The Black Vault Message Forums

Discover the Truth!        

General Discussion Topics

The latest mass shooting and Liberals.

The Black Vault Message Forums has a considerable number of niche forums to place your post. If you can not find a home for it, and the topic doesn't fit anywhere else, then post it here.

Postby En-Lugal » Sun Dec 16, 2012 8:47 am

Let me paint a picture: Escape from New York, Escape from L.A. and Demolition Man. These are the Liberal blueprint for America. I am so sick of these people politicizing tragedies like this to grab guns. The Constitution doesn't say we can have guns for hunting as Liberals would have you believe. The Constitution allows us to have guns to prevent tyranny. They have tanks, planes, and rockets so we are at a disadvantage already. I don't necessarily agree with assault weapon bans but I wouldn't say it's ok to carry them around either, obviously.

Ownership should be allowed, in every state. Besides, we've seen the results of states banning all guns. Bloomberg was just on television spouting some garbage about New York having the lowest crime rate in the country. :lol: Yes, really.
The modern definition of ‘racist’ is someone who’s winning an argument with a liberal.
User avatar
En-Lugal
 
Posts: 555
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 10:19 am

Postby at1with0 » Sun Dec 16, 2012 3:27 pm

Why wouldn't it be okay to carry around assault guns?

Are the guns afforded to us by the 2nd amendment only meant for us to pad our gun collections?
"it is easy to grow crazy"
User avatar
at1with0
 
Posts: 9182
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 5:55 pm
Location: the coproduct of the amalgam of all structures

Postby capricorn » Sun Dec 16, 2012 4:40 pm

It depends, if there is a reason to walk around with them then yes. But at this moment, I don't think it is necessary. However, if the govt decides to roll down the street in army tanks and soldiers and start genocide then I may want to walk around with my assult rifle.
But if or when that happens, I'll be happy that my founding fathers gave me my sacred right to defend myself.
"a free society depends on a virtuous and moral people."
User avatar
capricorn
 
Posts: 712
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 7:03 pm

Postby at1with0 » Sun Dec 16, 2012 4:50 pm

It depends... so the 2nd amendment is a conditional provision?
"it is easy to grow crazy"
User avatar
at1with0
 
Posts: 9182
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 5:55 pm
Location: the coproduct of the amalgam of all structures

Postby capricorn » Sun Dec 16, 2012 5:40 pm

The 2nd ammendment is not conditional, however every person has the obligation to exercise their right in a manner that respects the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of another. When I say "it depends", I mean this from the individual moral perspective rather than from the law of physics perspective.

The problem is that we now live in a society of moral rejects. Some would like we as a people to eliminate this right since they feel we are no longer capable of taking care of ourselves. Some think that the govt would do a better job of running our lives if we as a people were to give up one of our unalienable rights. However, I disagree. I feel that once you make a something illegal, u take it away from the moral and upstanding citizens and put it in the hands of the criminals.
"a free society depends on a virtuous and moral people."
User avatar
capricorn
 
Posts: 712
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 7:03 pm

Postby En-Lugal » Sun Dec 16, 2012 11:28 pm

at1with0 wrote:It depends... so the 2nd amendment is a conditional provision?


No, the Liberals want everyone to think it is. They create the notion that the 2nd Amendment refers to hunting rifles with five shot clips and handguns. When they argue it's because Americans don't need more than a five round clip for hunting. However, the second Amendment doesn't say only for hunting. Liberals know this but choose to be knowingly deceitful anyway.

The lady who was on Face to Face on CBS this morning, her name escapes me at the moment, said she would have a bill passed by the first of the year banning all guns in America. The only way I see that happening is if Liberals circumvent Congress and the Constitution. Seeing as how liberals have made a habit of this, it just might happen. I guess we'll see.

at1with0 wrote:Why wouldn't it be okay to carry around assault guns?

Are the guns afforded to us by the 2nd amendment only meant for us to pad our gun collections?


capricorn wrote:The 2nd ammendment is not conditional, however every person has the obligation to exercise their right in a manner that respects the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of another. When I say "it depends", I mean this from the individual moral perspective rather than from the law of physics perspective.


It's not that I object to assault weapons, I've owned them. I remember gun racks in the back window of people's vehicles. I have no problem with open carry, I've seen first hand that it works just fine in nearby Mississippi. I just never saw a need to carry an assault rifle, besides, those things are unwieldy. :lol: If it were decided by the people that it was alright, I'd be fine with it. Liberals are trying to ban ownership outright.

capricorn wrote:The problem is that we now live in a society of moral rejects. Some would like we as a people to eliminate this right since they feel we are no longer capable of taking care of ourselves. Some think that the govt would do a better job of running our lives if we as a people were to give up one of our unalienable rights. However, I disagree. I feel that once you make a something illegal, u take it away from the moral and upstanding citizens and put it in the hands of the criminals.


Right. The Liberals have been hand feeding the entitlement cases for generations and therefore gain the support of these same people now. The generations of enslaved and impoverished reality television subjects would gladly vote away their, and our, rights as long as their "free" check comes every month. That's why Obama's class warfare agenda resonates so well with these people. They've been indoctrinated to hate success and successful people. "It isn't fair" or "I want my fair share" they say.
The modern definition of ‘racist’ is someone who’s winning an argument with a liberal.
User avatar
En-Lugal
 
Posts: 555
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 10:19 am

Postby at1with0 » Mon Dec 17, 2012 7:19 am

capricorn wrote:The problem is that we now live in a society of moral rejects.


once you make a something illegal, u take it away from the moral and upstanding citizens and put it in the hands of the criminals.


I agree!
"it is easy to grow crazy"
User avatar
at1with0
 
Posts: 9182
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 5:55 pm
Location: the coproduct of the amalgam of all structures


Return to General Discussion Topics

  • View new posts
  • View unanswered posts
  • Who is online
  • In total there are 3 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 3 guests (based on users active over the past 10 minutes)
  • Most users ever online was 292 on Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:19 pm
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests