Article: WISCONSIN GAZETTE: REPEAL OF ‘STUPID’ 2ND AMENDMENT PAST DUE

Maybe if just repealed the 'stupid' 1st Amendment, we wouldn't have to read this trash. I am sure these same journos will have no problem with that, right? [rolleyes]
 
I agree. Let's get rid of the 'stupid' part that says "A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state". That's just distracting to the real meaning (as explained in Heller).

THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
 
I agree. Let's get rid of the 'stupid' part that says "A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state". That's just distracting to the real meaning (as explained in Heller).

THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

Its been getting the royal infringement treatment for years and years.
 
Guys got a screw loose, "instruments of death" he says

Ya must have failed history class, because I'll be dammed if swords, daggers, bows and catapults were the "instruments of death" that killed way before a fire arm was ever conceived,

Its the cultur, and economy that shape the crime rates, not the tools used
 
Its been getting the royal infringement treatment for years and years.

The guy who wrote that article clearly has a reading comprehension problem - which does not surprise me given the quality of writers and writing I've seen out of newspapers in general over the last ten years or so.

I don't know how the statement " shall not be infringed" - could be any clearer.

Although I'm sure somewhere there's a liberal who will claim that "infringed" means we should put frilly fabric decorations on our guns similar to what people put on curtains.
 
Guys got a screw loose, "instruments of death" he says

Ya must have failed history class, because I'll be dammed if swords, daggers, bows and catapults were the "instruments of death" that killed way before a fire arm was ever conceived,

Its the cultur, and economy that shape the crime rates, not the tools used

As usual - newspaper writers are ignorant of just about everything they write about.

They ought to go do a little investigation on the number of people killed during wars fought with single shot bolt action rifles and swords and so forth - vs - the wars fought with semi-auto rifles.

Last time I checked - we're having a 100 year anniversary of the beginning of a war fought out by infantrymen who shot each other dead in the millions - with bolt action rifles.

Proof yet again - that the weapon is not the problem - it's the person (or persons) holding them.
 
These people just piss me off.

Why don't they try reading some of the comments underneath previous idiot libtard screeds who propose repealing the Second Amendment. Maybe they'd learn a thing or two before writing their trash piece, and getting slammed on their own.
 
deep down the 2nd amendment is stupid we shouldn't need a piece of paper to tell people we are allowed to defend ourselves. But as the world is we do unfortunately need it............and lawyers.
 
If this were Russia he'd be imprisoned by the KGB or at least be tranfered to Siberia...[rolleyes] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI7KJnRlsS4

I think you have that wrong.......

If this was Russia he would be writing for Pravda - and have the official endorsement of the party - because he's saying that rights should be taken away from the peasants.

If you really sit back and take a objective look at what the US mainstream media largely does - they're function is not that much different than what the function of Pravda was in the Soviet Union. They act as the mouthpiece of the power structure and the progressive belief system that so many in power hold.

He's not against "the system" - he's FOR IT.
 
deep down the 2nd amendment is stupid we shouldn't need a piece of paper to tell people we are allowed to defend ourselves. But as the world is we do unfortunately need it............and lawyers.

There's an awful lot of people who REALLY truly believe that you do not deserve any "rights" - and that your very existence owes itself to the government.

This type of person has always existed. It's why we had a revolution here in the first place. One of the best examples I can think of in a movie is a scene in "Last Of The Mohicans" ( go to 12:00 for a good example of British attitudes towards their "subjects")

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top Bottom