1) sure, the constitution can be changed with an amendment. Maybe you guys should try it that way instead of passing laws that violate it, or trying to argue that "the people" doesn't mean the people.
2) uh, yeah. Why not just punish the people who commit violence crime? It's not a difficult concept.
3) Yeah, I don't like this style of arguing either, but it happens on both sides- like when you guys start talking about bazookas, tanks, and most laughably, nukes. A fork is orders of magnitude closer in damage to a .223 round than a nuke is.
4) the ignorance is very real. I mean look, you guys try to ban a gun because of its freaking grip! It's fires a projectile at 2500 ft/sec and your worried about the shape of the handle??? Yeah, that's ignorance alright.
6) you guys ignore all studies that show more guns DOES NOT equal more violence (without specifying violence that only happens with a gun).
Gotta love that final made up quote down there--pedantic arguments rooted in semantics: that sounds like a perfect description of all of your posts about the "Real meaning" of the second amendment, Pooch.
Also, at the beginning, there's a sarcastic remark about never being able to change the Constitution. Humorous that yall keep bringing that up, suggesting that we don't believe in the Amendment process, when we keep telling you: "Hey, there's an amendment process over here--stop trying to effect Constitutional changes through mere legislation."
This post has so much fail that I'm not even going to go into the rest of it. What's the point? We've been over it before and you've just answered us with "Nuh-uh" and facebook quizzes.
1) sure, the constitution can be changed with an amendment. Maybe you guys should try it that way instead of passing laws that violate it, or trying to argue that "the people" doesn't mean the people.
ReplyDelete2) uh, yeah. Why not just punish the people who commit violence crime? It's not a difficult concept.
3) Yeah, I don't like this style of arguing either, but it happens on both sides- like when you guys start talking about bazookas, tanks, and most laughably, nukes. A fork is orders of magnitude closer in damage to a .223 round than a nuke is.
4) the ignorance is very real. I mean look, you guys try to ban a gun because of its freaking grip! It's fires a projectile at 2500 ft/sec and your worried about the shape of the handle??? Yeah, that's ignorance alright.
6) you guys ignore all studies that show more guns DOES NOT equal more violence (without specifying violence that only happens with a gun).
Gotta love that final made up quote down there--pedantic arguments rooted in semantics: that sounds like a perfect description of all of your posts about the "Real meaning" of the second amendment, Pooch.
ReplyDeleteAlso, at the beginning, there's a sarcastic remark about never being able to change the Constitution. Humorous that yall keep bringing that up, suggesting that we don't believe in the Amendment process, when we keep telling you: "Hey, there's an amendment process over here--stop trying to effect Constitutional changes through mere legislation."
This post has so much fail that I'm not even going to go into the rest of it. What's the point? We've been over it before and you've just answered us with "Nuh-uh" and facebook quizzes.