Liberal Forum

RebelGator » 27 Jan 2026, 9:21 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 9:21 am

Lots more where that came from, think you'll survive it?

I'm sure.....it's very MAGA.....

we've explored the reasons why

Blackvegetable » 27 Jan 2026, 9:59 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 9:59 am

I'm sure.....it's very MAGA.....

we've explored the reasons why

In all your explorations, you never discovered what is absolutely true about evolving in plain sight.

Blackvegetable » 27 Jan 2026, 8:05 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 8:05 am

don't assert, @*TinyBubbles

in my wine 
makes me happy 
makes me feel fine 
your left your left 
your left right left 

Buck Naked » 27 Jan 2026, 10:39 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 10:39 am

in my whine 
makes me happy 
makes me feel fine 
your left your left 
your left right left 

you left out an h in wine. fify

Blackvegetable » 27 Jan 2026, 8:56 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 8:56 am

Huey » 27 Jan 2026, 8:46 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 8:46 am

Oh, my bad, I was wrong.  You fully support the second amendment.  No limits.

****,

Personally, I think 2A is anachronistic crap.

Specifically, the interpretation of "Individual right" is - as the late Chief Justice Berger noted - a fraud.

Bruen is its dumb, ugly bastard.

There is no sacred right to own a firearm. But that does NOT mean people can't possess them. It is a privilege which comes with responsibility. 

You have no idea at all what the OP is about. It isn't about the 2nd Amendment....it is about Free Ride's **** show and the absurdity of the "historical context" exemption under which it festers.

 

Personally, I think 2A is anachronistic crap.

Looks like I was right the first time,  YOU do not fully support the 2A.

Bruen is its dumb, ugly bastard.

AI OverviewNew York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen
 (2022) was a landmark Supreme Court case that struck down a New York law requiring individuals to show "proper cause" to carry a handgun in public. The 6-3 ruling established that the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense and required gun regulations to align with historical tradition

I can't think of any other right where you have to show proper cause.

There is no sacred right to own a firearm. But that does NOT mean people can't possess them. It is a privilege which comes with responsibility.

It is not a sacred right nor is it a privilege.  It's a CONSTITUTIONAL right.
 
 

Huey » 27 Jan 2026, 10:45 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 10:45 am

Looks like I was right the first time,  YOU do not fully support the 2A.

AI OverviewNew York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen
 (2022) was a landmark Supreme Court case that struck down a New York law requiring individuals to show "proper cause" to carry a handgun in public. The 6-3 ruling established that the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense and required gun regulations to align with historical tradition

I can't think of any other right where you have to show proper cause.

It is not a sacred right nor is it a privilege.  It's a CONSTITUTIONAL right.

You are supporting the government murdering citizens and spending our tax dollars to do it Huey.

Thanks for all your efforts to preserve 2A so we can fight back.. That's what it was intended for.
 

Johnny » wrote:

02 Feb 1970, 5:56 pm

Huey » 27 Jan 2026, 10:45 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 10:45 am

Looks like I was right the first time,  YOU do not fully support the 2A.

AI OverviewNew York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen
 (2022) was a landmark Supreme Court case that struck down a New York law requiring individuals to show "proper cause" to carry a handgun in public. The 6-3 ruling established that the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense and required gun regulations to align with historical tradition

I can't think of any other right where you have to show proper cause.

It is not a sacred right nor is it a privilege.  It's a CONSTITUTIONAL right.

You are supporting the government murdering citizens and spending our tax dollars to do it Huey.

Thanks for all your efforts to preserve 2A so we can fight back.. That's what it was intended for.
 

 

No, I'm not. There was no reason to shoot that man.

There are some things the man should have different but he did not deserve to be shot.

Johnny » wrote:

02 Feb 1970, 5:56 pm

Huey » 27 Jan 2026, 10:45 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 10:45 am

Looks like I was right the first time,  YOU do not fully support the 2A.

AI OverviewNew York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen
 (2022) was a landmark Supreme Court case that struck down a New York law requiring individuals to show "proper cause" to carry a handgun in public. The 6-3 ruling established that the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense and required gun regulations to align with historical tradition

I can't think of any other right where you have to show proper cause.

It is not a sacred right nor is it a privilege.  It's a CONSTITUTIONAL right.

You are supporting the government murdering citizens and spending our tax dollars to do it Huey.

Thanks for all your efforts to preserve 2A so we can fight back.. That's what it was intended for.
 

 

No, I'm not. There was no reason to shoot that man.

There are some things the man should have different but he did not deserve to be shot.

Huey » 27 Jan 2026, 10:52 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 10:52 am

No, I'm not. There was no reason to shoot that man.

There are some things the man should have different but he did not deserve to be shot.

What changes between earning to be shot or deserving to be shot? Social consensus of the situation after it is over.

Huey » 27 Jan 2026, 10:45 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 10:45 am

Looks like I was right the first time,  YOU do not fully support the 2A.

AI OverviewNew York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen
 (2022) was a landmark Supreme Court case that struck down a New York law requiring individuals to show "proper cause" to carry a handgun in public. The 6-3 ruling established that the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense and required gun regulations to align with historical tradition

I can't think of any other right where you have to show proper cause.

It is not a sacred right nor is it a privilege.  It's a CONSTITUTIONAL right.

Define "fully support".

Blackvegetable » 27 Jan 2026, 11:22 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 11:22 am

Huey » 27 Jan 2026, 10:45 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 10:45 am

Looks like I was right the first time,  YOU do not fully support the 2A.

AI OverviewNew York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen
 (2022) was a landmark Supreme Court case that struck down a New York law requiring individuals to show "proper cause" to carry a handgun in public. The 6-3 ruling established that the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense and required gun regulations to align with historical tradition

I can't think of any other right where you have to show proper cause.

It is not a sacred right nor is it a privilege.  It's a CONSTITUTIONAL right.

Define "fully support".

 

That is a question.  Are you going to take the pledge?

If not, you might as well just explain whether or not you fully support the 2A.  
 

Huey » 27 Jan 2026, 10:52 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 10:52 am

No, I'm not. There was no reason to shoot that man.

There are some things the man should have different but he did not deserve to be shot.

Very few if any MAGA's on this site agree with you.
 

Huey » 27 Jan 2026, 11:24 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 11:24 am

That is a question.  

This is **** ridiculous.

 

*Roshambo » 27 Jan 2026, 11:24 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 11:24 am

Very few if any MAGA's on this site agree with you.

You will have to take that up with them.  You and BV are very good at thinking you are stirring up **** with crap like that.

You're not.

Blackvegetable » 27 Jan 2026, 11:25 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 11:25 am

Huey » 27 Jan 2026, 11:24 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 11:24 am

That is a question.  Are you going to take the pledge?

If not, you might as well just explain whether or not you fully support the 2A.  

 

This is **** ridiculous.

 

 

FIFY

If you support the the right of law abiding citizens to purchase a firearm, or as many firearms as suits them that would indicate full support.

WMDs are not firearms. Missles are not firearms.  RPGs and Bazookas are not firearms.

Just saying.
 

Huey » 27 Jan 2026, 11:29 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 11:29 am

You will have to take that up with them.  You and BV are very good at thinking you are stirring up **** with crap like that.

You're not.

One more reason for you to refer to him as Master Vegetable
 

Blackvegetable » 27 Jan 2026, 11:22 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 11:22 am

Define "fully support".

each person's brain unconditional surrender of biological time alive to obey(mind) social consensus life isn't self evident time adapting in plain sight daily here.

*Roshambo » 27 Jan 2026, 11:36 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 11:36 am

One more reason for you to refer to him as Master Vegetable

Keep in mind MasterBator is here because of me.  

Huey » 27 Jan 2026, 11:33 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 11:33 am

FIFY

If you support the the 

You're a salmonid.

Don't ask why unless you're ready to pledge...



 

Blackvegetable » 27 Jan 2026, 11:41 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 11:41 am

Huey » 27 Jan 2026, 11:33 am » wrote: ↑

27 Jan 2026, 11:33 am

If you support the the right of law abiding citizens to purchase a firearm, or as many firearms as suits them that would indicate full support.

WMDs are not firearms. Missles are not firearms.  RPGs and Bazookas are not firearms.

Just saying.

 

You're a salmonid.

Don't ask why unless you're ready to pledge...



 

 

you were saying.......

PS.  I have taken the pledge to answer your questions on a one for one basis.  That a does not mean you ask 15 questions and I have to wait to ask you questions.  Been down that road with you before.