Gun sales always rise AFTER mass shootings...

[AllBoxingAD]

That a sitting US Senator advocates a gun ban.

Geez, can't you guys keep up just once?!

Its a point that means what?

[1bad65]

Its a point that means what?

If you're too stupid to figure it out on your own, I'm not wasting my time trying to teach you.

[AllBoxingAD]

If you're too stupid to figure it out on your own, I'm not wasting my time trying to teach you.

You mean you cant answer the question?

[1bad65]

You mean you cant answer the question?

I've answered it repeatedly.

You're just too stupid and pig-headed to grasp it.

I know my limitations. I can't fix your stupid.

So why should I waste more of my time explaining it to you yet again??

I can put you in Time Out with Cobra if you keep pestering me to try and teach the unteachable.

[AllBoxingAD]

I've answered it repeatedly.

You're just too stupid and pig-headed to grasp it.

I know my limitations. I can't fix your stupid.

So why should I waste more of my time explaining it to you yet again??

I can put you in Time Out with Cobra if you keep pestering me to try and teach the unteachable.

Points are supposed to support an argument.

What argument does your point support?

[1bad65]

Points are supposed to support an argument.

What argument does your point support?

Enjoy Time Out.

You were warned, repeatedly.

If you can start engaging in discourse like an adult, I'll let you out and give you another chance.

[DreamerUSA]

Patriotic Americans like myself recognize the very real possibility that after a mass shooting the US Army will do a door to door sweep across the nation and remove all of our guns.

So it's important that I buy more guns than there are arms to wield them in my house in order to retain our freedom.

Any call for 'common sense gun reforms' will be met with hostility since it's obviously just a call for forceful collection of all of our legally obtained weapons.

Can't speak for others, but outside of my belief that we should be able to own whatever we want. There is my belief in law and order. If we can just decide willy nilly to allow the Feds to continue to ignore the Constitution. Then what is to stop them from confiscating all guns at some point?

It seems many have no problem with the Feds ignoring not one, but two Constitutional amendements, the 2nd and 10th, to get what they want. If people have no problem ignoring the Constitution, the very foundation of our country and our legal system, again I ask. What is to stop them from doing whatever the fu*k they please?

[The Big Dunn]

Can't speak for others, but outside of my belief that we should be able to own whatever we want. There is my belief in law and order. If we can just decide willy nilly to allow the Feds to continue to ignore the Constitution. Then what is to stop them from confiscating all guns at some point?

It seems many have no problem with the Feds ignoring not one, but two Constitutional amendements, the 2nd and 10th, to get what they want. If people have no problem ignoring the Constitution, the very foundation of our country and our legal system, again I ask. What is to stop them from doing whatever the fu*k they please?

while understanding your point, doesn't it make sense that the laws created when we were a just forming nation be evaluated and, if necessary, changed, now that we are a formed nation that is over 240 years old?

when the 2nd amendment was written, there was real fear that the gov't might try to take away the Free State.

Is that fear as real today as it was then?

the 10th amendment was written to define the establishment and division of power between the Federal government and state governments. The country obviously wasn't as vast, not as many different states, as multicultural, as economically and socially diverse.

edit: the country didn't have such vast inequities in health and education etc.

Shouldn't how we interpret this law reflect those changes?

[Motorcity Cobra]

Points are supposed to support an argument.

What argument does your point support?

Dude is a p*ssy. He said he reported me to the FBI because I said i dont have a problem with racist getting shot after Scalise was shot at that baseball game for Congress.

[DreamerUSA]

while understanding your point, doesn't it make sense that the laws created when we were a just forming nation be evaluated and, if necessary, changed, now that we are a formed nation that is over 240 years old?

when the 2nd amendment was written, there was real fear that the gov't might try to take away the Free State.

Is that fear as real today as it was then?

when the 10th amendment was written to define the establishment and division of power between the Federal government and state governments. The country obviously wasn't as vast, not as many different states, as multicultural, as economically and socially diverse.

Shouldn't how we interpret this law reflect those changes?

Cetainly they can change and the Founders envisioned this and put in place a legal framework for us to change things if as a country we decided to do so. Reinterpeting laws to fit our belief structure is'nt that legal framework.

I'm not sure what the size or makeup of our country has to do with the seperation of powers between the Fed and state governments. Absolutely anything someone wants the Feds to do, states either already do or can do if their people so choose. There is no Constitutional ban on states haveing their own healthcare systems, SS or basicly any program that exists under the Feds. If anything the size and diversity of our country should tell people that a one size fits all solution is asinine and thus state power should be even greater imo.