Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
What Are Your Thoughts on This Story?
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ConstitutionCowboy" data-source="post: 3173980" data-attributes="member: 745"><p>HR - 7115, if passed, will be a violation of the Second Added Article to the Constitution - AKA the Second Amendment - let alone an egregious assault on the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms. Period. There is no discussion to the contrary that is viable, holds any credibility, or makes any sense as a proposed measure of safety and in fact would be detrimental to the Right of Self Defense. The only circumstance where any such measure would be of value is under a tyranny, dictatorship, despotism, or any other form of government where force is required to maintain 'loyalty', subservience, slavery, socialism, communism, or theocracy.</p><p></p><p>A revolution was waged against a government that desired one or more of those ends in the not-to-distant past. It bares the title of <em>The American Revolution</em>.</p><p></p><p>Woody</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ConstitutionCowboy, post: 3173980, member: 745"] HR - 7115, if passed, will be a violation of the Second Added Article to the Constitution - AKA the Second Amendment - let alone an egregious assault on the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms. Period. There is no discussion to the contrary that is viable, holds any credibility, or makes any sense as a proposed measure of safety and in fact would be detrimental to the Right of Self Defense. The only circumstance where any such measure would be of value is under a tyranny, dictatorship, despotism, or any other form of government where force is required to maintain 'loyalty', subservience, slavery, socialism, communism, or theocracy. A revolution was waged against a government that desired one or more of those ends in the not-to-distant past. It bares the title of [I]The American Revolution[/I]. Woody [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
What Are Your Thoughts on This Story?
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom