monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

@hightor,

Quote:

The intimidation factor can't be overlooked.

They do not have their faces covered like Anti-Fa does. What is intimidating when you can identify the person?

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

Quote:

Americans are free to be racists

Abstractly yes, in the same way that Americans are free to be paedophiles. Try to claim your right to be a racist after you've beaten up a member of some racial minority.

Quote:

Americans are free to be dumb

Obviously.

Quote:

...that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty...

I've never seen patriots calling for our armed forces to be deactivated — has war been declared?

Quote:

How they protest, so long as it is done legally, is up to them.

And I'll continue to mock the wannabe Rambos who can't make a point without resorting to the tactic of intimidation.

2 Replies

@hightor,

Quote:

And I'll continue to mock the wannabe Rambos who can't make a point without resorting to the tactic of intimidation.

Some people are actually reassured by people sticking up for their rights, not intimidated. It is clear you are not one of them.

1 Reply

@coldjoint,

Quote:

Some people are actually reassured by people sticking up for their rights, not intimidated.

I'm not intimidated; I'm camo-clad, well-armed, and 500 miles away!

1 Reply

@hightor,

Use your rights or lose your rights.

You feel free to give yours up, the rest of us will be over here fighting to keep them.

1 Reply

@hightor,

Quote:

I'm not intimidated; I'm camo-clad, well-armed, and 500 miles away!

Is your face covered? If not. It's cool.

0 Replies

@snood,

snood wrote:

white supremacists and neo-Nazis

Progressives sure do like to demonize people.

0 Replies

@hightor,

hightor wrote:

And some of those people are racists and some are neo-nazis.

Shame on you for demonizing peaceful protesters who only want progressives to stop violating their civil liberties.

hightor wrote:

No doubt there are plenty of concerned gun-owners as well. But you can effectively air these views without showing up in childish camo costumes and armed to the teeth.

Carrying a gun in public is a natural protest against progressives who want to violate people's right to have that gun.

hightor wrote:

The intimidation factor can't be overlooked.

Protesting against progressivism is hardly intimidation.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

Quote:

In Virginia, this day is referred to as "Lobby Day" and has traditionally been a day to redress grievances against the government.

I suppose that's precisely why, for so many decadeds every year at this time in Virginia, NGOs have been out marching with balaclavas and automatic weapons. Last year, when the League of Women Voters and Greenpeace marched with grenade belts, sniper rifles and IEDs should have clued me in about what happened today.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

I don't consider access to semi-automatic firearms a "right" and am happy with the rather dated arsenal I have.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

Well, thank you for that, george. I haven't turned on my TV here for years though several times a week or so, I'll watch some news segment that comes to my attention from any network including Fox. My news intake is pretty much all print an those sources are as varied as my links demonstrate.

I do have to tell you that I knew with certainty that Fox was included in your diet. It shows up all the time in the phrases you use, in the style/nature of the arguments you advance and in what you've come to believe. Your take on the impeachment proceedings was/is a rather clear and evident example.

And sure, your peripheral knowledge from reading and from life inform how you think as it does with me and all the rest of us.

Again, thanks for the honesty. You and I are a very odd couple but I've always found that knowing you is mostly agreeable. Not right now, let me clarify, but mostly.

1 Reply

@hightor,

hightor wrote:

I don't consider access to semi-automatic firearms a "right" and am happy with the rather dated arsenal I have.

People were also OK with women not voting and blacks being slaves. I am glad that we progressed as a country and weren't happy with their dated things.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

People were also OK with women not voting and blacks being slaves. I am glad that we progressed as a country and weren't happy with their dated things.

But now this progress must stop?

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
People were also OK with women not voting and blacks being slaves. I am glad that we progressed as a country and weren't happy with their dated things.
But now this progress must stop?

Ask Hightor, he seems to be against it.

1 Reply

@blatham,

blatham wrote:

I suppose that's precisely why, for so many decadeds every year at this time in Virginia, NGOs have been out marching with balaclavas and automatic weapons. Last year, when the League of Women Voters and Greenpeace marched with grenade belts, sniper rifles and IEDs should have clued me in about what happened today.

Pro-freedom protesters march with guns as a statement of defiance against progressive tyrants who try to say that they can't have those guns.

0 Replies

@hightor,

hightor wrote:

I don't consider access to semi-automatic firearms a "right"

We have the right to have any arm that there is no compelling government interest in restricting access to.

There is no compelling government interest in restricting access to semi-auto actions. Given the need to aim for each shot, semi-auto rifles don't produce useful fire that is much faster than fire from a lever- or pump-action rifle.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Who decides which guns the government has a “compelling interest” in restricting?

2 Replies

@snood,

Ollie should. That way we could all acquire 60 caliber machine guns with 1000 round containers.

0 Replies

You engage in childish personal attacks because you are not capable of making an intelligent argument.

0 Replies

@snood,

snood wrote:

Who decides which guns the government has a "compelling interest" in restricting?

In theory, the Supreme Court. But in practice is it usually the NRA.

1 Reply

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know