0
   

Who Would Vote For bush Again?

 
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 08:51 am
The black friends I have are all hunters and outdoorsmen, they don't fit the inner city mold.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 09:12 am
cjhsa
cjhsa wrote:
Isn't it odd how blacks like to call for stricter gun controls yet they are the perpetrators of most urban gun related crimes?
Disarm whitey so we can run amuck.


It's not odd at all. All peoples, regardless of their race, want to live in safe neighborhoods. Poor people living in crime ridden neighborhoods are the most gun vicitimized population in the country. Of course they are the most likely to want gun control because they are the most threatened by guns and the criminals that prey on them more than people outside of their neighborhoods.

cjhsa, shame on you for such a racist statement!

BBB
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 09:24 am
cjhsa wrote:
The black friends I have are all hunters and outdoorsmen, they don't fit the inner city mold.


Based upon your statements I am suprised you have any black "friends"

You remind me of the person who says. "What me hate blacks? Hell some of my best friends are black."
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 09:36 am
Brandon9000 wrote:
Quote:
"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government."

--George Washington


Quote:
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."

--Thomas Jefferson


I have spent probably hundreds of hours discussing this issue with tNRA nutjobs. The individual right to bear arms under the Second Amendment does not exist. It certainly does not exist in the Ninth Circuit. If you want to dispute this, feel free to post a thread about it.

As well, there have been dozens of phony quotes attributed to Washington and Jefferson cooked up by the gun wackjobs.

So Brandon, kindly prove that Washington and Jefferson actually said these things you claim they said.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 09:38 am
Links to where quotes are cut-and-pasted are essential.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 10:00 am
The 9th circuit laughing stock of all things judicial.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 10:02 am
Re: cjhsa
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:

cjhsa, shame on you for such a racist statement!

BBB


I've been repeatedly the focus of reverse racism here at A2K. Why can't I stir the pot a bit? Hmmm?
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 10:10 am
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 10:10 am
Besides, it wasn't a racist comment, it was a statistically accurate but politically incorrect one.

Like another A2Ker has said, "being politically correct is gay".
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 10:30 am
Roxxxanne wrote:
The individual right to bear arms under the Second Amendment does not exist.


Liar.



Roxxxanne wrote:
It certainly does not exist in the Ninth Circuit.


Who gave the Ninth Circuit the power to trump the Supreme Court's Miller Ruling???

LOL!!!! Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 10:31 am
edgarblythe wrote:
Running people over with tanks and blasting away scores of them isn't murder?


Depends on the circumstances.

It isn't murder in the context of putting down a riot.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 10:53 am
oralloy, Not all riots deserve to be run down by tanks.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 10:58 am
cicerone imposter wrote:
oralloy, Not all riots deserve to be run down by tanks.


I'm not sure that "deserve" is the right word, as what I propose is for the restoration of order, not punishment.

However, what would be an example of a riot where it would be inappropriate to use force to put them down?
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 11:07 am
oralloy
Question, In your opinion would it or should it have been proper to shoot down the people who participated in the recent riots in France. Just trying to get a handle on when you feel it proper to shoot and run over rioters.
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 11:25 am
oralloy wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
Running people over with tanks and blasting away scores of them isn't murder?


Depends on the circumstances.

It isn't murder in the context of putting down a riot.


How do you define a riot and how do you determine that the people who you run over are "rioters" and not merely protestors or even just bystanders?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 11:32 am
Not all riots deserve the consequence of death.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 12:10 pm
au1929 wrote:
oralloy
Question, In your opinion would it or should it have been proper to shoot down the people who participated in the recent riots in France. Just trying to get a handle on when you feel it proper to shoot and run over rioters.


The should have all been shot and dragged through the streets.

Oh, I forgot, we are more civilized than the muslims. Party on, dudes!
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 12:29 pm
cjhsa wrote:
au1929 wrote:
oralloy
Question, In your opinion would it or should it have been proper to shoot down the people who participated in the recent riots in France. Just trying to get a handle on when you feel it proper to shoot and run over rioters.


The should have all been shot and dragged through the streets.

Oh, I forgot, we are more civilized than the muslims. Party on, dudes!

Yeah, so do you think rioters should be shot or not?
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 12:31 pm
Absolutely. Preferably in the lower extremities so they could be brought to trial - in Texas.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Mar, 2006 12:35 pm
cjhsa wrote:
Absolutely. Preferably in the lower extremities so they could be brought to trial - in Texas.


I guess there's an advantage to always trying to spin your opinions as being tongue-in-cheekish. Then, when you expose something really stupid and ugly about yourself, you can always claim "Keeding! I was only keeeedingg!!!!!"
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 © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/18/2025 at 07:01:59