Just heard the 2A referred to as "outdated" LOL
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
-
- Posts: 3192
- Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 5:27 pm
Just heard the 2A referred to as "outdated" LOL
These people have ZERO concept of freedom and the Bill of Rights. Zero. They actually want to live in a world where only Donald Trump and his Army has guns. When you present it like that though, they get pissed. It's comical. Terrible mass shooting, where clearly law enforcement dropped the ball a million times, including the day of the shooting, yet we want to abolish the 2nd and 14th amendments to the constitution of the United States..they are "outdated"
- UpstateSCHokie
- Posts: 11998
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:31 pm
Re: Just heard the 2A referred to as "outdated" LOL
NYT's version of a "conservative" referred to the 2nd Amendment as the "so-called right to bear arms." As though that right is some fictitious idea that doesn't really exist or is not codified in our BoR.CFB Apologist wrote:These people have ZERO concept of freedom and the Bill of Rights. Zero. They actually want to live in a world where only Donald Trump and his Army has guns. When you present it like that though, they get pissed. It's comical. Terrible mass shooting, where clearly law enforcement dropped the ball a million times, including the day of the shooting, yet we want to abolish the 2nd and 14th amendments to the constitution of the United States..they are "outdated"
These people are just authoritarian dicks that want to strip away my rights and your rights because we don't vote the way they want us to. They are not able to control us or manipulate us with their Marxist propaganda.
=====================================
MSNBC Is Sick of the 'So-Called Right' to Bear Arms
By Bill D'Agostino | February 22, 2018 6:36 PM EST
On Thursday’s Deadline: White House, MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace and New York Times columnist Bret Stephens eschewed the obligatory disclaimer that has been used by gun control advocates for decades – the claim that they’re not ‘coming for anybody’s guns.’
Wallace complained during the show’s first segment that the arguments “on the other side” – meaning those against gun control – had become “repugnant,” whereas before they'd been “civilized.” Implicit in this remark was the assumption that the position of Republicans and pro-Second Amendment individuals has changed somehow.
But as Stephens would go on to point out, the argument in favor of the right to bear arms is the same today as it was twenty years ago: it’s in the Constitution. In an appreciable but disturbing moment of honesty, Stephens struck at the core issue of that argument, and questioned whether owning firearms really ought to be a right at all:
Amazingly, Wallace was fully on board with Stephens’s characterization of the Second Amendment as a “so-called ‘liberty.’” She called for “common-sense restrictions" of “this so-called ‘right.’”There is something kind of aggressively and inhumanly repetitive about this line that guns are essential to American liberties – a hard one to stomach when so many thousands of people are dying every year for this so-called ‘liberty.’
So much for “aggressive and inhumanly repetitive.” These remarks by Wallace and Stephens expose the inherent dishonesty of the arguments made by so many gun control advocates when they claim they’re not interested in taking anyone's guns. If they believe guns to be the root cause of murder, and by their own admission they no longer feel the need to even pretend to respect the Second Amendment, why wouldn’t they want to ban firearms entirely?
Of course, no MSNBC show would be complete without some sort of Russia-related non-sequitur. Thursday’s installment was provided courtesy of former CIA Assistant Director Frank Figliuzzi, who claimed the NRA was taking money from Russia. He went on to allege that most of the people who expressed concern about mental health after the Florida high school shooting were Russian Twitter bots:
Finally a real solution: repeal whichever Constitutionally guaranteed liberties the supposed Russians on Twitter want us to have.They’re taking money from Russia. They’re sitting back while Russian bots come out after the Parkland shooting, telling us that, “It’s all about mental health, they’re going to take their guns away.” They’re saying nothing. It’s time to wonder whether the NRA is for us or against us.
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/bi ... -bear-arms
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire (1694 – 1778)
- awesome guy
- Posts: 54187
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
- Party: After 10
- Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Re: Just heard the 2A referred to as "outdated" LOL
They've always been that. Imbeciles like Uprising claimed it meant forward thinking, but it meant "progressing" past the need of the constitution to put the government in charge of society, progressing beyond it's constitutionally limited role. They're meddlesome people.
Last edited by awesome guy on Fri Feb 23, 2018 4:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
Re: Just heard the 2A referred to as "outdated" LOL
This is going to backfire big time for Democrats if they keep pushing it.UpstateSCHokie wrote:NYT's version of a "conservative" referred to the 2nd Amendment as the "so-called right to bear arms." As though that right is some fictitious idea that doesn't really exist or is not codified in our BoR.CFB Apologist wrote:These people have ZERO concept of freedom and the Bill of Rights. Zero. They actually want to live in a world where only Donald Trump and his Army has guns. When you present it like that though, they get pissed. It's comical. Terrible mass shooting, where clearly law enforcement dropped the ball a million times, including the day of the shooting, yet we want to abolish the 2nd and 14th amendments to the constitution of the United States..they are "outdated"
These people are just authoritarian dicks that want to strip away my rights and your rights because we don't vote the way they want us to. They are not able to control us or manipulate us with their Marxist propaganda.
=====================================
MSNBC Is Sick of the 'So-Called Right' to Bear Arms
By Bill D'Agostino | February 22, 2018 6:36 PM EST
On Thursday’s Deadline: White House, MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace and New York Times columnist Bret Stephens eschewed the obligatory disclaimer that has been used by gun control advocates for decades – the claim that they’re not ‘coming for anybody’s guns.’
Wallace complained during the show’s first segment that the arguments “on the other side” – meaning those against gun control – had become “repugnant,” whereas before they'd been “civilized.” Implicit in this remark was the assumption that the position of Republicans and pro-Second Amendment individuals has changed somehow.
But as Stephens would go on to point out, the argument in favor of the right to bear arms is the same today as it was twenty years ago: it’s in the Constitution. In an appreciable but disturbing moment of honesty, Stephens struck at the core issue of that argument, and questioned whether owning firearms really ought to be a right at all:Amazingly, Wallace was fully on board with Stephens’s characterization of the Second Amendment as a “so-called ‘liberty.’” She called for “common-sense restrictions" of “this so-called ‘right.’”There is something kind of aggressively and inhumanly repetitive about this line that guns are essential to American liberties – a hard one to stomach when so many thousands of people are dying every year for this so-called ‘liberty.’
So much for “aggressive and inhumanly repetitive.” These remarks by Wallace and Stephens expose the inherent dishonesty of the arguments made by so many gun control advocates when they claim they’re not interested in taking anyone's guns. If they believe guns to be the root cause of murder, and by their own admission they no longer feel the need to even pretend to respect the Second Amendment, why wouldn’t they want to ban firearms entirely?
Of course, no MSNBC show would be complete without some sort of Russia-related non-sequitur. Thursday’s installment was provided courtesy of former CIA Assistant Director Frank Figliuzzi, who claimed the NRA was taking money from Russia. He went on to allege that most of the people who expressed concern about mental health after the Florida high school shooting were Russian Twitter bots:Finally a real solution: repeal whichever Constitutionally guaranteed liberties the supposed Russians on Twitter want us to have.They’re taking money from Russia. They’re sitting back while Russian bots come out after the Parkland shooting, telling us that, “It’s all about mental health, they’re going to take their guns away.” They’re saying nothing. It’s time to wonder whether the NRA is for us or against us.
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/bi ... -bear-arms
Re: Just heard the 2A referred to as
awesome guy wrote:They've always been that. Imbeciles like Uprising claimed it meant forward thinking, but it meant "progressing" past the need of the constitution to put the government in charge of society, progressing beyond it's constitutionally limited role. They're meddlesome people.
Nah, most of them are just imbeciles. They think they have some bold roadmap of the human condition and psyche, when nothing further could be the truth. What more can you expect from the by-product of single mother rearing and fluff science research.
The university system in this country should be reset to a time before women's and ethnic studies curricula. They should all be 100% banned from university property as their only purpose is to breed malcontent children incapable of supporting themselves outside of public funding or diversity/quota systems.
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
- awesome guy
- Posts: 54187
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
- Party: After 10
- Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Re: Just heard the 2A referred to as "outdated" LOL
YepHokieJoe wrote:awesome guy wrote:They've always been that. Imbeciles like Uprising claimed it meant forward thinking, but it meant "progressing" past the need of the constitution to put the government in charge of society, progressing beyond it's constitutionally limited role. They're meddlesome people.
Nah, most of them are just imbeciles. They think they have some bold roadmap of the human condition and psyche, when nothing further could be the truth. What more can you expect from the by-product of single mother rearing and fluff science research.
The university system in this country should be reset to a time before women's and ethnic studies curricula. They should all be 100% banned from university property as their only purpose is to breed malcontent children incapable of supporting themselves outside of public funding or diversity/quota systems.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.