At least 10 killed after shooting during 'Dark Knight' screening in Colorado

[Cabbagesandking]

So you think burglars, muggers, murderers, etc. are not a threat to the nation?
10, 329, 137 instances recorded of violent, property, murder, rape, robbery, and assault crimes costing in the 100s of billions of dollars according to 2010 stats alone. Yeah, no threat at all.


Simply because nitwits like you can't get the reasoning behind the arguments in the first place. And it isn't as if your arguments don't go round in circles either.

And vice versa.

And where on Earth do you get that from. And what has it to do with the discussion?

 

[L Gilbert]

And where on Earth do you get that from. And what has it to do with the discussion?

Wasn't it you that said

What desperate stretching. Where is there any permission in the Constitution for the 'Right' to carry Arms. Or in the Bill of Rights (which is part of the Constitution). It is sad that some of you cannot get beyond the "ad hominens."

But then, there is nothing else.

There is no "Right" to carry or use in any way other than the thousand year old tradition of providing national defense. The other part of 'overthrowing tyrants goes back to Magna Carta and still confers no Right to more than possess and be prepared for national emergency.

?

 

[Cabbagesandking]

Wasn't it you that said ?

And you parlay that into approval for violent crime? Have you read any of this discussion?

 

[L Gilbert]

And you parlay that into approval for violent crime?

WHOOOOOSH!
That's the sound of the point whizzing waaaaaaaaaaaay over your tiny little mind.

Ok, Cabbagehead, I'll explain it s l o o o o o w l y to you: you mentioned the right to bear arms being intended for national threat or defense. I replied with a question about whether those crimes I mentioned were considered by you to be a threat to national stability/security. Get it?

 

[CDNBear]

I doubt whether there is so much unadulterated nonsense spouted about any topic in any society...

And along came you...

There is no "Right" to "bear arms,"...

It would be nicer, colby, if you read what I wrote and worked on your cognitive skills.

Nowhere is there any permission, even in your Constitution, for citizens to carry Arms for any other purpose or at any other time. It is your national sickness and money induced ignorance that leads to any other interpretation.

So, you see, I do know what I am talking about.

No, I don't see.

What I do see, is you making a fool of yourself, yet again, lol.

This really shows who is in the Right over this.

It sure does. Colpy.

I suggest that you absorb my message and add to your store of learning.

Why the hell would we want to be uninformed and make fools of ourselves like you?

For Colby, with a P, the Right to "Keep and Bear Arms" means exactly what I said it does and is still an archaic Common Law concept that has been long disposed of in less frightened countries. That is, it means to keep them at home and bear them when the country needs them.

Oh there's the caveat, lol.

What desperate stretching.

What an excellent description of your posts.

I do not understand the context of the times.

That isn't all you don't understand.

Please provide credible references.

No! you research it. You make these claims that murderous behaviour and the weapons to carry it out prevent crime. Show your support.

Predictable...

Well, my Bull Shyte Tolerance Level has been reached.

Really? And they call me patient.

You Sir, are a dullard and a liar.

Oh I proved that months ago dude.

I have no idea what that means.

Like most of the facts posted to completely refute the intolerable lies in your posts.

I know that there has been nothing but bluster posing as argument against the position Colpy took.

FIFY.

Well, Mr. Colpy. We have some dictionary copy and paste to "back up" Constitutional copy and paste. The same inanity and inability to understand what is in front of you instigates both.

From one "moron" to another.

At least you admit it.

Jealousy will get you nowhere.

I won't sell people out, like your mentor.

Sucks to be you.

Have you read any of this discussion?

I have, I wish to take this moment to thank you for the good laugh, while you continue to make posts that prove every observation, I have posted about you.

 

[L Gilbert]

A little info:
definition;
http://www.definitions.net/definition/national%20security

 

[Cabbagesandking]

WHOOOOOSH!
That's the sound of the point whizzing waaaaaaaaaaaay over your tiny little mind.

Ok, Cabbagehead, I'll explain it s l o o o o o w l y to you: you mentioned the right to bear arms being intended for national threat or defense. I replied with a question about whether those crimes I mentioned were considered by you to be a threat to national stability. Get it?

"So you think burglars, muggers, murderers, etc. are not a threat to the nation?
10, 329, 137 instances recorded of violent, property, murder, rape, robbery, and assault crimes costing in the 100s of billions of dollars according to 2010 stats alone. Yeah, no threat at all."

That was not a question, It was an imputation.

If you intended it as a question, then I have to ask you why you think it is relevant to the particular purpose of the thread. How to deal with crime is a separate issue. Carrying guns is not an answer as Traynor could tell you.

 

[CDNBear]

"So you think burglars, muggers, murderers, etc. are not a threat to the nation?
10, 329, 137 instances recorded of violent, property, murder, rape, robbery, and assault crimes costing in the 100s of billions of dollars according to 2010 stats alone. Yeah, no threat at all."

That was not a question, It was an imputation.

If you intended it as a question, then I have to ask you why you think it is relevant to the particular purpose of the thread. How to deal with crime is a separate issue. Carrying guns is not an answer as Traynor could tell you.

Good idea, dance, don't answer the question, just dance, lol...

 

[L Gilbert]

"So you think burglars, muggers, murderers, etc. are not a threat to the nation?
10, 329, 137 instances recorded of violent, property, murder, rape, robbery, and assault crimes costing in the 100s of billions of dollars according to 2010 stats alone. Yeah, no threat at all."

That was not a question, It was an imputation.

Um, you are projecting your interpretation into my intent.

If you intended it as a question, then I have to ask you why you think it is relevant to the particular purpose of the thread. How to deal with crime is a separate issue. Carrying guns is not an answer as Traynor could tell you.

So I guess crime is not considered by you to be a threat to the security and stability of a nation.
Unreal.

 

[CDNBear]

Unreal.

Not really.

You did catch all the BS he posted in this thread, hell this site?

I'm surprised he hasn't told Colpy he rewrote the Constitution, so he knows.

 

[L Gilbert]

Not really.

Ok ...... how about unrealistic then.

You did catch all the BS he posted in this thread, hell this site?

Nope. Just some of it.

I'm surprised he hasn't told Colpy he rewrote the Constitution, so he knows.

You mean he claims to be one of the writers of the Amendments (and other changes to the Constitution)? rofl

 

[CDNBear]

Ok ...... how about unrealistic then.

No, just expected and predictable.

Nope. Just some of it.

Oh dude, this guy is funny as hell. "I'm right, you're wrong, because I say so", is his usual nutty MO.

You mean he claims to be one of the writers of the Amendments (and other changes to the Constitution)? rofl

No, he claims to have written for the UN. Given the length he'll go to pump up his ego. I'm just surprised he didn't.

 

[EagleSmack]

Not really.

You did catch all the BS he posted in this thread, hell this site?

I'm surprised he hasn't told Colpy he rewrote the Constitution, so he knows.

Apparently he has made a U.S Constitutional Ruling from what I can tell.

 

[SLM]

Apparently he has made a U.S Constitutional Ruling from what I can tell.

Really? Are U.S. Constitutional Rulings often pulled from the rectum?

 

[CDNBear]

Apparently he has made a U.S Constitutional Ruling from what I can tell.

Yep, and couldn't be further from reality, if he tried.

I was going to say memories of the English pride incident, but it's more like memories of every thread he posts in.

With my penchant for calling BS, is it any wonder why he has me on ignore?

 

[L Gilbert]

just expectedly and predictably unrealistic

Fixed it for you.

Oh dude, this guy is funny as hell. "I'm right, you're wrong, because I say so", is his usual nutty MO.

Yeah, I got that.

No, he claims to have written for the UN. Given the length he'll go to pump up his ego. I'm just surprised he didn't.

I beg to differ:

Wasn't it you that said
"There is no "Right" to carry or use in any way other than the thousand year old tradition of providing national defense."

(referring to the Constitution and its definitions.
See: District of Columbia vs. Heller (2008 )

 

[CDNBear]

I stand corrected.

 

[L Gilbert]

I stand corrected.

Ah, you're human (at least partially). lol

 

[EagleSmack]

Really? Are U.S. Constitutional Rulings often pulled from the rectum?

They can be yes.

 

[Cabbagesandking]

So this degenerates into the usual as those without the mental equipment jump in.