One form of violence (gun violence) with a weapon is far easier to accomplish than any other.Originally Posted by Baron D'Holbach
One form of violence (gun violence) with a weapon is far easier to accomplish than any other.
"Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."
Luisss, where do you get your information from, God?
It's might be easier to shoot someone, but if I hit you once in the head with a bat you would not wake up. Hit you in the forearm and you might never be able to tie your shoes because your bones would be shattered. If I shot you in the arm, you'd probably be fine with a little surgery.
Roses are red; violets are blue. I shagged your girl; maybe tomorrow you can to.
Common sense.
I realize that, like God, you don't believe in such a thing, but it is true nevertheless.
"Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."
It's not hard to stab someone. And with a baseball bat I can inflict a good deal of damage towards an unarmed assailant.Common sense.
I realize that, like God, you don't believe in such a thing, but it is true nevertheless.
Both require proximity to the individual being targeted.
"Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."
If you're robbing or mugging someone than that that's covered.
http://news.yahoo.com/los-angeles-po...012126480.html
What do you think about that?
And is that where most gun-violence occurs?
"Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."
Do you have statistics on where the most gun violence occurs?
It actually makes sense that God doesn't believe in common sense and you being a man of God think you have some.Common sense.
I realize that, like God, you don't believe in such a thing, but it is true nevertheless.
So you lack common sense and reading comprehension?It actually makes sense that God doesn't believe in common sense and you being a man of God think you have some.
Because I said neither of those things.
(Setting you up here)
"Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."
Color all you want. You wrote that God doesn't believe in common sense.
We also all know you lack common sense as per your posts. Your thoughts on gunshots vs. knife wounds only verifies this further.
Is that what you do in this alternative reality you have made for yourself?
"Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."
So you see where you said God doesn't believe in common sense.
Good.
Much like my intelligence transcends yours, God transcends common sense.
I hope that solves your dilemma.
"Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."
So now you don't believe in your own intelligence.
Good, now you're on track with the rest of us.
On a bit of a different note, I'd like to point out that this is also within the US constitution:
...the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.
Are we just pointing out irrelevant things now?
Did you know that Canadian law states that every 5th song on the radio must be by a Canadian born citizen? Justin Beiber explained.
That was actually to prevent us from giving it to the Indians, but since we wiped them out, it's no longer needed. We still have criminals and an oppressive government, therefore, we still need guns. Thank you nichts, for proving my point.
Sirveri explained quite clearly what the second amendment was originally intended for. You're wrong.
"Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."
Sirv is an expert? I should let him interpret what things mean to me? You're a pedo, since I said it on the Internet does it make it less true?
You run around saying your god has no common sense and then expect to take anything you say seriously? You should probably use this time you are making yourself stupid with and file your teeth down.
Last edited by The Blazin1; 12-27-2012 at 06:14 PM.
If I knew I was gonna get you to Spazz like a ****** just by saying you're wrong I would have done so much sooner
"Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."
Spaz like what? You call that a victory lol, the very fact that you disagree with me makes my opinion that much stronger, even the people that dislike me, dislike you more. People stop arguing points that are in line with your views because you make such idiotic posts, it makes them seem dumber because they appear to be on the same side as you. Now go report me, it's what you do.If I knew I was gonna get you to Spazz like a ****** just by saying you're wrong I would have done so much sooner
I notice you didn't deny anything from my previous post,it must all be true.
Please, Blazin. You run around sucking up to the biggest trolls, you're a racist prick and you're clever at times. That's the extent of your forum persona, and of your intelligence. You've never argued any point successfully, and you yourself have admitted my arguments have been sound on occasion.
Don't let the fact that we disagree on this one matter cloud you from the fact that overall, you're a dumb ***.
"Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."
You're the one who keeps bringing up what's in the constitution, since what's in the constitution is gospel. No harm in pointing out what else is in the constitution, is there?
Really? Where did I "keep bringing up what's in the constitution?"
Also, point out where that was changed as well. Or point out the difference between the constitution and the bill of rights. We'll wait.
The bill of rights is part of the constitution.
You really gonna argue that **** point again?
"Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."
Here's where you can find information on the three separate documents that are stored in separate housing units in the Rotunda for the Charters of Freedom.
It's really very simple. The text in red pertains the the text in green. The two parts are to be taken together, not treated as separate statements.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.
Placing restrictions on guns for people not part of a "well regulated militia" is not an infringement on their 2nd Amendment rights.
Or that, in order to secure the freedom of any state, in the US, let alone the rest of the world, will require a lot more fire power than a few assault rifles handled by doomsday preppers.
Thing is, allowing the possession/sale of such fire arms would result in more harm than good, ultimately damaging the security of the free state. Which is why those arms are illegal.
So, if you want a fire arm for household protection, cool! Buy a handgun. But learn to use it. You certainly don't need an AK47 to protect your home, however. And nor will it help you revolt against a "tyrannical" government.
Oh cool. So my friend and I are a well-regulated militia so we can get AK-47s.
Noice!
Hmmmm, and you and your friend are gonna go "secure" the liberties of Luisss, eh?
The fact that they are housed individually does not mean they are not part of one larger document. It's the equivalent of storing three different chapters of a book in three different houses. They still make up part of the same book.
EDIT:
From your own damn source, lol:
The Bill of Rights, added to the Constitution in 1791 as the first ten amendments, explicitly protected freedom of speech, of the press, of religion, and of assembly, among many other rights.
Last edited by Luisss; 12-27-2012 at 08:50 PM.
"Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."
We patrol our block making sure liberties aren't infringed upon.
That's how it works, right?
A lawyer who can't read! Typical. Let me highlight the section from the Government page that I linked you to:
Even their collective name is the CharterS (note the plurality there) of Freedom. Not the Charter of Freedom.The Rotunda for the Charters of Freedom is the permanent home of the Declaration of Independence, Constitution of the United States, and Bill of Rights. These three documents, known collectively as the Charters of Freedom, have secured the rights of the American people for more than two and a quarter centuries.
Boy, it's really sad how you fail to grasp this. I hope you'll be bringing some sort of A game come January. I don't want to burst out laughing. :/
Hey Baron, tell me what an amendment is.
The Bill of Rights is known as a document, but that document is an addition to the Constitution, making the Constitution include not only the original text but it's ten amendments.
How about this: It's like an Appendix. An appendix is technically it's own piece but it is part of a much larger document.
"Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."
Boy, first you can't define 'infringement' and now this? Are there any words you DO know?Hey Baron, tell me what an amendment is.
Look here: These THREE documents. That's from the government's page on them. Surely you aren't saying that you know more than the government? Why, that'd be like what you accuse TCG of with SCOTUS.
Are you going to define it or not?
The government recognizes three documents, one of which is an addition to the another that together form the constitution in it's entirety. The government got it right, you're just reading it wrong.
Like I said, no common sense or reading comprehension.
"Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."
You didn't define infringe, why should I play your game?
Nope. I'm reading it right, you're trying to add all types of definitions and hidden meanings to it that aren't there.
Three documents housed in three different units. It's that simple. Thanks for playing, buh-bye now!
Well, we're all glad you're finally admitting you have neither.Like I said, no common sense or reading comprehension.
It's been a long and arduous journey but you've finally learned what we've been telling you all along.
Common sense is no game, Baron.You didn't define infringe, why should I play your game?
Go color.
"Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit."
Posting Permissions
