|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Book ... /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1525968826 Message started by MnSpring on 05/10/18 at 09:13:46 |
|
Title: Book ... Post by MnSpring on 05/10/18 at 09:13:46 WOW, That’s Hypocrisy. Wanting to get rid of and/or seriously restrict the 2nd, which protects her right to this kind of total Stupidity ! http://ew.com/books/2018/05/10/chelsea-clinton-start-now-announcemnet/ Chelsea Clinton to publish children’s book for young activists, Start Now! GOLLLLEEEEY GEEEEEEEEEEE, Dem dare 7-10 years olds, sure do no a lot bout things. |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by Serowbot on 05/10/18 at 09:19:52 The second amendment protects her right to publish children's books?... Does it protect my right to make toast?... ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/10/18 at 12:12:32 Every right we enjoy is protected by The Second Amendment. |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by Serowbot on 05/10/18 at 12:25:46 That's why toast is illegal in France.... ;D |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by MnSpring on 05/10/18 at 13:10:36 4C5A4D50485D504B3F0 wrote:
That’s a Joke, Right ? A ‘Drive By’ Right ? You really think, the thoughts/words of a person, whether it is in a Newspaper, Web, Radio, TV, Soapbox, Or a Book. Is protected by a, “SIGN” ?????????? (Have you, Ever, read. ‘Fahrenheit 451’ ?) |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by Serowbot on 05/10/18 at 14:43:58 That's why there are no books in France... ;D |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by Eegore on 05/10/18 at 18:18:10 I agree with Serowbots points here, there an awfully lot of countries that share freedom of press that do not have anything like the second amendment. Its a comparative reasoning and I hear it from people that live in other countries all the time. In theory we can say that the government in the US only allows freedom of press because if they didn't the citizens would rise up, with their owned firearms and overthrow the government, however nothing like this has happened. (and yes there's the complete government overtaking where Americans are marched off to FEMA death camps etc. etc. but I am talking strictly removal of Freedom of Press only) I feel we would still have freedom of press simply because there is so much money in modern media. Second Amendment as far as I can tell has nothing to do with it now. |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/10/18 at 19:12:06 495F48554D58554E3A0 wrote:
Without a second amendment If someone did outlaw something that was ridiculous to outlaw WHAT THE FUKK WOULD YOU DO ABOUT IT? |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by Eegore on 05/11/18 at 03:48:48 "Without a second amendment If someone did outlaw something that was ridiculous to outlaw WHAT THE FUKK WOULD YOU DO ABOUT IT?" Seriously that's what I was just talking about. Other countries deal with this and its not by marching with personally owned firearms and starting a civil war with their government. That's less and less reasonable every year. More countries have Freedom of Press and assembly that do not have anything like the 2nd Amendment than ones that do. There aren't massacres, enslavement, mass outlawing of anything etc. etc. Very few people in the US will carry guns to a capital and threaten to overthrow if they outlawed toasters, or specific capacity magazines just like they did in CO. The National Guard didn't come into towns gunning down US citizens and citizens didn't go gunning down government officials. Why didn't we use our 2nd Amendment to resolve all these real issues like the laws surrounding the 2008/2009 bailouts? Why didn't we use it to stop the individual mandate for healthcare? Why don't we use it to stop the FCC from severely altering our communications options? These are questions people who resolve issues in their countries ask since they don't have a 2nd Amendment and they aren't criminally oppressed, and they still run election based systems. There's a lot of data supporting the ability to change and influence government without individual firearm ownership. I bet in France if they outlawed toasters nobody would say "Gee if we only had guns we could overthrow our government and get our toasters back" |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by MnSpring on 05/11/18 at 08:23:53 Perhaps one needs to be more, Specific. A Book, is in a group of, things, covered by, ‘…Freedom of Speech...". So a, ‘book’ even though, it is comprised of words, printed on paper, and bound together, (and now a electronic Facsimile of, on a ‘reading’ device or a computer). Is simply a POV of that person. Clearly under the, ‘…Freedom of Speech…”. To say, ‘…freedom of press…” is just one Part, of the overall, ‘…Freedom of Speech…”. Now for the, ‘freedom’ of, ‘Books’ which has now been chained to, ‘press’. Just go to your favorite browser, and type in: ‘Book Banning In France’. Or, 'Book Banning'. Then read the various sights, and their, POV. (Gonna do that again on a Rainy Nasty Day) You will find statements like below, and they are Very Interesting. (Didn’t find anything about France Banning Toast though !) “…In 2016, a television ad which advocated that babies with Down Syndrome shouldn't be aborted solely because of their syndrome ran. It was ruled anti-abortion speech and removed….” “…Most recently, several acts ordered by Nicolas Sarkozy, then-Interior Minister and former President of the Republic (until 2012), have been criticized as forms of censorship…” “…Libraries sometimes avoid purchasing controversial books, and the personal opinions of librarians have at times impacted book selection….” “…2010 was a difficult year for Internet freedom in France. The offices of several online media firms and their journalists were targeted for break-ins and court summons and pressured to identify their sources. As a result, France has been added to Reporters Without Borders list of "Countries Under Surveillance"...” “…On 14 October 2011 a French court ordered French Internet service providers to block the Copwatch Nord Paris I-D-F website. The website shows pictures and videos of police officers arresting suspects, taunting protesters and allegedly committing acts of violence against members of ethnic minorities….” “…April 2013 DCRI forced the deletion of the article when it summoned a volunteer with administrator's access to the French language Wikipedia and ordered him to take down the article that had been online since 2009. DCRI claimed the article contained classified military information and broke French law….” ETC/ETC/ETC/ETC/ETC/ETC Found these Very Interesting: “…Orwell, (Animal House), found that no publisher would print the book, due to its criticism of the USSR, an important ally of Britain in the War. Once published, the book was banned in the USSR and other communist countries. In 2002, the novel was banned in the schools of the United Arab Emirates, because it contained text or images that goes against Islamic values…” (Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland Lewis Carroll) “…The censor General Ho Chien believed that attributing human language to animals was an insult to humans. He feared that the book would teach children to regard humans and animals on the same level, which would be “disastrous”…" So Interesting, because that is Exactly what Walt Disney did, (Well Known Anti-Gun) with ‘Bambi”. It started a generation of kids to identify that, ‘Bambi’, was a Sentient being, because it could ’talk/think’. So those kids, grew up teaching their kids, “Oh ya Can’t Hunt ‘Bambi’. Then those kids grew up, teaching their kids, ‘Guns Are Bad’, simply because they had NO association with them. “…At present, the Bible has been banned in Saudi Arabia. In a number of countries, bible translation, distribution, sale or promotion is prohibited or made difficult, and the Bible may be considered extremist materials…” (Catch -22) “…Banned in several US states: in 1972, it was banned in Strongsville, Ohio (overturned in 1976)…” ( Doctor Zhivago) ”…Banned in the Soviet Union until 1988 for criticizing life in Russia after the Russian Revolution. When its author, Boris Pasternak, won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1958 he was forced to reject it under government pressure.…” (Remember the, ‘The Satanic Verses’, by Salman Rushdie) “… led to their author having a death warrant put on the author’s head. In fact, few modern books have as bloody a publication history. As a result of this book, had to go into hiding for an entire decade after Iran’s Ayatollah issued a fatwa, a fatwa that also led to the death of Rushdie’s Japanese translator. Decried by many in the Muslim world for its apparent blasphemy, it was burned in the streets in Britain and around the Islamic world….” That’s enough, I could spend Hours reading this. It is Fascinating History. But alas, the dew is off the grass, time to climb on the lawn mower. The point is, no one has marched to Capital Hill with a gun. Yet, books that, ‘were’, banned here, are now NOT, banned, due to people raising their voices and giving their POV. Which, someone, CAN NOT, say: ‘ you will do this, or you will be shipped off to North Montana in Winter simply because I said so’. Because Of ??????????? |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by MnSpring on 05/11/18 at 14:50:02 09292B233E294C0 wrote:
That, again, is Precisely, the Point ! Because of, What ??????? AND, What was that that, STOPPED, the Overrun, (By the Government), of Tax Paying Citizens in the 2014 Bundy standoff. Where the Government, after YEARS of Lying, and NOT, following their OWN rules. The case was DISMISSED. It's NOT, a theory ! Some say, we must be Civilized, like Other Nations. Therefore this country does NOT need a 1st or 2nd. A question is, does, ‘Civilized’, mean that the government can say: ‘Sit Down, STFU, and NO you can NOT, take your child elsewhere for care, and we will SPEND, a Tremendous amount of other peoples money, to Force you to Stay Right where you are’ Does, ‘Civilized’ mean a Government saying: We don’t need to spend any money on defense, because someone else does it for US Does, ‘Civilized’ mean a Government saying: ‘I don’t care that you just paid 500.00 for that gun. We are Going to Take It Away, and give you 50.00, so you, ‘Will’, be happy’ Does, ‘Civilized’ mean a Government saying: ‘We have Plenty of your money, to feed/house/fix, refugees, and completely change, our lifestyle, for people that have never done anything for this country and never will’ Does, ‘Civilized’ mean a Government saying: ‘Everybody has, ‘FREE’ H.C., and it works for your broken leg just fine. But the latest treatment for Cancer, we just can’t afford Does, ‘Civilized’ mean": A Government Monarch, has a ’Secret’ meeting with a P.M. Every Week, and, NO ONE, knows what is said And On and On and On it goes. |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by Eegore on 05/11/18 at 16:14:14 As with every gun debate ever, we can circular reason our way around our positions by cherry-picking facts that suppot our views. My point is that people who live in other countries do not see how our 2nd Amendment is the reason why we have freedoms similar, as in not exactly the same, (for instance in France you can show a balloon thingy on network TV but that would never fly here type of similar) when they do not have a 2nd Amendment. I don't know how much time you guys spend outside the country working with others but its typically no less than 4 months annually for me, and in my experience most people don't feel more oppressed in their country than in the US. We say the National Guard would have come and murdered thousands of people if we werent armed, and we all know thats not true. Nobody would have enacted martial law over people throwing local politicians out of office because they acted against their constituents. It wasnt the 2nd Amendment, its simply bad publicity, and terrible logistics to clean up that many bodies. |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by Matchless G11 on 05/12/18 at 03:25:39 [color=#0000ff] We say the National Guard would have come and murdered thousands of people if we werent armed, and we all know thats not true. Nobody would have enacted martial law over people throwing local politicians out of office because they acted against their constituents. It wasnt the 2nd Amendment, its simply bad publicity, and terrible logistics to clean up that many bodies. [/quote][/color] Eegore There are people who suffered under Hitler , Pol Pot, Stalin and Mao. who might differ with you and your above statement. |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by MnSpring on 05/12/18 at 05:47:29 0121232B3621440 wrote:
Last time I was, ‘cross the pond’, was when I was in the UK, at the big, CLA ‘Game Fair’, about 15 years ago. However over the last 50 years, visiting various Gun Shops, gun shows, ranges, gun clubs, competitions. Owning a brick & Mortar gun shop, and working in various ones, have had some experience in, talking to people from different Nations. And every one, was just, WOWED, with the Freedom, ‘GUNS’, had in America. This included UK, AU, Germany, Denmark, Norway, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, Spain, Portugal, and of course, Canada and Mexico. Lately, it is internet, ‘boards/forums’, like this one, which are Gun Orientated, which open up discussions to all, but most are, from the USA. On One, a person was talking about, and asking if anyone else was doing the same thing, about crafting a certain shell for a certain use. I had done something very slimier 15 years ago, have refined it and adapted it to other cartridges. Offered to send a couple of, EMPTY, cartridge cases, to this fellow who was working on this project., (they would have made his work easier), He declined, because he was from Brazil, and just Possessing that EMPTY Un-Primed case, (if caught), would put him in Jail. So I would like to see, the list of countries you say, the residents of, see no difference between where they live, and the USA, because of the 2nd Adm., and the Firearm, sports/competitions/recreations, they engage in. Granted, if they are Not ‘gun’ people. They may not see a difference. But that would be like saying, ‘Eric Holder’, only wants to protect your freedom. |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by Eegore on 05/13/18 at 18:11:49 Primarily Japan but also in order of most recent documented conversations: UK Ireland Germany Norway Sweden Brazil Peru Argentina Chile These are broken down into individuals in which I have had direct contact in their country on more than 8 occasions for a duration of more than 60 days. I left out places I have not been to such as Australia although I know people there that do not think the 2nd Amendment is directly correlated with our modern day media rights and content or "Freedom of Press". There was no direct discussion regarding gun support from each individual as the topic was regarding modern media and if they believed that without a 2nd Amendment that US citizens would not have a Freedom of Press. I can ask them each if they are "gun supporters" and clarify that is the individual ownership of firearms in the home. |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by Eegore on 05/13/18 at 18:17:49 223B35356363203726373139616667520 wrote:
Eegore There are people who suffered under Hitler , Pol Pot, Stalin and Mao. who might differ with you and your above statement. [/quote] I believe the situation that I was in and the situations leaders documented above are not close enough to bridge the gap without looking far into the structure of each government within its initial development and modernization into the time of said leaders decisions. Also each happen prior to today's usage of modern media. I believe that the mass murder of citizens in one county of the US because they are using legal means to remove politicians from office is unlikely not because it has never happened, but simply because it would be more trouble than its worth. |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by MnSpring on 05/14/18 at 07:26:35 08282A223F284D0 wrote:
First this post was changed to, ‘Freedom of the PRESS’. Which ‘Freedom of the Press’ is a Part of, ‘Freedom of Speech’. In a ‘Book’, Just because it is printed words, and bound, the, ‘Freedom’ to say what one wants, IS, the 1st, Amendment. Of course, outside things like shouting ‘Fire’ in a crowded theater, when their is not a fire, and it is meant to cause harm, or perhaps it is a prank, but does cause harm. (That is to get ahead of a counter, which if I said, ‘…shouting fire in a theater…”, someone could say: “ Nothing Wrong with that, and NO one has Ever been prosecuted for shouting ‘fire’, in a theater, when their is a fire) Now going back to the people you have talked to from other countries, which you say have said their, ‘freedom of speech/press’, is just as good as the one in the USA, and their is no need for a 2nd, to protect it. Their is a distinct difference, in the way you are contacting these people, and the way, those people have, contacted me. In most cases, coming to the place where I sell something they are interested in, instead of being approached by you to sell/give them something. It is a, Huge, difference. Just like selling something in Minn. on a Monday, after the Vikings Lost a game on Sun. Sit at the desk and do paperwork. Or the,’Team’, Won, forget the paperwork, make hay while the sun shines. Some thoughts on, ‘Freedom of Press’. Could it be, that they believe their press is Free, because they know/experienced, nothing else ? Because they have been told it is ? Do they believe if you are, ‘giving’, something, will they not say what they believe you want to hear ? If you are selling something, do they believe that if they say, what they believe you want to here, they will get a better price ? Are they afraid to speak badly of their, freedom of the press, because if the wrong person hears them, they will just ‘disappear’ ? The statement from a previous post: "…In 2016, a television ad which advocated that babies with Down Syndrome shouldn’t be aborted solely because of their syndrome ran. It was ruled anti-abortion speech and removed….”, Is from France, (France because of someones, ’Toaster’) It is a Statement, which, here, in the US, would most definitely be considered, ‘censorship’, at the very least. (Now again, believing it was, ‘removed’, by a policy/law/directive, by a government). It would not have been, ‘removed’ by the company/station, that aired it, it just wouldn’t have been aired in the first place. If it was that stations, Policy. (Very much like the, ‘Policy’, of several ‘news’ stations, to not report any ‘news’, which does not fit their policy, or if it is big, and all over elsewhere, to spin it, or out and out lie, so it does fit their policy.) Oh, one more note: You said, ‘Brazil’. Wondering what position, that person, your contact, has in the Government ? In fact, what contact/ties/association to their, ’government’, do any of these people you contact have. |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by Eegore on 05/14/18 at 08:02:46 " Could it be, that they believe their press is Free, because they know/experienced, nothing else ?" Not typically, and we would have to define "know/experience" for instance how much knowledge/experience do you have with Japan and their press structure in comparison to how much they have with ours? We would have to define the terms then compare for each location per individual. "Do they believe if you are, ‘giving’, something, will they not say what they believe you want to hear ?" No. There is no exchange of goods, donation or otherwise, these are people with whom I work or have worked with on various projects and have maintained contact with. The shortest is 9 years. " Are they afraid to speak badly of their, freedom of the press, because if the wrong person hears them, they will just ‘disappear’ ?" No. None of them believe they will be murdered or incarcerated for communicating their opinion about the US 2nd Amendment in correlation to the US Freedom of Press/Assembly and their own respective countries rights. Communication is not encrypted or otherwise kept private. They are ok with their statements being public and tied to their actual identity. "Oh, one more note: You said, ‘Brazil’. Wondering what position, that person, your contact, has in the Government ? In fact, what contact/ties/association to their, ’government’, do any of these people you contact have." None. They are citizens, 4 of them holding duel citizenship of the country they are talking about. There is in my opinion no conspiracy or danger here to anyone. These people simply do not believe that the 2nd Amendment is protecting the US Freedom of Speech at this time. This belief stems from their own location of residency having similar, not exact freedoms of press and assembly however they do not have a 2nd Amendment or similar. Its that simple, they just perceive it that way and I can see why as I have been to these locations myself several times for extended durations of time. |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by MnSpring on 05/14/18 at 09:03:03 4666646C7166030 wrote:
Using France as a example because of a Toaster. The Below is, ‘Fake’ ? The, ’Truth’? Or just ‘ignored’ ? (For the record, I do Not believe in suicide, but believe the Freedom, to state a Opinion !) “…In 1987 a law repressing incitation to suicide was passed, after a best-selling book called "Suicide, mode d'emploi" was published in 1982. The bill was first adopted by the Senate in 1983; in 1987, during the debates before the National Assembly, the book was cited by name as a prime example of what was to be banned. This book, written by two anarchists (Claude Guillon and Yves Le Bonniec), contained a historic and theoretical account of suicide, as well as a critical overview of ways to commit suicide. The book could not be rereleased in 1989 because of that law. The book is thus censored de facto, unavailable in all libraries and bookshops in France. It has never been translated into English….” http://www.artandpopularculture.com/Censorship_in_France And the: “…In 2016, a television ad which advocated that babies with Down Syndrome shouldn't be aborted solely because of their syndrome ran. It was ruled anti-abortion speech and removed. …” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_France So, while some may believe, that Disarming, civilian, Citizens, is correct. Others believe, that, ‘Freedom’, is correct. And which one, 'IS', correct, will be determined, probably 50-100 years from now. And even then, it will be argued, as who, is 'correct' in their opinion, of what was correct ! Just to ‘remind’, some. When you are persuaded to Give UP a ‘Freedom', in return for ’Security’, you will have NEITHER. Which is Very Well Documented in History ! And said by well knowen people, a Long Time Ago. |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by Eegore on 05/14/18 at 10:15:23 I will resend this link to some associates in France, they will not be government employees or people afraid of death or incarceration by responding publically and ones in which I have had no exchange of services or goods. I am not sure but I don't think that citizens in France would have used personal firearms to alter the laws made regarding suicide, or to get the book re-published. Just as I do not expect they would do the same to get commercials re-aired. Also I do not believe that those laws would have ceased to exist if French citizens had a 2nd Amendment. I could be wrong, but to maintain context these have to have a direct nexus to the 2nd Amendment and its use for TV commercials and suicide laws in France. This means French citizens would be willing to take up arms over the content described. Also I recommend looking up the ALA's list of banned and challenged books in the US, it happens here too. |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/14/18 at 11:59:48 ALA? |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by MnSpring on 05/14/18 at 13:11:50 7555575F4255300 wrote:
JOG, ALA = American Library Association, Wasn’t sure, had to look it up myself, Did so, went to their sight: http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks/classics And found this, about banned books. “…attempts by individuals and groups to have books removed from libraries shelves and from classrooms….” (Oh what a List, LOLOLOLOLOLOL) So, the, ‘Attempt’ to BAN a book (or limit Free Speech), has been, ‘attempted’, by Liberians, school boards, teachers, who are imposing their, Personal Opinions, on other people. Who do NOT want to allow other people to have a different source of information. (Like 80% of today's Media) And, when concerned people objected, the, ‘Ban’, (by that ‘Person’) is overturned. It is, a, ‘BAN, by one person, or a ‘Board’, etc. It is Not a, ‘BAN’, from the Federal Government. (In THIS, Country) http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1526047608 So the school, that suspended 2 students, for 5 days, for posting a photo of them with a gun at a range. Because: “…wording in the district's policy that prohibited students from having weapons for any reason on or off school grounds. Penalties included an evaluation by the Child Study Team and a recommendation that a student be suspended from school for at least one year…” The photos do NOT, show what really happened, when the Parents took to giving their opinion to the school board. A Letter, did ! “…The videos of Monday's school board meeting showed just three of the 25-plus people who spoke that made valuable points. What you don’t see in the video is what Board of Education members were doing the entire time. They were on their phones, not paying attention to the issue at hand….” So now, that, ‘board’, which is the, ‘government’, in that case. Which one of the Countries you named, do you believe, would have, IMMEDIATELY done, (After they were severely criticized by the Parents) Stop the Suspension ? Remove the, ‘black’ mark from the student’s record ? Re-wright the, ‘rule’, about what a student does when NOT a Student/in class/On School grounds ? I don’t believe any of them would, Simply because, They Don’t HAVE TO ! Let’s go right back to the beginning. A Person has a opinion, their should be no 2nd. Using the 1st, as the, (Protected), vechiel to give that opinion, that their should be no 2nd. The fact that, someone from another country, believes that their, ‘freedom of press’, is the Same as here. Is their opinion. Put a frog in a pan of hot water, it jumps right out. Put a Frog in a pan of cold water, then S L O L E Y raise the heat. What happens ? |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by Serowbot on 05/14/18 at 13:20:55 Trump is banning science... one word at a time... ::) Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by MnSpring on 05/14/18 at 14:39:00 5640574A52474A51250 wrote:
That would be, YOUR, Opinion ! (Or was that a, ’SPIN” of a headline) “…a list of phrases to be avoided …” Perhaps one need to read that part again. and concentrate on the word, ‘avoided’. (Just a note, ‘avoided’, does not = ‘Banned’’) "... and here, the agency’s linguists have done an even better job of camouflage: …” OH just like, ’Sensible Gun Control needs to be in-acted’, when, ‘BAN Guns’, is what it means ? “… war on science …” Yep, Spin, Clickbait, and plain old LIES. (the word, ‘WAR’) Amazing, if this country is SO Bad, and other countries have a Better, ‘Freedom of Speech’, WITHOUT, any kind of 2nd. (or so you have been told) Why hasn’t Trump, made a, executive order, saying the word/s, … … … … are BANNED ? |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by Eegore on 05/14/18 at 15:04:27 The ALA list does not have government listed books as it is no part of their research and US controls pretty much stop at child pornography. Our banning or limitation comes from us, not the government that so many people seem to think is doing it. Right it is their opinion regarding the assessment that our 2nd Amendment is not protecting our Freedom of Speech/Assembly at this time, and mine is influenced by their and my observations. I do not think our Freedom of Press/Assembly is currently protected by our 2nd Amendment. |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by MnSpring on 05/14/18 at 15:48:07 7B5B59514C5B3E0 wrote:
OK then, now we know where you stand. (Ya could have saved a lot of typing) |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by Serowbot on 05/14/18 at 16:13:58 4665587B7962656C0B0 wrote:
We all could.. ;D |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by Eegore on 05/14/18 at 17:59:37 14370A292B30373E590 wrote:
OK then, now we know where you stand. (Ya could have saved a lot of typing) [/quote] I thought I made it clear in my first post (number 7 in this thread) that was contested: " I feel we would still have freedom of press simply because there is so much money in modern media. Second Amendment as far as I can tell has nothing to do with it now. " |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by MnSpring on 05/15/18 at 10:04:23 5474767E6374110 wrote:
Yep, (Actually it was post 6), you, ‘KINNA’ skirted around it. In post 24, you came out and said it. (Although now, (out of the blue), adding the word, ‘Assembly’) In post 6, you said, ’now’. That word, coupled with, ’as far as I can tell’, suggests that at one time, you believed the 2nd, Did protect the first. But you don’t believe that now. So, that is your belief. Fine. Just as I have mine. Their are 2 others here, that routinely, (to put this electronic forum into real life words) “ Say one thing, yet do another” Again back to the point. Totally Ironic, (and total Hypocrisy), that a person uses the, Protection of the 1st., To try and eliminate, the 2nd. |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by Serowbot on 05/15/18 at 10:31:38 I fail to see any hypocrisy.... the two amendments are not joined at the hip. |
|
Title: Re: Book ... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/15/18 at 10:39:53 The people who are carrying legally are out in public, and nobody knows who, how many, where. But the odds of a bad guy getting shot have been going up while crime has been dropping. Do you have to SEE the gun, and does there need to be a news worthy event before you can understand the impact of the second amendment and how tyrants and criminals are DETERRED? |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |