The body count

[james&olya 1,121]

says the pro government sympathizer....

Every American should own a fvcking Tomahawk Missile if we really want to get down to it.

Your position is consistent with the actual language of the 2nd amendment. If you want to be able to take down your government you might need a few nukes as well.

The utter insanity of wanting to apply 18th century principles on private ownership of weapons of war to our 21st century reality is frightening!

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Your position is consistent with the actual language of the 2nd amendment. If you want to be able to take down your government you might need a few nukes as well.

The utter insanity of wanting to apply 18th century principles on private ownership of weapons of war to our 21st century reality is frightening!

and in one last word you trash the constitution like every other moonbat out there.

[revtech100 16]

The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.......

I feel for the victims. But the gun required an operator. If a drunk driver plows into a crowd in a ford, do we ban fords? No. We punish the driver. Same here. Punish (with extreme prejudice) the shooter. And befor you jump my s$&?, I speak from experience having had my 18 year old daughter kidnapped and murdered. Had she had a gun that night, things might have turned out different.

[james&olya 1,121]

and in one last word you trash the constitution like every other moonbat out there.

A process to amend the constitution was wisely put in place. Our current broken politics looks unlikely to be able to live up to the promise of being able to keep that noble document relevant to the times and conditions at present. I believe our 'founding fathers' would be appalled.

[james&olya 1,121]

The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.......

I feel for the victims. But the gun required an operator. If a drunk driver plows into a crowd in a ford, do we ban fords? No. We punish the driver. Same here. Punish (with extreme prejudice) the shooter. And befor you jump my s$&?, I speak from experience having had my 18 year old daughter kidnapped and murdered. Had she had a gun that night, things might have turned out different.

The right to keep and bear Tomahawk cruise missiles? Tactical nuclear weapons? Land mines? Chemical weapons?

I am very sad to hear about your tragedy!

[Darnell 8,479]

I believe our 'founding fathers' would be appalled.

Agreed. They'd be exceptionally appalled at the fact that dueling has been outlawed.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.......

I feel for the victims. But the gun required an operator. If a drunk driver plows into a crowd in a ford, do we ban fords? No. We punish the driver. Same here. Punish (with extreme prejudice) the shooter. And befor you jump my s$&?, I speak from experience having had my 18 year old daughter kidnapped and murdered. Had she had a gun that night, things might have turned out different.

[james&olya 1,121]

Agreed. They'd be exceptionally appalled at the fact that dueling has been outlawed.

They were men who believed in some basic principles but who were also very pragmatic. You surely cannot believe they would advocate for the private ownership of all weapons of war today! Limits must be imposed and have been. The silly arguments of the NRA pretending that these principles only apply to whatever weapon class they have a hard-on for at the moment seem without merit to me. If you want an effective citizen armed force that could throw off a despotic government you would need much more than handguns and rifles!

[Darnell 8,479]

They were men who believed in some basic principles but who were also very pragmatic.

If you canna solve a dispute, or a matter of honor, with a sword,

then yer a pansie

[but my ammo stock is over 18 cases now]

As to the rest of yer posit, trying to compare 'then' to 'now' for choice of armaments; I'm sorry - you really seem to not understand (emphasis on seem ) what dueling is all about.

Edited July 21, 2012 by Darnell

[james&olya 1,121]

If you canna solve a dispute, or a matter of honor, with a sword,

then yer a pansie

[but my ammo stock is over 18 cases now]

As to the rest of yer posit, trying to compare 'then' to 'now' for choice of armaments; I'm sorry - you really seem to not understand (emphasis on seem ) what dueling is all about.

What the he!! does dueling have to do with the second amendment or the possession of assault rifles?

[Darnell 8,479]

What the he!! does dueling have to do with the second amendment or the possession of assault rifles?

I didn't make that leap - you did.

If'n yer gonna argue with me - can you , at least, stick to my miniscule focus???

[which is, of course, dueling.................. and the Founding Father's abysmal opinion on why we not allow it anymore]

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

What the he!! does dueling have to do with the second amendment or the possession of assault rifles?

Try dueling with one of these and you will never go back to a cap and ball revolver.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

They don't, it is totally unjustified. So are extended magazines.

I don't hink you should have the ablity to get on this forum and give your opinions. If we take the Second amendment , why don't we take the first also.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

They don't, it is totally unjustified. So are extended magazines.

So why don't you explain to me why an AR-15 (Hollywood Gun) is so much more inherently dangerous than say a Glock 29 or a Remington Model 100 shotgun. I mean from a tactical standpoint. I am all ears.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

I have an AR-15 and extended magazines. I feel quite justified in owning it for the past 25 years or so.

Me to. Bushmaster Model