Oink Oink Larry! That ought to be something you can comprehend.
craigd beat me to the punch on your silly and erroneous statement about Ed having First Amendment rights here on this BBS. He also succinctly corrected you on your accusation that I have the same sort of reading comprehension problems as you. FYI, the 1st Amendment is to protect political speech, and this is a private BBS owned and operated by one Dave Weber, who has already stated in the past that he does not want or appreciate anti-gun comments being posted on his site. Dave can and has censored whomever and whatever he wishes, and he has totally silenced Ed on at least three occasions. So far, he has not done that to me, even when you cried to him like a whiny little girl. As to your statement not made by Voltaire, are you telling us that you'll defend to the death the right of Ed or John Kerry to make anti-gun and anti-hunting statements... but that very same staunch defense of free speech does not extend to keith? Sure looks that way Larry.
That's what I meant earlier today when I said "Veterans fought and died to preserve those rights, and real veterans who understand what their service was for do not think they have some superior level of rights that other U.S. citizens do not have." Contrast that with your ridiculous idea that Ed or John Kerry have unlimited rights to trash the 2nd Amendment, but I don't have any right to say anything that the Great Larry Brown does not approve of. Have you noticed that Ed bailed on you here Larry? Several of us told you he was a self-serving Troll. The last thing Ed really wanted was a discussion of SC guns. Ever hear the term "Useful Idiot" Larry? Thanks for being one and for proving our point.
Now let's address your ridiculous parsing of words concerning my egregious error of suggesting that you just might consider your "DIFFERENT" commitment to the 2A as a "STRONGER" commitment. Tell us Larry, just what did you mean by "DIFFERENT"? You also called it "the TRUE commitment to the Second Amendment. Remember this?
I'd also hasten to point out that threads about the 2A and who supports it or who does not always leave me a bit cold, mainly because the 500 pound gorilla in the room never gets mentioned. It's like NRA membership gives you an automatic pass on being a supporter of the 2A. Well, here's another way to look at it: If you never served in the military, then you never put any real TEETH behind your support of the 2A. You never said "Hey, Uncle Sam, here I am! I'm ready to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And I'm signing a blank check to you. As long as I wear the uniform, you can send me wherever you want, whenever you want." That, IMO, is the TRUE commitment to the Second Amendment. And the rest of the Constitution.
So lets analyze this like any normal person with a brain might. According to you, your commitment via military service is a "500 pound gorilla" that never gets mentioned. And it is the only one with "any real TEETH". And it is the "TRUE" commitment! Any normal person who read those things just might conclude that you consider your commitment stronger than mine, or any other person who did not serve in the military. Then when you go on to ask about the "inferiority complex" you incorrectly assume I must have for not serving in the military... well it becomes obvious that you must feel that you are superior and that your commitment is stronger. No, you didn't say those exact words. But it is very obvious that you have NOT been saying that your "DIFFERENT" and "TRUE" commitment with "real TEETH" is either a weaker or equal commitment than those who are not veterans. If it ain't equal and it ain't weaker... what does that leave us to conclude???... unless you are dealing with a self-described wordsmith who will say and do anything to ever avoid admitting to being wrong.
You really are a piece of work Larry.... the Energizer Bunny of bloviating jerks.
