Actions in support of the Second Amendment

Chelsea dad g09 said:
No. The author is stated on the article itself, I wil not do anyone's research for them as much as I wont tell anyone how to defend their families.
Click to expand...
If you wish to be seen as someone who makes unfounded accusations, go right ahead, but don't expect me to help you.
 
espola said:
Those bases seem to be pretty well covered already.
Click to expand...

So to review, the border crisis Democrats say "doesn't exist" is well covered already? The Fentanyl crisis is being well covered?

I asked you once before and I don't believe you answered. We know you see every comment but selectively respond. What is your proposal for the gun situation we have in the U.S.? You play JoeTato Briben for a day. You couldn't possibly be any worse. What would you do about guns?
 
Chelsea dad g09 said:
If you're asking about the case in Miramar, it's my belief if they are hit with a felony they should lose their rights to own a firearm.
Click to expand...
The linked article you dislike so much shows several examples of situations where convicted felons had their gun-ownership rights restored under the "relief" principle originally intended by Congress to keep the gun manufacturer Winchester in business after their parent company Olin Mathiesen had been found guilty of an illegal kickback scheme involving the international trade in drugs. Do you think they just made up all those cases?

Here is a more detailed analysis of the "relief" law, published by the University of Chicago Legal Forum --

 
Slobodan said:
So to review, the border crisis Democrats say "doesn't exist" is well covered already? The Fentanyl crisis is being well covered?

I asked you once before and I don't believe you answered. We know you see every comment but selectively respond. What is your proposal for the gun situation we have in the U.S.? You play JoeTato Briben for a day. You couldn't possibly be any worse. What would you do about guns?
Click to expand...
The President can do nothing on that line without the help of Congress (assuming here that the Supreme Court will not upend the will of the people and Congress again).
 
Slobodan said:
You don't have to own anything... it's your choice to continue pretending you're not a democrat.
Click to expand...
The Democrats are one of the two big criminal organizations thwarting the will of the American people, the other being the Republicans. They should both be prosecuted under the RICO statute.
 
espola said:
The linked article you dislike so much shows several examples of situations where convicted felons had their gun-ownership rights restored under the "relief" principle originally intended by Congress to keep the gun manufacturer Winchester in business after their parent company Olin Mathiesen had been found guilty of an illegal kickback scheme involving the international trade in drugs. Do you think they just made up all those cases?

Here is a more detailed analysis of the "relief" law, published by the University of Chicago Legal Forum --

Click to expand...
Again, you're standing by an article written by a known liar funded by a partisan committee. Not my fault you didnt do your research and are now doubling down.
 
Chelsea dad g09 said:
Again, you're standing by an article written by a known liar funded by a partisan committee. Not my fault you didnt do your research and are now doubling down.
Click to expand...

You have made that claim twice. Or are you including the University of Chicago in your accusations now?

I understand that you are prejudiced against the organization. Can you find any errors in the linked article written with their support?
 
espola said:
You have made that claim twice. Or are you including the University of Chicago in your accusations now?

I understand that you are prejudiced against the organization. Can you find any errors in the linked article written with their support?
Click to expand...
Is your memory working now?
 
espola said:
You have made that claim twice. Or are you including the University of Chicago in your accusations now?

I understand that you are prejudiced against the organization. Can you find any errors in the linked article written with their support?
Click to expand...
Ill make the claim a million times if you'd like. Maybe you ought to do your research before posting articles. The university of Chicago wasnt in the original article you posted so let's stay on topic before you confuse yourself again. I believe zero from any organization that is dishonest and partisan.
 
Chelsea dad g09 said:
Ill make the claim a million times if you'd like. Maybe you ought to do your research before posting articles. The university of Chicago wasnt in the original article you posted so let's stay on topic before you confuse yourself again. I believe zero from any organization that is dishonest and partisan.
Click to expand...
You don't like them (for reasons you will not elucidate), so you will not even look to see if what they are saying is true or not. That fits pretty well into the definition of "prejudice".
 
Chelsea dad g09 said:
Help me? You were the one asking for help, not me.
Click to expand...
Magoo is famous for twisting words/post. When confronted he will then double down and if that doesn't work he stops replying. After time, if it's brought up again, he'll try denying it or try spinning it again. He famously posted that Russia spies on all foreigners and wanted to know the urinal habits of guys on the forum. He's weird...
 
espola said:
You don't like them (for reasons you will not elucidate), so you will not even look to see if what they are saying is true or not. That fits pretty well into the definition of "prejudice".
Click to expand...
Theres the disconnect. I know they are dishonest and what I'm saying is true, you want me to show you and when I refuse, to make you do your own research you claim I'm prejudice. Sound about right?
 
Chelsea dad g09 said:
Theres the disconnect. I know they are dishonest and what I'm saying is true, you want me to show you and when I refuse, to make you do your own research you claim I'm prejudice. Sound about right?
Click to expand...
You "know" they are dishonest, but you refuse to say how you came to that knowledge.
 
Multi Sport said:
Magoo is famous for twisting words/post. When confronted he will then double down and if that doesn't work he stops replying. After time, if it's brought up again, he'll try denying it or try spinning it again. He famously posted that Russia spies on all foreigners and wanted to know the urinal habits of guys on the forum. He's weird...
Click to expand...
I never understood your strange fixation with urinals.
 
Chelsea dad g09 said:
By that logic I should ask you if you know the authors of the articles you post are honest or you just post because it agrees with your viewpoint...would that make you prejudiced?
Click to expand...
I understand that the author and the organization that published the article have a publicly-stated political position. Because of that, I looked into some of the claims made in the article and I could find no deliberate mistakes. How did your analysis of the article work out?
 
espola said:
I understand that the author and the organization that published the article have a publicly-stated political position. Because of that, I looked into some of the claims made in the article and I could find no deliberate mistakes. How did your analysis of the article work out?
Click to expand...
Oh wait a minute -- you have already stated that --

"I believe zero from any organization that is dishonest and partisan."

How does that work out for you with the MAGA cult?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top