0
   

Why Does Barack Obama Want To Ban All Our Guns?

 
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 06:47 am
Obama does want to ban all semi-autos. Considering I own four, and a semi-auto rifle in a deer hunting caliber is likely my next gun purchase, I don't have much use for the fellow.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 06:49 am
Satane, why do you fear little pussy cats?



http://www.athenswater.com/images/G21CAT.jpg
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 06:51 am
I take that back. I may buy a semi-auto clip fed Marlin 22 carbine for my son's 13th birthday.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 06:54 am
Acknowledging that cats are the spawn of Satan does not constitute evidence that i fear them. I don't fear guns, either. The only scary thing in this whole business is the thought of clowns like you and Tinkerbell who need to have firearms so you can feel like real men. You're both sad cases.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 06:56 am
I have firearms because:

1. It's my constitutional right and DUTY
2. Because I hunt
3. For personal protection

Set, the truly sad cases are those that are willing to compromise their rights in return for the perception of safety. Note that I don't support the Patriot Act either.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 06:57 am
Hey, if I'm tinkerbell, then Set must be a big, fat, gay Peter Pan.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 06:59 am
I'm real proud of you, Tinkerbell.

There is no constitutionally guaranteed right to own a handgun. There is no constitutionally guaranteed right to hunt with an automatic or a semi-automatic weapon (there is not constitutionally guaranteed right to hunt at all--equally, it is not prohibited). There is not constitutionally imposed duty to own firearms. Your spiel about rights is bullshit.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 07:11 am
BFGPP - you are wrong.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 07:35 am
Setanta wrote:
Acknowledging that cats are the spawn of Satan does not constitute evidence that i fear them. I don't fear guns, either. The only scary thing in this whole business is the thought of clowns like you and Tinkerbell who need to have firearms so you can feel like real men. You're both sad cases.


You have a very tiny penis don't you Laughing
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 07:48 am
More than enough to fill your mouth, which is what i suspect you'd like. But i don't associate with white trash.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 07:50 am
The funny part of this is using the standard applied to Obama, it looks like McCain wants to ban all guns too..

Quote:
Supports ban on certain assault weapons
McCain said he was open to voting for an assault weapon ban, depending on the details


Quote:
McCain rallied Senate Republicans behind a Democratic measure requiring background checks at gun shows.


Oh, the poor NRA.. no major candidate to endorse. Maybe they will endorse Bob Barr
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 07:51 am
cjhsa wrote:
. . . you are wrong.


Here, apparently, that didn't sink in with you, Tinkerbell. The constitution does not guarantee you the right to possess a handgun. The constitution does not guarantee you the right to hunt with an automatic or a semi-automatic firearm. The constitution does not guarantee you the right to hunt, and also does not prohibit it. The constitution does not impose any duty on you to own a firearm.

Facts will bite you in your ass every time, Tinkerbell.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 09:43 am
The Constitution and the Bill of Rights guarantee me the right to bear arms - of my choice. I can buy a handgun in any state, as I have no criminal background or medical condition such as yours that prevents me from doing so.

If I can get my hands on a nuke, Craven will want to buy it from me.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 09:51 am
The constitution does not guarantee you the right to bear arms of your choice. Here is a link to the text of the United States Constitution, which i thought i ought to provide, as i suspect you've never read it.

Article One, Section Eight reads, in part:

[Congress shall have the power:] To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

In upholding the 1934 National Firearms Act, in the case of The United States versus Miller, the Supremes wrote (in 1939):

In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense. Aymette v. State of Tennessee, 2 Humph., Tenn., 154, 158.

The Constitution as originally adopted granted to the Congress power- 'To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.' U.S.C.A.Const. art. 1, 8. With obvious purpose to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of such forces the declaration and guarantee of the Second Amendment were made. It must be interpreted and applied with that end in view.


So, the Supremes do not agree that you have the right to bear any arm of your choice.

As i said, Tinkerbell, facts have a habit of biting you in the ass.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 09:55 am
So why can I buy all that stuff at my local arma-mart?

Reality has a way of biting YOU in the ass, Set.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 09:57 am
I really don't mind it Set, keep pushing that drivel on your candidate of choice, make sure they let the public know their true stance before the election, and watch them fall like ducks from the sky....
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 10:50 am
Reality doesn't bite me in the ass--i've never said that you should or shouldn't have access to any particular type of weapon. I've just pointed out that the constitution does not guarantee you access to the firearm of your choice.

I've not endorsed any candidate. But you have a problem here, Tinkerbell. Apparently, you didn't read Parados' post. It seems you aren't going to have much fun this election cycle, with your one-trick pony.

parados wrote:
The funny part of this is using the standard applied to Obama, it looks like McCain wants to ban all guns too..

Quote:
Supports ban on certain assault weapons
McCain said he was open to voting for an assault weapon ban, depending on the details


Quote:
McCain rallied Senate Republicans behind a Democratic measure requiring background checks at gun shows.


Oh, the poor NRA.. no major candidate to endorse. Maybe they will endorse Bob Barr
0 Replies
 
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 10:59 am
Maybe we need to dress our babies in bullet proof bathing suits:

Toddlers Hurt by Idiots with Guns
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 11:08 am
Green Witch wrote:
Maybe we need to dress our babies in bullet proof bathing suits:

Toddlers Hurt by Idiots with Guns


How about titling that correctly?

Maybe "Children Shot by Gang Members" ?

Do you really think those gang bangers are going to turn in their weapons if guns were banned?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Jun, 2008 11:31 am
They may have been the victims of gang members, but that's just a guess on your part--the article makes no such statement.

Forget about the bullet-proof vests for toddlers, though, GW--if Tinkerbell here and his cronies get their way, armor-piercing rounds will be cheap and plentiful.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 01:14:14