|
|
Scum
Aug 27, 2020 0:59:41 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by 00hmh on Aug 27, 2020 0:59:41 GMT -6
Who actually planned these violent events? It sure doesn't look like anyone did much thinking about any political agenda.
The demonstrations and BLM protest is political and planned a bit, but you don't really think the violence afterwards is included in the plan, part of a plot?
|
|
|
|
Scum
Aug 27, 2020 5:23:53 GMT -6
Post by williamtsherman on Aug 27, 2020 5:23:53 GMT -6
Strictly a coincidence, I'm sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Aug 27, 2020 6:31:10 GMT -6
Did he ever answer the question? Whenever he successfully dodges a point blank question I just picture him dancing away like Joaquin Phoenix in the Joker. I answered. I don't.
I do believe good guys who want guns for a right of self defense and for purposes of a well regulated militia could be subject to reasonable regulation, for example be required to register their weapon, be responsible for it, be careful with it, and track it's sale without interference with those rights.
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand? Registration? Might as well paint a target on your back. You'd see a lot of weapons "lost in a tragic boating accident." The government cannot be trusted with a gun registry. Look at what Biden wants to do through executive action: joebiden.com/gunsafety/#Gun confiscation is a real concern, when you have highly-placed politicians talking openly about it. Biden's "buy-back" plan for "assault weapons" (which he doesn't define) isn't voluntary. You either sell them to the government (for a fraction of its value) or register it. He wants state licensing. He wants bans on "assault weapons" (again undefined) and "high-capacity magazines", which in Cali is 10 rounds. He wants to end online sales of guns, ammunition, even gun parts. He wants to do all of this, by himself, with the stroke of a pen. Of course lawsuits would be filed, and the Supreme Court would overturn most of these, but what happens in the meantime? Legal gun owners would be forced to obey these laws, while criminals... well, you know. THAT is tyranny, and goes completely against the Constitution. That one man can wield that kind of power is insane. |
|
|
|
Scum
Aug 27, 2020 8:13:53 GMT -6
Post by 00hmh on Aug 27, 2020 8:13:53 GMT -6
I answered. I don't.
I do believe good guys who want guns for a right of self defense and for purposes of a well regulated militia could be subject to reasonable regulation, for example be required to register their weapon, be responsible for it, be careful with it, and track it's sale without interference with those rights.
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand? I understand statutory and constitutional interpretation pretty well. Familiar with the recent case law. Courts have never made that language absolute. Recent cases in the Supreme Court, which are not without some controversy, recognize an individual right, but a limited one, and while they strike down SOME specific restrictions that may infringe on a right to keep and bear arms, the cases are pretty clear they are not striking down ALL restrictions. It is not "infringement" to introduce reasonable regulation. Even to prohibit ownership by some classes of owners of some kinds of weapons. Certainly there is no absolute restriction on regulating sale and transfer which is not "keeping and bearing." |
|
|
|
Scum
Aug 27, 2020 8:23:07 GMT -6
Post by 00hmh on Aug 27, 2020 8:23:07 GMT -6
I answered. I don't.
I do believe good guys who want guns for a right of self defense and for purposes of a well regulated militia could be subject to reasonable regulation, for example be required to register their weapon, be responsible for it, be careful with it, and track it's sale without interference with those rights.
THAT is tyranny..... goes completely against the Constitution. The restrictions I suggested above do not limit your keeping and bearing arms, the test in the courts would be whether they are reasonable regulation of your ability to transfer arms, and to use them.
There is no prohibition in the Constitution against making the individual responsible if you do exercise your right to bear arms. On the contrary everything in English law suggests you should be held responsible for harm caused by keeping or bearing. Be careful. You don't mean to say that your right to "keep and bear" allows you the right to do "USE in any way," without restriction. A right to bear arms doesn't give such right. It is historically grounded in English law giving right to use arms in defending self and property. Authority on that right recognizes limitations doing so under law. It was not unrestricted.
In the context of the 1792 Constitutional provisions creating a national Army, the Framers of the amendment had concerns to preserve "well regulated" state militia which had been the armed forces used in the rebellion. Again that part is certainly not an unrestricted individual freedom.
|
|
|
|
Scum
Aug 27, 2020 9:44:30 GMT -6
Post by williamtsherman on Aug 27, 2020 9:44:30 GMT -6
Who actually planned these violent events? It sure doesn't look like anyone did much thinking about any political agenda. The demonstrations and BLM protest is political and planned a bit, but you don't really think the violence afterwards is included in the plan, part of a plot? And I suppose that if Democratic governors and mayors are not actually walking out of stores with stolen items, and are not actually applying their lighters to gasoline-soaked buildings, then they can in no way, shape or form be assigned any responsibility for the safety or their states and towns.
We will see if the majority of voters feel the same way.
|
|
|
|
Scum
Aug 27, 2020 10:46:10 GMT -6
Post by 00hmh on Aug 27, 2020 10:46:10 GMT -6
Who actually planned these violent events? It sure doesn't look like anyone did much thinking about any political agenda. The demonstrations and BLM protest is political and planned a bit, but you don't really think the violence afterwards is included in the plan, part of a plot? And I suppose that if Democratic governors and mayors are not actually walking out of stores with stolen items... This is no answer to the question I posed in response to your rant above.
"Those committing the violence and destruction now may find that their currently passive victims are actually quite good at violence and destruction themselves, when they want to be. If this country becomes Yugoslavi, I know who my money is on....and it's not those currently acting out."
C'mon. Stop it.
"Those people" Overcome by a glorious violent uprising of the white "victims." Sound like a racist Nazi website.
I suppose your change here to talking about voters is a step in the right direction. But let's acknowledge that nobody supports the violence. It is am emotional response. Yes, a real problem we should address, but one that was pretty stupid and ineffective mob violence, not some political statement and planned event. Not "Some segments" plotting to achieve "their" "particular interests"
Wait! You might be onto something, there. That's if you are talking about the armed "militia" that appeared to defend Kenosha without much reason to believe Kenosha wanted them, all resulting in completely innocent people shot. A lot more reason to think that was planned violence.
|
|
|
|
Scum
Aug 27, 2020 11:15:54 GMT -6
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Aug 27, 2020 11:15:54 GMT -6
"Those committing the violence and destruction now may find that their currently passive victims are actually quite good at violence and destruction themselves, when they want to be. If this country becomes Yugoslavi, I know who my money is on....and it's not those currently acting out."
C'mon. Stop it.
"Those people" Overcome by a glorious violent uprising of the white "victims." Sound like a racist Nazi website.
I suppose your change here to talking about voters is a step in the right direction. But let's acknowledge that nobody supports the violence. It is am emotional response. Yes, a real problem we should address, but one that was pretty stupid and ineffective mob violence, not some political statement and planned event. Not "Some segments" plotting to achieve "their" "particular interests"
Wait! You might be onto something, there. That's if you are talking about the armed "militia" that appeared to defend Kenosha without much reason to believe Kenosha wanted them, all resulting in completely innocent people shot. A lot more reason to think that was planned violence.
"C'mon. Stop it." - Can't argue with that logic. Everyone, pack it up and go home. 00 has declared world peace based on his simple idea of "C'mon. Stop it." Next we have a veiled accusation Sherm being either a racist, a Nazi, or a website. Not sure which. I think it's cute that you're naive enough to think that there is no organization behind these protests/riots. And I'm not sure which innocent people got shot? Was it the one minding his own business, that was out jogging and tripped over the shooter, knocking him to the ground? Or was it the one who was trying to hand the rifle back to the shooter by grabbing it out of his hands? It's all so confusing, I'm just glad we have 00 here to tell us all how to interpret everything. I've been getting it completely wrong, depending on my own eyes! Damn these racist glasses! |
|
|
|
Scum
Aug 27, 2020 13:15:08 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by 00hmh on Aug 27, 2020 13:15:08 GMT -6
Yeah, "Those people" are always out there with clever plans to advance their agenda against the victimized white majority.
A stroke of genius how they are winning friends in Wisconsin and nationwide. That's the key to their goal.
What is that goal? I forget.
Never mind. I am sure it will be clear me soon if you keep explaining.
I am starting how you're thinking about this. It's definitely a plot. That's black and white clear the longer you go on explaining it.
|
|
|
|
Scum
Aug 27, 2020 13:45:51 GMT -6
Post by williamtsherman on Aug 27, 2020 13:45:51 GMT -6
As an example of what I mention above.
We have this young teenager Rittenhouse who comes up against a selection of child molesters and woman beater types from among the crowd of rioting scum in Kenosha. That confrontation had a rather lopsided outcome. Those rioters may want to go back to having sex with children and beating up women. Their days of carefree, unopposed burning and looting may be ending. |
|
|
|
Scum
Aug 27, 2020 15:18:06 GMT -6
Post by 00hmh on Aug 27, 2020 15:18:06 GMT -6
As an example of what I mention above.
We have this young teenager Rittenhouse who comes up against a selection of child molesters and woman beater types from among the crowd of rioting scum in Kenosha. That confrontation had a rather lopsided outcome. Those rioters may want to go back to having sex with children and beating up women. Their days of carefree, unopposed burning and looting may be ending. Yes, he is a hero isn't he? Your kind of guy! 17 years old and wise beyond his years, he joins a militia group of admirable patriots whose example he can follow. Armed with automatic weapon, volunteering his time to keep order in America when nobody else would.
Wandering the street alone with his weapon, he blunders into a crowd and after words with them flees. As he runs from the crowd, apparently according to you a group of fierce child molestors, he hears some gunfire in the distance. He turns and sees someone unarmed coming in his direction. Bravely he shoots him 4 times, hitting him in the head. He makes a phone call and flees the scene.
As pursuers chase him accusing of the shooting, he trips and falls, but has the presence of mind to shoot the pursuers. After pulling himself to his feet he continues on undeterred by the carnage.
|
|
|
|
Scum
Aug 27, 2020 16:26:38 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Aug 27, 2020 16:26:38 GMT -6
You have obviously not seen the video.
|
|
|
|
Scum
Aug 27, 2020 16:50:11 GMT -6
Post by williamtsherman on Aug 27, 2020 16:50:11 GMT -6
If you are not hysterical, you may notice that I did not voice support for violence from the right. I just note that eventually there will be a response. And when it comes, I think the right will do it more competently.
As for Rittenhouse, he is immature, misguided, probably a bit nuts, and so forth. But, despite being hugely outnumbered, he scored an immediate head shot kill on the child molester, and other hits on some of the other scum while suffering none himself.
Get the picture.
Personally, I would rather see all this rioting, destruction and violence end before it becomes a civil war.
|
|
|
|
Scum
Aug 27, 2020 16:55:14 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by JacksonStreetElite on Aug 27, 2020 16:55:14 GMT -6
You have obviously not seen the video. If you think video evidence is persuasive you underestimate how far gone 00 is. |
|
|
|
Scum
Aug 27, 2020 18:44:55 GMT -6
00hmh likes this
Post by rmcalhoun on Aug 27, 2020 18:44:55 GMT -6
I agree sooner than later people were going fight back. I do not think its right and really the militia type are as crazy as they come. They just do not ever really go out and riot wreak havoc. Instead the screw sheep and practice shooting and blowing up stuff a lot. None of these rioters want anything to do with them, Sherm is right about that.
Now that its happened you are going to see them in larger numbers at these protests/riots. These are not misguided youth rebelling against their parents and showing up at these things because its now cool to do. These clowns are psychos who have been taught and trained for this since their teenage years
|
|
