doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Winchester 21

It is quite understandable that King says he likes Jagermeister for his fake manners and dishonesty, since fake manners and dishonesty has been King's stock in trade here for many years.

I really got a kick out of King's dishonest rejection of Geo's suggestion that he make a monetary donation to the NRA. King says his contribution to the NRA had been stated here. That was a lie. King told us many times that he wrote to the NRA with his own ideas about countering gun control. But King would never tell us exactly what he suggested to them, despite my asking him many times to share with us what he wrote to them. However, it is safe to say that King had suggested the same kinds of whipped puppy responses such as giving up semi-autos and large capacity magazines and Universal Background Checks that he had suggested here on numerous occasions. King's ideas were to make concessions to Obama and Co., and then try to gain back some of what we gave up later. Thankfully, the NRA did not even respond to King, let alone take his idiotic advice.





King would no sooner help the NRA than he would endorse Donald Trump for re-election. King is here to undermine us and LULL people into thinking there is no threat from the Liberal Left Democrats to our gun rights. King and Jagermeister are two trolls who do all they can to subvert any discussions that might actually inform guys about the very real threats we face.

I don't care about the F-bombs that I got from JBRooster last week. He knows who the real trolls are now. I wouldn't expect anything but F-bombs and insults from Bob Cash, and certainly wouldn't expect any of our Fake Ass Gentlemen (F.A.G.s) or Manners Police to utter a peep of protest about it either. I actually love it when they show their hand... and their hypocrisy. We don't need people like this on our side or in some Big Tent. Embracing guys like King is about as intelligent as injecting your own liver with cancerous cells. They are the enemy within, and no one should be fooled by any fake manners or attempts to suppress repetition of their anti-gun rhetoric.



And for King to actually read his own anti-gun words... and those from his friend Ed Good suggesting that we disarm... and still say he sees no evidence of anti-gun sentiment here, shows exactly how dishonest he really is. It takes a real honest-to-God pathological liar to see Ed Good saying in writing that we should disarm, and make the statement he did above.

There are anti gunners posting here and their comments have nothing to do with disagreeing with another poster. Their anti gun comments are independently posted, not neccesarily in contrast to the comments of another poster.

Whoa, miller, it didn't happen that way. When the founding fathers set things to writing the common people explicitly weren't to be part of it. Hamilton railed against the democratic spirit unleashed by the Revolution. "The mass of people seldom judge or determine right," he told the Constitutional Convention, even advocated a Senate and president serving for life modelled on the British monarchy and House of Lords.

He was ignored although the Constitution strengthened federal authority and forbade interference with the states in collecting debts and violating property rights in general (including slavery which expanded dramatically after independence). By and for the people evolved over time, as the Second---but let's not get into that! Hamilton was later instrumental in gaining support for the Constitution.

The Civil War rid the US of slavery, not the logic of liberty. By and for the people wasn't around Lying Lincoln, as you say, any more than it was around Hilary Clinton when she paid $1.2 billion to run the country her way. .

Woe, King!

You have an extra period at the end of your post.

And you were getting so good with the punctuation. Spelling is still impeccable.


___________________________
Aaron Burr!

Naturally, King Brown does not wish to get into the Original Intent or the adoption of the 2nd Amendment, because he is still in denial about it, and he continues to lie and say that the Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a relatively recent invention of the NRA.

It bears repeating once again because King is frequently in denial of his own words:









Even when King Brown has been repeatedly shown proof of the Framers Original Intent of the Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms from their writings, correspondence, The Federalist Papers, etc., King has always rejected the truth and has advanced the silly Liberal Left idea of an ever evolving "living document" that has as much meaning and permanence as a piece of toilet paper. As for the rest of King's idiotic blather, the Constitution was debated and discussed for quite some time before ratification and signing. There were a multitude of opinions that did not make the final cut, as much as King would like us to think otherwise.

And so much... once again... for the King of Dishonesty and his vow to refrain from political discussion here.

What a Poster Child for the meaning of complete fraud! Dishonesty is not civility. And lies about the 2nd Amendment on a Firearms forum are not mannerly. But you won't hear any complaints from his pen pal from Topeka.

I love this one. What a lovely rhetorical question!

Because without biased, stacked interventionist and activist courts overriding the democratic process as exemplified by the will of the people through the US Congress and the Executive branch, as well as our Parliamentary system, the Liberal agenda would have been dead in the water for the last 60 years, if not longer.

Funny, although predictable, how the one time the court rules against the leftist agenda it's thwarting the democratic process.

My 80 year old father and I have been members of the NRA for many years. But, until now I have never made an extra donation to the Political Victory Fund. I just made a sizable one. Why now? Because I have a 21 year old son and our 2nd Amendment rights are under attack like never before. The NRA is our best hope of ensuring that my son is able to exercise his 2nd Amendment rights when he is my dad's age.

James, makes no difference to me which side one or the other is on of the Second, I doubt anyone here has doubt of it being an enduring debate. That's a historical fact and proof is how thousands of jurisdictions see it as they please all over the country and regulate accordingly.

The Supreme Court is activist---biased and stacked, depending on one's opinions---but they are comprised of jurists chosen by political parties representing majorities of the time. Members tremble of calamitous consequences if their parties don't get the judge of their choosing.

The answer to the rhetorical question, of course, is that we get stacked courts in a democratic process because it's the nature of the system.

It is not accurate to say that the entire Supreme Court is activist, biased and stacked. Some of the Justices actually try to apply the law. Some of them bend the law to suit their particular political views.

King, regardless of who appoints them some justices apply the law and some justices feel they should make law.

I don�t have much good to say about those who feel they should be making law. Sadly the SCC has been loaded with them. And far too many on the USSC