Yeah, I noticed your derogatory words in two posts to insult persons of Polish origin.
Yes King, I fully intended to insult your friend Jagermeister, because I don't care much for trolls and liars. You seem to find fault with that attitude. I suppose that's because it hits so close to home. I also notice that you were totally silent when your pal Last Dollar called James M. a wop. Would you believe me if I made the same lame excuse he did and claimed that I thought it was a term of endearment? The whole context of his reaction to Jim's reference to the extreme anti-gunner George Soros... sounded quite endearing. Of course we know that you consider Soros a distinguished American Jew:
He's throwing ilks about again..These guys are never done, they are always off on some tirade and continue to preach to the choir. Who does this wop think he is convincing? FYI: I wont watch the Superbowl today. Who the F**K is Soro? Another Kenyan?? Our gun rights will be overthrown during the Superbowl? OMIGOD, what next...??? I know! Space invaders, The same ones that killed Kennedy!
Here's some derogatory words you posted that are highly insulting to those of us who actually cherish our Constitutional rights to Keep and Bear Arms. pomofo should know that not everyone on this site is what they pretend to be. Here is a small sample of your anti-2nd Amendment rhetoric King... your legacy here. These are your own unedited words, so I'm certain you must be proud of them:
The roots I'm comfortable with are the radical---"to get to the root of"---and that's Jesus's teaching. The shame is how far the Christian community has drifted from it. We act irrationally from fear when the Christian message is to fear not, even death itself.We call ourselves Christian nations and stockpile ammunition, need concealed carry to protect ourselves and a regulated militia without regulations to protect us from our own governments, abandoning Jesus's teaching to defend it.
Remember that one King? I get a kick out of it when avowed Atheist's like you invoke the name of Jesus to make a dishonest point.
Here's the one where you used the same words used by Anti-Gun Organizations and attempt to portray gang-bangers as children, and to justify voting for the Liberal Left politicians who wish to disarm us.
What would pass for absurd in Canada is the notion that a vote for liberals means an anti-gun sentiment, as if a reverence or need for guns comes first in a country's priorities. Or anti-gun to mention US acceptance of mass murder, mass school executions, 438 children being hit by a bullet every month between 2004 and 2014, 13 children between one and three killed themselves with guns so far this year as the violence that defines the US trickles down to babies in diapers.
Now these two statements were extremely insulting to all law abiding gun owners. How very crude and insulting of you to even suggest that we accept mass murders.
Democracies make choices. Americans accept mass murder to defend an individual right to bear arms in the name of personal freedom.
....Americans choose how they want to live, accept mass murder, mass school executions, mass incarceration (suddenly recognized as wrong). As much as they dislike it, little is done about it. Democracies make choices but few modern countries are as burdened in solving these societal problems as the US with three centuries of a ruinous race legacy.
And everyone should be aware that you obviously refuse to accept the 2008 Heller and McDonald Supreme Court decisions, and that you continue to make the totally false claim that the Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a recent invention crafted by our NRA:
I believe what Levin says about the Second was in the the Founders' minds. The pity is they didn't write it down. They wanted to protect the states from federal interference, for sure. But the country is still wrangling with the Second to the point that courts are allowing various levels to regulate from popular vote.
Dave, Dave, Dave: you're like those fundamentalists who claim Jesus walked with the dinosaurs. There was no NRA at time of the Founding Fathers. The change was recent to what the Second is today. You acknowledge as "infringements" all those jurisdictions making the Second what they want it to be. But still the law.
Whether Americans carry because they can or have to is not the issue. They democratically make decisions on how they want to live. Their homicide record is not edifying among modern societies. It is a violent country.
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.
Also, you never responded to my answer to your lie about how your off topic Boer War History Lesson ended up in the "Hoarder or Collector" thread. And old colonel once again wasn't concerned about his pal King's thread diversion:
http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbt...3389#Post503389By the way, I know that you and old colonel have been diligently working behind the scenes in a vain attempt to silence me. In fact, I know much more than that.
