rights right now without ever exercising my 2A rights That's not an answer to the question I asked you. The answer is either yes or no. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 14:48:56 GMT -5
Does Mike think his 1A rights are guaranteed if his 2A rights are taken away? Well I still have 1A rights right now without ever exercising my 2A rights
And yes, you ARE exercising your 2A rights by choosing to not own a gun. You are acting by choice, not by mandate.
See how nice freedom is when we let ALL people have their freedom to do as THEY wish? |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by oujour76 on Mar 27, 2018 14:56:00 GMT -5
That Nixon appointed Stevens. Not 100% sure of your source, but believe you may have mis-read it...Nixon appointed Stevens to US Court of Appeals. Ford nominated him for US Supreme Court. I will say this. You are about the real kinda middle of the road person on here. Thanks, I think. |
|
|
Full Season 2022 Douche Champion
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 15:35:35 GMT -5
Serious question:
Why doesn't anyone bring Ruth Bader Ginsberg out of her coma long enough for her to sign HER retirement papers?
|
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 16:34:03 GMT -5
Serious question:
Why doesn't anyone bring Ruth Bader Ginsberg out of her coma long enough for her to sign HER retirement papers? Because she knows she'll be replaced with a judge who would reverse every single decision she ever made. If Clinton would've won I'm willing to bet she would've retired already. But shes going to try to hang on till the next Democrat president |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 16:34:40 GMT -5
Well I still have 1A rights right now without ever exercising my 2A rights
And yes, you ARE exercising your 2A rights by choosing to not own a gun. You are acting by choice, not by mandate.
See how nice freedom is when we let ALL people have their freedom to do as THEY wish?Except for gays, minorities, and muslims |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 16:36:33 GMT -5
Well I still have 1A rights right now without ever exercising my 2A rights That's not an answer to the question I asked you. The answer is either yes or no. Then my answer is Yes Because again, the entire point of the 2nd amendment was to make sure if the government tried to be a tyrannical one the citizens would be able to fight back using their own weapons. Today that no longer applies because the US military would defeat you and your ilk in 10 seconds if it came to that. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by bamorin on Mar 27, 2018 17:45:13 GMT -5
That's not an answer to the question I asked you. The answer is either yes or no. Then my answer is Yes Because again, the entire point of the 2nd amendment was to make sure if the government tried to be a tyrannical one the citizens would be able to fight back using their own weapons. Today that no longer applies because the US military would defeat you and your ilk in 10 seconds if it came to that. So, mikey says we actually should have bazookas, missile launchers, anti-aircraft guns, machine guns, and large artillery to protect us in the 21st century from the 21st century weaponry of the government. glad you're catching on. Ba( they couldn't do it in 10 seconds in '73)Morin |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 18:08:13 GMT -5
Then my answer is Yes Because again, the entire point of the 2nd amendment was to make sure if the government tried to be a tyrannical one the citizens would be able to fight back using their own weapons. Today that no longer applies because the US military would defeat you and your ilk in 10 seconds if it came to that. So, mikey says we actually should have bazookas, missile launchers, anti-aircraft guns, machine guns, and large artillery to protect us in the 21st century from the 21st century weaponry of the government. glad you're catching on. Ba( they couldn't do it in 10 seconds in '73)Morin There was an open war between the US military and citizens that included guns and shooting at each other in 1973?? Missed that one in history class. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by bamorin on Mar 27, 2018 19:24:42 GMT -5
So, mikey says we actually should have bazookas, missile launchers, anti-aircraft guns, machine guns, and large artillery to protect us in the 21st century from the 21st century weaponry of the government. glad you're catching on. Ba( they couldn't do it in 10 seconds in '73)Morin There was an open war between the US military and citizens that included guns and shooting at each other in 1973?? Missed that one in history class. yep, lasted 73 days. the US was stuck with the M16, the citizens were stuck with the AK47. the government did what they could to call it a draw. one from the government is sitting center in my avatar pleading his case. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 19:28:17 GMT -5
There was an open war between the US military and citizens that included guns and shooting at each other in 1973?? Missed that one in history class. yep, lasted 73 days. the US was stuck with the M16, the citizens were stuck with the AK47. the government did what they could to call it a draw. one from the government is sitting center in my avatar pleading his case. Where did the battles take place? Causalities?? |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by bamorin on Mar 27, 2018 19:37:25 GMT -5
yep, lasted 73 days. the US was stuck with the M16, the citizens were stuck with the AK47. the government did what they could to call it a draw. one from the government is sitting center in my avatar pleading his case. Where did the battles take place? Causalities?? South Dakota, Minnesota yep |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 19:40:21 GMT -5
Serious question:
Why doesn't anyone bring Ruth Bader Ginsberg out of her coma long enough for her to sign HER retirement papers? Because she knows she'll be replaced with a judge who would reverse every single decision she ever made. If Clinton would've won I'm willing to bet she would've retired already. But shes going to try to hang on till the next Democrat president She needs the assault pillow that "your side" gave Justice Scalia... |
|
Jan 13, 2020 17:38:49 GMT -5
Jan 13, 2020 17:38:49 GMT -5
May 1, 2022 14:04:40 GMT -5
May 1, 2022 14:04:40 GMT -5
