Liberal Forum

FOS » 16 Jun 2022, 11:56 am » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 11:56 am

Huey » 16 Jun 2022, 11:50 am » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 11:50 am

Before you can make this argument you have to reconcile the fact that repeating rifles were available and known about for centuries.  The problem is they could not be mass produced and were expensive.  In 1777 the Continental Congress considered paying for a repeating flintlock.

The Belton flintlock was a repeating flintlock design using superposed loads, conceived by Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, resident Joseph Belton some time prior to 1777. The musket design was offered by Belton to the newly formed Continental Congress in 1777. Belton wrote that the musket could fire eight rounds with one loading,[1] and that he could support his claims "by experimental proof."[2] Belton failed to sell the musket to Congress, and later was unable to sell the design to the British Army a year after the American Revolution.[1] There are no records that indicate that the gun was ever supplied, and it is uncertain if or how exactly the Belton improvement operated.[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belton_flintlock

You are incorrect concerning cannons.

You are totally ignoring the essence of the issue. Totally ignoring it.

I actually do not care about you access to small arms lol.

The point of the 2nd amendment was based on the fact that a civilian was actually able to own weapons available to the military.

you cant do that anymore. You, sir, cannot buy a nuclear missile.

SHOULD you?

Thats the whole **** question. If you are really going to pretend that the 2nd has some sacred **** meaning to you...maybe you should address the fact that it is a dead letter. Cause it is. If you think your Ar15 is gonna make any **** difference in a civil war, you are delusional. 

address that fact. stop telling us about cannons.

SOunds like some one is backtracking.

A nuclear firearm is classified as a mass destruction weapon.  That is also why you can't purchase a stinger.

Yes, you can purchase a firearm that was available to the military as long as it was manufactured before May 1986. 

You can buy an F 15 as soon as it is demilitarized as well as a cannon.  

So far you are in a slump, MENSA.  

PS.  Address the OP, MENSA.  Got some knowledge. 

You are just like BV.  You get your *** handed to you on the OP and then you start slithering around like a snake.  
 
 
 

@FOS  

The reason Madison did what he did concerning repeating rifles was so the avg citizen could afford it

Huey » 16 Jun 2022, 12:02 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 12:02 pm

SOunds like some one is backtracking.

A nuclear firearm is classified as a mass destruction weapon.  That is also why you can't purchase a stinger.

Yes, you can purchase a firearm that was available to the military as long as it was manufactured before May 1986. 

You can buy an F 15 as soon as it is demilitarized as well as a cannon.  

So far you are in a slump, MENSA.  

PS.  Address the OP, MENSA.  Got some knowledge. 

You are just like BV.  You get your *** handed to you on the OP and then you start slithering around like a snake.

oh stop pretending lol. You are STILL MISSING THE POINT....

as you said, you are no **** mensa lol.

are you gonna make me repeat myself twice here?

the POINT is...warfare today is TOTALLY DIFFERENT from warfare in 1776...indeed pre WW1.

CIVILIANS CANNOT OWN SIGNIFICANT MILITARY TECHNOLOGY

that dream is over, boy. accept it.

now, fight for the right for bill gates to buy a nuclear weapon, or STFU about the 2nd. its irrelevant. There really is no grey area here.

FOS » 16 Jun 2022, 12:07 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 12:07 pm

oh stop pretending lol. You are STILL MISSING THE POINT....

as you said, you are no **** mensa lol.

are you gonna make me repeat myself twice here?

the POINT is...warfare today is TOTALLY DIFFERENT from warfare in 1776...indeed pre WW1.

CIVILIANS CANNOT OWN SIGNIFICANT MILITARY TECHNOLOGY

that dream is over, boy. accept it.

now, fight for the right for bill gates to buy a nuclear weapon, or STFU about the 2nd. its irrelevant. There really is no grey area here.

I accept your defeat.

Huey » 16 Jun 2022, 12:10 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 12:10 pm

I accept your defeat.

ohhhh.....damn i got your pathetic *** sounding like vegasgiants now LOL.

you have no response? the 2nd is irrelevant cause civilians cannot purchase relevant modern military equipment.

the 2nd hasnt mattered for a long **** time. Its a dead letter. You cannot deny that. 

FOS » 16 Jun 2022, 12:13 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 12:13 pm

ohhhh.....damn i got your pathetic *** sounding like vegasgiants now LOL.

you have no response? the 2nd is irrelevant cause civilians cannot purchase relevant modern military equipment.

the 2nd hasnt mattered for a long **** time. Its a dead letter. You cannot deny that.

convince me.

Huey » 16 Jun 2022, 12:20 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 12:20 pm

convince me.

when was the last time your stupid rifle scored a kill on an f22?

FOS » 16 Jun 2022, 12:21 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 12:21 pm

when was the last time your stupid rifle scored a kill on an f22?

You are off on a tangent.  And what stupid rifle would that be, MENSA?
 

Huey » 16 Jun 2022, 12:24 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 12:24 pm

You are off on a tangent.  And what stupid rifle would that be, MENSA?

oh no...i am on the topic. laser focused. You seem to have a poor memory.

I am speaking of the futility of the 2nd in light of modern technology. I have now repeated that 3 times, and you dont have **** to say to it.

And this is what i think the OP was really about.

nobody actually gives a **** about your obscure flintlock rifle lol. that isnt the point.

the point is....you are NOT equipped for modern warfare. You do not own **** that can prevent an f22 to from identifying you and taking you out. Nothing.

your 2nd is for nostalgia about an america that used to be, plus maybe you like hunting and just looking at guns.

but you cant do **** in a real war. Useless. The 2nd has literally been demoted to pure product consuption...that is ALL IT IS.

FOS » 16 Jun 2022, 12:28 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 12:28 pm

Huey » 16 Jun 2022, 12:24 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 12:24 pm

You are off on a tangent.  And what stupid rifle would that be, MENSA?

oh no...i am on the topic. laser focused. You seem to have a poor memory.

I am speaking of the futility of the 2nd in light of modern technology. I have now repeated that 3 times, and you dont have **** to say to it.

And this is what i think the OP was really about.

nobody actually gives a **** about your obscure flintlock rifle lol. that isnt the point.

the point is....you are NOT equipped for modern warfare. You do not own **** that can prevent an f22 to from identifying you and taking you out. Nothing.

your 2nd is for nostalgia about an america that used to be, plus maybe you like hunting and just looking at guns.

but you cant do **** in a real war. Useless. The 2nd has literally been demoted to pure product consuption...that is ALL IT IS.

 

Go read Federalist 46.  Get back to me.  You are "thinking" what the OP is really about as a reframe.  

I never said I was equipped for modern warfare.  I was at one point but not now.  And what is your hardon for an F22?   LMAO!

the idea of the title and the OP has been crushed.  Now you are rambling, MENSA.

 

Huey » 16 Jun 2022, 12:32 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 12:32 pm

Go read Federalist 46.  Get back to me.  You are "thinking" what the OP is really about as a reframe.  

I never said I was equipped for modern warfare.  I was at one point but not now.  And what is your hardon for an F22?   LMAO!

the idea of the title and the OP has been crushed.  Now you are rambling, MENSA.

are you gonna make me repeat myself again?

not quite mensa boy....if you arent equipped for modern warfare....then your 2nd is nothing but product consumption.

your gun, your big mac...no **** difference.

you can kill yourself with either.

you did NOT crush the OP....you just decided to argue against a strawman. He is NOT wrong...muskets mattered in 1776. they do NOT matter now. 

so if you are not equipped for warfare...how the **** is your gun buying any mroe relevant that any other product consumption? pot? child porn? guns? just **** products to consume bro. No difference.

FOS » 16 Jun 2022, 12:28 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 12:28 pm

I am speaking of the futility of the 2nd in light of modern technology. 

 

This "futility" you speak of is nothing compared to the futility of not being able to defend ourselves against what any common criminal can use against us.
In the meantime there are millions of White People who live in 98% White Communities who have owned semi auto firearms for generations and who have also never had to use them for self defense
If we could wave a magic wand and ignore the Nig on Nig Murders that are confined to our concrete and asphalt Urban Congos....the USA is a pretty safe place to live.. !!

 
 

FOS » 16 Jun 2022, 12:41 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 12:41 pm

Huey » 16 Jun 2022, 12:32 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 12:32 pm

Go read Federalist 46.  Get back to me.  You are "thinking" what the OP is really about as a reframe.  

I never said I was equipped for modern warfare.  I was at one point but not now.  And what is your hardon for an F22?   LMAO!

the idea of the title and the OP has been crushed.  Now you are rambling, MENSA.

are you gonna make me repeat myself again?

not quite mensa boy....if you arent equipped for modern warfare....then your 2nd is nothing but product consumption.

your gun, your big mac...no **** difference.

you can kill yourself with either.

you did NOT crush the OP....you just decided to argue against a strawman. He is NOT wrong...muskets mattered in 1776. they do NOT matter now. 

so if you are not equipped for warfare...how the **** is your gun buying any mroe relevant that any other product consumption? pot? child porn? guns? just **** products to consume bro. No difference.

 

f you arent equipped for modern warfare....then your 2nd is nothing but product consumption.

Odd, Madison never said that.  You got a reference for that?  A link?

Second Amendment is from 1789. Thus the second amendment only applies to Muskets.

That is the title.  That is ****.  

This is the OP:

Bullet was invented in 1847. Second Amendment is from 1789. Thus the second amendment only applies to Muskets.

That is ****.  

Seems I nailed it. 

Huey » 16 Jun 2022, 12:49 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 12:49 pm

Odd, Madison never said that.  You got a reference for that?  A link?

That is the title.  That is ****.  

This is the OP:

That is ****.  

Seems I nailed it.

you are just confirming exactly what I said. You want to argue with the OP over irrelevant trivial details, cause that is all you can **** do. 

I am taking his argument and developing it.

and you have no **** response to my criticism. None. 

if the 2nd is irrelevant then why does it exist?

you cannot argue that it isnt irrelevant. You are talking about **** disarmed f15s lol....like you are gonna win a war with that. 

FOS » 16 Jun 2022, 12:57 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 12:57 pm

Huey » 16 Jun 2022, 12:49 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 12:49 pm

Odd, Madison never said that.  You got a reference for that?  A link?

That is the title.  That is ****.  

This is the OP:

That is ****.  

Seems I nailed it.

you are just confirming exactly what I said. You want to argue with the OP over irrelevant trivial details, cause that is all you can **** do. 

I am taking his argument and developing it.

and you have no **** response to my criticism. None. 

if the 2nd is irrelevant then why does it exist?

you cannot argue that it isnt irrelevant. You are talking about **** disarmed f15s lol....like you are gonna win a war with that. 

 

Developing it?        That is some real fancy talk for reframing.  Let him develop his own argument. 

Your criticism is not based on fact.  Bring on some links to prove the assertions you are making.  

I never said anything about fighting a war.  Have you read Federalist 46 yet?  

Huey » 16 Jun 2022, 1:02 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 1:02 pm

Developing it?        That is some real fancy talk for reframing.  Let him develop his own argument. 

Your criticism is not based on fact.  Bring on some links to prove the assertions you are making.  

I never said anything about fighting a war.  Have you read Federalist 46 yet?

bitch i read the federalist papers years ago.

which is why i am telling you....your stupid dream of citizens owning weapons significant for modern warfare is **** retarded. You know that.

we dont. We cant. 

GHETTOBLASTER » 16 Jun 2022, 12:47 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 12:47 pm

This "futility" you speak of is nothing compared to the futility of not being able to defend ourselves against what any common criminal can use against us.
In the meantime there are millions of White People who live in 98% White Communities who have owned semi auto firearms for generations and who have also never had to use them for self defense
If we could wave a magic wand and ignore the Nig on Nig Murders that are confined to our concrete and asphalt Urban Congos....the USA is a pretty safe place to live.. !!

this is between me and huey dude. ignore my argument for now, i just wanna humiliate this guy

FOS » 16 Jun 2022, 1:04 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 1:04 pm

Huey » 16 Jun 2022, 1:02 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 1:02 pm

Developing it?        That is some real fancy talk for reframing.  Let him develop his own argument. 

Your criticism is not based on fact.  Bring on some links to prove the assertions you are making.  

I never said anything about fighting a war.  Have you read Federalist 46 yet?

bitch i read the federalist papers years ago.

which is why i am telling you....your stupid dream of citizens owning weapons significant for modern warfare is **** retarded. You know that.

we dont. We cant. 

 

So then you know your are full of it concerning what Madison wrote about an armed populace. 

your stupid dream of citizens owning weapons significant for modern warfare is **** retarded. You know that.

I have never said that, MENSA.  You are really becoming upset.  

Huey » 16 Jun 2022, 1:06 pm » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 1:06 pm

So then you know your are full of it concerning what Madison wrote about an armed populace. 

I have never said that, MENSA.  You are really becoming upset.

Let's say the F-22 Scenario materializes someday..?
At least Our Founding Fathers had enough foresight and respect for our basic human rights to GIVE THE CITIZENS THE ABILITY TO PAY BACK THE FREEDOM HATING UNAMERICAN TRAITORS AFTER THEY RETURN HOME FROM A DAY OF KILLING THEIR OWN PEOPLE.
Our Founding Fathers never would have wanted to see the Law abiding citizens totally  out gunned by gangsters and an illegitimately installed  rogue government.
 
 
 

Huey » 16 Jun 2022, 10:52 am » wrote: ↑

16 Jun 2022, 10:52 am

Do I really need to explain it to him/her or should I let it go?

Oh, hell no.

Only credible citations.

You suck with the terminology, TTPS.