New Secret Audio Of Hillary Clinton Saying She’ll Destroy The Second Amendment - Page 3
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: New Secret Audio Of Hillary Clinton Saying She’ll Destroy The Second Amendment

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by mikestone967 View Post
    Another EPIC beat down!!!
    Says the epic meme troll who contributes nothing of himself.

  2.   
  3. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,762
    Quote Originally Posted by GryHounnd View Post
    You can quote whoever you like all day long, it doesn't change the facts as they are applied in real life. Like I said, your fantasy interpretation of the 2nd amendment and the Constitution are trumped by reality and the fact that the Supreme Court & lower courts, law enforcement, The President, Congress, & State Legislatures have not implemented your interpretation of all the quotes you assert as "truth". Reality is the ultimate trump card and needs no defense. So continue living in your dead dog holler or wherever you pretend to live, and continue to pretend that your beliefs and understanding of the legal system trump how laws are applied in reality. Those of us who aren't living in fantasyland, along De-nile, in the land of confusion will continue to live in the real world and operate according to the laws of reality.
    Speaking of denial, this is what the entirety of my last post was responding to:

    Quote Originally Posted by GryHounnd View Post
    ....What you think the 2nd Amendment means, isn't what the founding fathers, & 200+ years of law and juris prudence have said it means.
    I proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that you're wrong on what the Founders said the 2nd Amendment means, and if you're wrong about what they meant, you're wrong on usurpations by presidents, Congress and SCOTUS of what they meant representing "reality." They represent nothing more than usurpations, and the post I am replying to now represents no more depth of thought or grasp of "reality" than a wounded puppy nipping at his owner's hand after getting disciplined for peeing on the rug. This is at least the third ad hominem post by you in this thread alone.... in less than one full day's worth of postings by you. You add nothing of substance here. You should've been permanently banned for this little gem of a post, but for some inexplicable reason, Calvin didn't see the Report that I sent in. He did say when I alerted him to it another way though, the following:

    Quote Originally Posted by calvin View Post
    The post you linked to I did not receive any reports for. I do not review each and every post in each and every thread. I would have given a vacation, minimum, for that. In fact, the user is on vacation for an unrelated offense as we speak. That user is among a couple others that are about one violation from a permaban.
    If you're half the fine wine you imagine yourself to be, you've aged quite long enough, and your time has come.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  4. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    Speaking of denial, this is what the entirety of my last post was responding to:



    I proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that you're wrong on what the Founders said the 2nd Amendment means, and if you're wrong about what they meant, you're wrong on usurpations by presidents, Congress and SCOTUS of what they meant representing "reality." They represent nothing more than usurpations, and the post I am replying to now represents no more depth of thought or grasp of "reality" than a wounded puppy nipping at his owner's hand after getting disciplined for peeing on the rug. This is at least the third ad hominem post by you in this thread alone.... in less than one full day's worth of postings by you. You add nothing of substance here. You should've been permanently banned for this little gem of a post, but for some inexplicable reason, Calvin didn't see the Report that I sent in. He did say when I alerted him to it another way though, the following:



    If you're half the fine wine you imagine yourself to be, you've aged quite long enough, and your time has come.

    Blues
    You're the one who responded to my statement and is apparently so insecure in his position that he has to write out a poorly researched doctoral thesis that scrounges for whatever out of context scraps of historical support he can find to make a point that is completely out of joint with reality that he becomes irrelevant. I really don't care if you think the Constitution has been usurped, I don't care if you sit in your bunker in the swamps of rural Louisiana until archaeologists find your shriveled desiccated mummy clutching your guns like a reject from an Indiana Jones movie.

    The system we have is the system we have, the laws are what they are, the legal system has made its verdict known. No amount of historical wishful thinking on your part will change that...period. Quote whomever you want it still won't change a darn thing. The only thing it does is make you look like a fool...I for one will sit back, crunch on popcorn and continue to be entertained by your unbalanced rants.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

  5. Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    For the terminally clueless, make sure to read past the first line of the following to understand what I'm saying....

    I agree wholeheartedly with Billary Clinton about the NRA being a pernicious and corrupting influence in this society, and that SCOTUS got it wrong on the Second Amendment. The difference is that she and I don't have the same reasons for coming to the same conclusions.

    ...

    Blues
    Think its confusing for allot of people, because they've forgotten (or choose to) whom the Bill of Rights were actually addressing. First and foremost, the Second Amendment does not grant any right to bear arms nor does the rest of the Bill of Rights. The reasoning is well documented by the Founding Fathers themselves. But for brevity sake, I'm not going to cite them here.

    The Bill of Rights was meant as a persistent reminder to the government that they do not have the power to remove, or even limit a right that is as natural as breathing or a God given right.
    When all other methods of protest have been dismantled, the system leaves us with only two options: stand and fight, or kneel and beg for mercy. All you need to know is what YOU would do when faced with that choice.

  6. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,762
    Quote Originally Posted by Totidem Verbis View Post
    Think its confusing for allot of people, because they've forgotten (or choose to) whom the Bill of Rights were actually addressing. First and foremost, the Second Amendment does not grant any right to bear arms nor does the rest of the Bill of Rights. The reasoning is well documented by the Founding Fathers themselves. But for brevity sake, I'm not going to cite them here.

    The Bill of Rights was meant as a persistent reminder to the government that they do not have the power to remove, or even limit a right that is as natural as breathing or a God given right.
    Yep.







    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  7. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    I proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that you're wrong on what the Founders said the 2nd Amendment means,
    The reality is when Hillary gets to load the SCOTUS the "meaning" of the Constitution and Bill of Rights is subject to change through interpretation.
    “Religion is an insult to human dignity. Without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things.
    But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.” ― Steven Weinberg

  8. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by XD40scinNC View Post
    The reality is when Hillary gets to load the SCOTUS the "meaning" of the Constitution and Bill of Rights is subject to change through interpretation.
    History shows the meaning of the Constitution is subject to change depending on who is in power. It's a contract and contracts are always subject to renegotiation and reinterpretation.....just ask Donald.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

  9. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,762
    Quote Originally Posted by XD40scinNC View Post
    The reality is when Hillary gets to load the SCOTUS the "meaning" of the Constitution and Bill of Rights is subject to change through interpretation.
    That's been true for over 200 years, but it doesn't change the clear fact that the overwhelming majority of such "interpretive" rulings by SCOTUS have represented egregious usurpations of The Constitution. To simply accept that as "reality," one must ignore The Constitution as the supreme law of the land and adopt a "might makes right" view of law and government in its place.

    Nothing I've ever said about constitutional law or SCOTUS in this thread was a comment based on who's going to occupy the Rainbow House after the first of the year. Trump has said his uber-leftist sister would make a great SCOTUS justice, so I hardly see what either he or Billary will do regarding SCOTUS appointments as relevant to what I will do relevant to voting, or more importantly, relevant to what I discern to be the truth of whatever matter is being discussed.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast