Politics, abortion, capital punishment... anything to slink away from your unmistakably anti-gun words, eh King? What ever happened to your impassioned pleas to keep this forum all double-gun all the time, and leave politics out of it?

Originally Posted By: King Brown
Inviolable or unalienable constitutional rights on paper bear no resemblance to practice here or there. Jim recognizes it above as we all do. Whatever Dave does with this dissolving phantasmagoria, my hope is that there's a cleanup of all the political partisanship and slogans, jingoism, imputing of motives and citizenship, and it's packed it off to another place on the board. I'm here to learn about doubles. I don't give a tinker's dam about someone's father or politician unless it relates to gun provenance or some activity in the shooting sports.


I still can't believe that you actually made the ridiculous claim that your anti-gun rhetoric is nothing more than "reporting accurately..."

Originally Posted By: King Brown
I can't see the logic of how citing my posts concerning the Second would make me anti-gun unless you want to make me immortal for reporting accurately the wrong side as you see it of the liberal and conservative debate, which seems to be in liberal ascendancy from court findings. If you don't like it, don't blame me.


I'm sure you'd like everyone to believe that crap, but you have many times gone far beyond "reporting accurately" and followed up with your own anti-gun commentary. Here's some to refresh your memory:


King Brown post 433281 from "Trump on the Second Amendment" main forum 1/18/2016

Originally Posted By: King Brown
Ed, historically the individual "right" to bear arms is relatively new. I believe John Ashcroft in 2002 became the first federal attorney-general to proclaim that individuals should be able to own guns. The Supreme Court in 2008 overturned all mainstream legal and historical scholarship by ruling that there is an individual right to own firearms although with some limits. Obama said it again last week.

I believe that during the previous 218 years the Second meant what it said: firearms shall be held by "the People"---a collective and not individual right---insofar they are in the service of "a well-regulated militia." Was an individual right even mentioned at the Constitutional Convention or in the House when it ratified the Amendment or when debated in state legislatures? I don't think so.


It appears that the only "reporting accurately" going on there was you accurately reporting your anti-2nd Amendment beliefs that are in denial of our Individual RKBA. But it isn't simply a denial of our Individual RKBA King... it is a repeated denial... even after you have been corrected.

Only one of us is "reporting accurately" here King, and it sure ain't you. Dishonesty is not civility.

Voting for anti-gun Democrats is dumber than giving treats to a dog that shits on a Persian Rug