hamilton on gun control (not really) & militia

Hey assup ? That's a good picture of me and IBhankering at the last meeting of independent gloryhole owners and operators ! Originally Posted by Rey Lengua

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Your stupid ass still doesn’t comprehend that it’s the armed citizenry is the precursor for a well regulated militia, Ekim the Inbred Chimp, and you're still an illiterate, lib-retard fuck citing an illiterate lib-retard fuck, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State ..."

The survival of the state depends on a well regulated militia, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms ..."

A well regulated militia depends on an armed citizenry, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Hence, Ekim the Inbred Chimp, an armed citizenry is the precursor for a well regulated militia which is necessary for the survival of a "free state": not vice versa as your cited lib-retard jackass of an ignoramus claims, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.

Smarter people than us argue this every day.
I doubt that a bunch of name calling, hooker fucking guys can come up with an answer on a hooker board.

Smarter people than us argue this every day.
I doubt that a bunch of name calling, hooker fucking guys can come up with an answer on a hooker board. Originally Posted by Gotyour6

The Founding Fathers were pretty clear as to their intent, but lib-retard purveyors of lies and deceit -- such as the one cited by Ekim the Inbred Chimp -- continue to mislead the willfully ignorant and stupid.

Just moments ago, a talking head on CNN kept citing a poll showing most Americans are in favor of background checks, but she never revealed that there are, in fact, current statutes requiring back ground checks when purchasing a weapon: pure deception agitating for more gun laws.

Ok, I don't usually weigh in on gun debates, but here's my 2 cents:

Who would YOU trust to suggest what limits, if any, should apply to your Second Amendment rights?

Posters on a hooker board? Yeah, like I might trust yinz on anything.

The media? Yeah, like I care what CNN, FOX or some pampered editorial writer/talking head thinks about guns.

Politicians? Fuck, no! There is no question Odumbo and hildebeest would love to jettison the Second Amendment if they could get away with it, without seeking a Constitutional amendment to repeal it (that's too hard!). Every time they open their mouths it pushes me into the pro-gun camp!

The NRA? They oppose ANY limits, but I would like to hear their arguments against specific limits proposed by others.

The Courts? They're supposed to rule on a law's constitutionality, not propose their own laws. But again, I still want to hear their legal arguments when they uphold/strike down limits proposed by others.

Gun victims? Not really. However sympathetic I may be, I can't see them as unbiased on the issue.

Law enforcement? BINGO! Those are the folks I want to hear from. They strike me as being far more credible than any other party. If they start complaining about being outgunned by automatic weapons and so-called "cop killer" ammo when they respond to the bad guys, then I want to know what they think we should do about it. For them it's a life-and-death issue. Remember the 1997 North Hollywood Bank of America robbery?

Are there any reliable surveys or polls regarding LE's views on gun control? I'm not saying their opinions should prevail, only that I give them a lot more credibility than I do anyone else. Put yourself in a cop's shoes. They think about and deal with this every day.

Smarter people than us argue this every day.
I doubt that a bunch of name calling, hooker fucking guys can come up with an answer on a hooker board. Originally Posted by Gotyour6

The Founding Fathers were pretty clear as to their intent, but lib-retard purveyors of lies and deceit -- such as the one cited by Ekim the Inbred Chimp -- continue to mislead the willfully ignorant and stupid.

Just moments ago, a talking head on CNN kept citing a poll showing most Americans are in favor of background checks, but she never revealed that there are, in fact, current statutes requiring back ground checks when purchasing a weapon: pure deception agitating for more gun laws. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

If anything come up needing a militia chimp chump, you will have to go bail yours out of jail if any are still alive. Otherwise just call up the National guard. They are a well trained unit made up of civilians.

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Your stupid ass still doesn’t comprehend that the Second Amendment addresses the right of the individual American citizen to be armed, Ekim the Inbred Chimp. You're an illiterate retard citing illiterate retards, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State ..."

The survival of the state depends on a well regulated militia, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms ..."

A well regulated militia depends on an armed citizenry, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Hence, Ekim the Inbred Chimp, an armed citizenry is the precursor for a well regulated militia which is necessary for the survival of a "free state": not vice versa as your cited lib-retard jackass of an ignoramus claims, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.

eeehhbuburrrape should not be allowed to own a gun... dang gummit...

Your stupid ass still doesn’t comprehend that the Second Amendment addresses the right of the individual American citizen to be armed, Ekim the Inbred Chimp. You're an illiterate retard citing illiterate retards, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.

The survival of the state depends on a well regulated militia, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.



A well regulated militia depends on an armed citizenry, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.



Hence, Ekim the Inbred Chimp, an armed citizenry is the precursor for a well regulated militia which is necessary for the survival of a "free state": not vice versa as your cited lib-retard jackass of an ignoramus claims, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.
Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Which militia would you call?

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

FTFYour stupid ass, Ekim the Inbred Chimp, because your stupid ass still doesn’t comprehend that it’s the armed citizenry is the precursor for a well regulated militia, Ekim the Inbred Chimp. And you're still an illiterate, lib-retard fuck who is stupidly citing another illiterate lib-retard fuck, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.

FTFYour stupid ass, Ekim the Inbred Chimp, because your stupid ass still doesn’t comprehend that it’s the armed citizenry is the precursor for a well regulated militia, Ekim the Inbred Chimp. And you're still an illiterate, lib-retard fuck who is stupidly citing another illiterate lib-retard fuck, Ekim the Inbred Chimp. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Go lick your wounds chimp chump.

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Keep taking cum shots in your mouth, Ekim the Inbred Chimp.

well we know he does not being pissed on how about a little scat

well we know he does not being pissed on how about a little scat Originally Posted by cptjohnstone

LMAO wonder what grade school kid wrote that for the Okiebilly?

Ok, I don't usually weigh in on gun debates, but here's my 2 cents:

Who would YOU trust to suggest what limits, if any, should apply to your Second Amendment rights?

Posters on a hooker board? Yeah, like I might trust yinz on anything.

The media? Yeah, like I care what CNN, FOX or some pampered editorial writer/talking head thinks about guns.

Politicians? Fuck, no! There is no question Odumbo and hildebeest would love to jettison the Second Amendment if they could get away with it, without seeking a Constitutional amendment to repeal it (that's too hard!). Every time they open their mouths it pushes me into the pro-gun camp!

The NRA? They oppose ANY limits, but I would like to hear their arguments against specific limits proposed by others.

The Courts? They're supposed to rule on a law's constitutionality, not propose their own laws. But again, I still want to hear their legal arguments when they uphold/strike down limits proposed by others.

Gun victims? Not really. However sympathetic I may be, I can't see them as unbiased on the issue.

Law enforcement? BINGO! Those are the folks I want to hear from. They strike me as being far more credible than any other party. If they start complaining about being outgunned by automatic weapons and so-called "cop killer" ammo when they respond to the bad guys, then I want to know what they think we should do about it. For them it's a life-and-death issue. Remember the 1997 North Hollywood Bank of America robbery?

Are there any reliable surveys or polls regarding LE's views on gun control? I'm not saying their opinions should prevail, only that I give them a lot more credibility than I do anyone else. Put yourself in a cop's shoes. They think about and deal with this every day. Originally Posted by lustylad

Once again, LexusLoser looks to government for the answer. Forget the Constitution. We don't need rights. The NRA does not support gun violence, they support gun rights for law abiding citizens. Demonize them all you want, but they are on the front lines of reasonable, Constitutional gun regulation.