Liberal Forum

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 5:15 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 5:15 am

LMAO!  Mr. Veggie, you deem anything that crushes your argument as idiotic.  Di you manage to get that refund from Brown?  By the way I know about Warren Berger.  Mr. Veggie, you are not as superior as you tell yourself, dir.

He is not the CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT, he is one of many CHIEF JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT.

Says the legacy Brown admission who majored in 19th Century Russian studies.  Sir, what a waste of an Ivy College.  If in fact you are being honest. I am quite sure you don't have a JD or an academic history as a constitutional scholar. Sir.

He is not the CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT, he is one of many CHIEF JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT.

​​​​​​​Says the legacy Brown admission 

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 5:33 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 5:33 am

another nail in your coffin, Sir, is the fact for 143 years, 1791-1934, the interpretation of the 2A was not your interpretation or Berger’s interpretation.  And that was LONG before the political ARM of the NRA or Justice Scalia.

Mr Vegetable, my esteemed yet ignorant adversary, the federal government did little to nothing to regulate firearms.  You could mail order a sub machine gun and have it delivered to your home.  There was no regulation on automatic weapons/machine guns.  You could walk into  any store, as far as the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT was concerned, and d by rifles, handguns, machine guns, etc to your hearts content or your money ran out.

Additionally, politicians like Monroe did all they could to finance mass production of repeating rifles so the average citizen could afford one instead of a musket.  This has been posted to you previously.

Sir, please do not attempt. To tell me to hat YOUR interpretation, based on interpretations AFTER 1934, is the correct one.

Blackvegetable » 05 Aug 2025, 5:37 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 5:37 am

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 5:15 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 5:15 am

LMAO!  Mr. Veggie, you deem anything that crushes your argument as idiotic.  Di you manage to get that refund from Brown?  By the way I know about Warren Berger.  Mr. Veggie, you are not as superior as you tell yourself, dir.

He is not the CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT, he is one of many CHIEF JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT.

Says the legacy Brown admission who majored in 19th Century Russian studies.  Sir, what a waste of an Ivy College.  If in fact you are being honest. I am quite sure you don't have a JD or an academic history as a constitutional scholar. Sir.

You cannot "crush" arguments.

You don't know how to make a case.

He is not the CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT, he is one of many CHIEF JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT.

yesterday, he was just "another justice",.

Says the legacy Brown admission 

​​​​​​​this isn't about me...

 

Blackvegetable » 05 Aug 2025, 5:38 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 5:38 am

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 5:33 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 5:33 am

another nail in your coffin, Sir, is the fact for 143 years, 1791-1934, the interpretation of the 2A was not your interpretation or Berger’s interpretation.  And that was LONG before the political ARM of the NRA or Justice Scalia.

Mr Vegetable, my esteemed yet ignorant adversary, the federal government did little to nothing to regulate firearms.  You could mail order a sub machine gun and have it delivered to your home.  There was no regulation on automatic weapons/machine guns.  You could walk into  any store, as far as the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT was concerned, and d by rifles, handguns, machine guns, etc to your hearts content or your money ran out.

Additionally, politicians like Monroe did all they could to finance mass production of repeating rifles so the average citizen could afford one instead of a musket.  This has been posted to you previously.

Sir, please do not attempt. To tell me to hat YOUR interpretation, based on interpretations AFTER 1934, is the correct one.

Because I know this **** isn't worth reading, I am passing.


 

 

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 5:43 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 5:43 am

Yo wouldn't know if I can a case, Mr. Vegetable, because a case that is more than a sentence is more than you can comprehend. I accept your surrender.  Discretion is the better part of valor on your part.

Here it is in bullet points for the reading deficient.

1.  For 143 years the FED GOV's interpretation of the 2A disagreed with what you have been told to think. Little to none in regard to FEDERAL REGULATION.

2.  During that time you could walk into any store and buy any firearm you wanted or when mail order came along order one that was delivered to your home.

3.  The framers, like Monroe, funded the mass production of repeating rifles so the average citizen can afford them.  This has been posted to you before.

Blackvegetable » 05 Aug 2025, 5:52 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 5:52 am

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 5:43 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 5:43 am

Yo wouldn't know if I can a case, Mr. Vegetable, because a case that is more than a sentence is more than you can comprehend. I accept your surrender.  Discretion is the better part of valor on your part.

Here it is in bullet points for the reading deficient.

1.  For 143 years the FED GOV's interpretation of the 2A disagreed with what you have been told to think. Little to none in regard to FEDERAL REGULATION.

2.  During that time you could walk into any store and buy any firearm you wanted or when mail order came along order one that was delivered to your home.

3.  The framers, like Monroe, funded the mass production of repeating rifles so the average citizen can afford them.  This has been posted to you before.

I've seen you try, and fail, for 8 years, Sheilagh.

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 5:55 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 5:55 am

Actually, unless you can show the federal government had many regulations on firearms from 1791-1934 my case stands.

Sir, by all means, keep posting such nonsense.  I am enjoying this.  I post facts, you post lame ad hominems. Too funny, sir.

Blackvegetable » 05 Aug 2025, 5:37 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 5:37 am

You cannot "crush" arguments.

You don't know how to make a case.


yesterday, he was just "another justice",.


​​​​​​​this isn't about me...

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 5:43 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 5:43 am

Yo wouldn't know if I can a case, Mr. Vegetable, because a case that is more than a sentence is more than you can comprehend. I accept your surrender.  Discretion is the better part of valor on your part.

Here it is in bullet points for the reading deficient.

1.  For 143 years the FED GOV's interpretation of the 2A disagreed with what you have been told to think. Little to none in regard to FEDERAL REGULATION.

2.  During that time you could walk into any store and buy any firearm you wanted or when mail order came along order one that was delivered to your home.

3.  The framers, like Monroe, funded the mass production of repeating rifles so the average citizen can afford them.  This has been posted to you before.

Yo wouldn't know if I can a case

Blackvegetable » 05 Aug 2025, 5:58 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 5:58 am

Unless you are answering questions,  I don't have to do anything.

I don't even read the ****.

Blackvegetable » 05 Aug 2025, 6:03 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 6:03 am

QED

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 6:05 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 6:05 am

Cool.  Makes my job easier. I accept your surrender on the 2A interpretation argument,

If you want questions answered we must come up with conditions that will be Followed meaning you will answer a question for every question asked.  I have proved I act in good faith on this.

The other condition is you DO NOT edit quotes by deletion or any other forum when replying to them. 

Very simple son.

Blackvegetable » 05 Aug 2025, 5:58 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 5:58 am

Unless you are answering questions,  I don't have to do anything.

I don't even read the ****.
 

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 6:05 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 6:05 am

I accept your surrender on, Mr Troll.  Stick to numbers.  You at least sound intelligence when you do.

Blackvegetable » 05 Aug 2025, 6:07 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 6:07 am

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 6:05 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 6:05 am

Cool.  Makes my job easier. I accept your surrender on the 2A interpretation argument,

If you want questions answered we must come up with conditions that will be Followed meaning you will answer a question for every question asked.  I have proved I act in good faith on this.

The other condition is you DO NOT edit quotes by deletion or any other forum when replying to them. 

Very simple son.

Tiny,

Your cowardice "makes (your) job easy".

Anyone can flood the forum with **** and run...


 

 

Blackvegetable » 05 Aug 2025, 6:09 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 6:09 am

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 6:05 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 6:05 am

I accept your surrender on, Mr Troll.  Stick to numbers.  You at least sound intelligence when you do.

Why would anyone wade through such crap?

 

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 6:09 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 6:09 am

I am right here.  Just wait for somebody to rebut what I said.  Sir, you won't because you can't.  Sounds like you sir, are suffering from cowardice, Mr Options.

As a matter of fact I am more than willing to answer questions.  YOU refuse. So, I humbly suggest the cowardice is on your part, Mr. Anonymous.

Blackvegetable » 05 Aug 2025, 6:11 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 6:11 am

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 6:09 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 6:09 am

I am right here.  Just wait for somebody to rebut what I said.  Sir, you won't because you can't.  Sounds like you sir, are suffering from cowardice, Mr Options.

As a matter of fact I am more than willing to answer questions.  YOU refuse. So, I humbly suggest the cowardice is on your part, Mr. Anonymous.

That's a lie...

You "are here" if you stand behind your words.

You don't. 
 

 

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 6:14 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 6:14 am

Sir, for 143 years the federal government basically did not regulate firearms.  The interpretation you have been told to believe was not the interpretation that was adhered to.  

Again, when you agree to answer questions on a one for one basis, and show YOU are willing to stand by your words you may begin asking questions.  Also, you will not edit by deletion for any method when replying to a quote.  I gotta ask why are you such a coward?

Blackvegetable » 05 Aug 2025, 6:17 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 6:17 am

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 6:14 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 6:14 am

Sir, for 143 years the federal government basically did not regulate firearms.  The interpretation you have been told to believe was not the interpretation that was adhered to.  

Again, when you agree to answer questions on a one for one basis, and show YOU are willing to stand by your words you may begin asking questions.  Also, you will not edit by deletion for any method when replying to a quote.  I gotta ask why are you such a coward?

Shhhhhh...

Stop asserting things from which you will run.

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 6:30 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 6:30 am

In the early 1800s framers of the constitution like Monroe subsidized research and development of repeating rifles so the avg citizen could afford one.

In short, the Founding generation was familiar with tremendous advances in firearms technology. In the American colonial experience, the rate of fire for an ordinary firearm had quintupled. As of 1791, repeating firearms capable of firing 16 or 22 shots had been demonstrated, but they were much too expensive for ordinary citizens. The Madison-Monroe administration's wise industrial policy, continued under future administrations, led the way towards the mass production of high quality firearms at low prices. No one in 1791 or 1815 could have foreseen all the firearms innovations in the 19th century. We do know that the American federal government did all it could to make those innovations possible.