The fact that you believe more people are thinking like you validates my suspicions that you simply don't understand the dynamics in regards to firearms and their role in America, spreading factless rhetoric simply to agitate others.

Correct. No citizen patriot needs to own one.

 

That is the dumbest thing I've ever read. That's pretty much all riffles and pistols, you realize? I guess you don't like double-action revolvers either. I guess in your view, we should only be allowed to own black powder firearms. We need voting control for folks like you.

That is the dumbest thing I've ever read. That's pretty much all riffles and pistols, you realize? I guess you don't like double-action revolvers either. I guess in your view, we should only be allowed to own black powder firearms. We need voting control for folks like you.

 

What an ironic statement for someone so staunchly defending the 2nd Amendment to make.

What an ironic statement for someone so staunchly defending the 2nd Amendment to make.

Why is it ironic that I don't want someone that's against the constitution voting? Are you not reading the nonsensical posts he's making, or are you in lockstep with him? And the comment was more tongue in cheek as to his irony of wanting to take away a constitutional right.

The segment of the society that most needs to possess AR-15s are moonshine runners and people with meth labs in their kitchens, aside from deranged terrorists who shoot up office parties and grade schools.

The segment of the society that most needs to possess AR-15s are moonshine runners and people with meth labs in their kitchens, aside from deranged terrorists who shoot up office parties and grade schools.

 

I stand corrected. This is the dumbest thing I've read.

Why is it ironic that I don't want someone that's against the constitution voting? Are you not reading the nonsensical posts he's making, or are you in lockstep with him? And the comment was more tongue in cheek as to his irony of wanting to take away a constitutional right.

 

Read S L O W L Y so you can maybe understand. You want to limit the constitutional right of someone who doesn't defend your most sacred constitutional right. You have exposed yourself. The Constitution is only to be defended for those rights you hold dear. Your thoughts, clearly stated in your own words, you are fine with denying others their Constitutional rights.

Why is it ironic that I don't want someone that's against the constitution voting? Are you not reading the nonsensical posts he's making, or are you in lockstep with him? And the comment was more tongue in cheek as to his irony of wanting to take away a constitutional right.

You have a right to bear arms under the Constitution. It's up to the three branches of government to define "arms." Your "against the Constitution" claim is just right-wing jingoistic talk. You only know what you read on those patriots-for-America websites that you frequent.

Read S L O W L Y so you can maybe understand. You want to limit the constitutional right of someone who doesn't defend your most sacred constitutional right. You have exposed yourself. The Constitution is only to be defended for those rights you hold dear. Your thoughts, clearly stated in your own words, you are fine with denying others their Constitutional rights.

 

Read S L O W L Y so you can understand. It's called making a point. He wants to take away a constitutional right. I came back with he should lose a constitutional right. You only defend one side, but not the other. Sinking in yet?

Glad I could help, sport.

 

You aren't banning anything. Obama isn't either.

 

I still don't understand the concept behind banning this gun. You clearly don't really put much thought into it.

 

Terrorists attack America...and the proposal is to disarm law abiding Americans?

 

With all the Chicken Little stuff I read, that's surprising.

You have a right to bear arms under the Constitution. It's up to the three branches of government to define "arms." Your "against the Constitution" claim is just right-wing jingoistic talk. You only know what you read on those patriots-for-America websites that you frequent.

 

Nice try of wiggling out. You want a constitutional right taken away, you admitted to it by saying all semi-autos should be banned. You are against the 2nd amendment and you know you are, as do the vast majority on here. You don't even have a clue on anything firearm related, you only know what you read on those anti-American websites that you frequent.

Serious question. Does the Constitution say that ownership of semi-automatic weapons is a right, or is that an interpretation?

With all the Chicken Little stuff I read, that's surprising.

Maybe like that "global warming" alarm you are so fond of?

Serious question. Does the Constitution say that ownership of semi-automatic weapons is a right, or is that an interpretation?

 

Since we're allowed to own them and have been for quite some time I have to say it falls under a right.

Since we're allowed to own them and have been for quite some time I have to say it falls under a right.

But is it a constitutional right? No.