TX Repubs are batshit crazy

2lion70

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2004
16,137
5,369
1
1. They refuse to accept Joe Biden won the 2020 Presidential election
2. They have classified gay as a dysfunctional lifestyle - as if they know anything about functional
3. They want everyone to have a gun everywhere all the time - more guns = more deaths

These yahoos are so far out of touch with reality they probably think the Earth is flat and dinosaurs used to hunt humans.
GOP wants Texans to vote on secession from the U.S.
Thousands of Republicans gathered in Houston last week for the 2022 Texas State Republican Convention. Here's a roundup of the GOP's take on hot-button issues — in their own words — from the official platform document.
 

psuted

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Nov 26, 2010
26,964
22,015
1
1. They refuse to accept Joe Biden won the 2020 Presidential election
2. They have classified gay as a dysfunctional lifestyle - as if they know anything about functional
3. They want everyone to have a gun everywhere all the time - more guns = more deaths

These yahoos are so far out of touch with reality they probably think the Earth is flat and dinosaurs used to hunt humans.
GOP wants Texans to vote on secession from the U.S.
Thousands of Republicans gathered in Houston last week for the 2022 Texas State Republican Convention. Here's a roundup of the GOP's take on hot-button issues — in their own words — from the official platform document.

Democrats cheated and committed voter fraud. You are a girly man. And your not infringing on 2nd amendment rights 2Lying.
 

interrobang

Well-Known Member
Aug 21, 2016
21,151
30,110
1
People in inner city Chicago, LA, Baltimore, St Louis, DC, etc, etc already do have a gun with them all the time. No one has an issue with that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bison13 and psuted

NJPSU

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
43,262
14,977
1
1. They refuse to accept Joe Biden won the 2020 Presidential election
2. They have classified gay as a dysfunctional lifestyle - as if they know anything about functional
3. They want everyone to have a gun everywhere all the time - more guns = more deaths

These yahoos are so far out of touch with reality they probably think the Earth is flat and dinosaurs used to hunt humans.
GOP wants Texans to vote on secession from the U.S.
Thousands of Republicans gathered in Houston last week for the 2022 Texas State Republican Convention. Here's a roundup of the GOP's take on hot-button issues — in their own words — from the official platform document.
The also physically attacked that Republican Congressman that wears the eye patch. It was during that TX GOP convention. Apparently they called him “eyepatch MCCain” while assaulting him.
 

2lion70

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2004
16,137
5,369
1
People in inner city Chicago, LA, Baltimore, St Louis, DC, etc, etc already do have a gun with them all the time. No one has an issue with that.
I have relatives in Chicago - they don't carry a gun all the time. Your attempt at rational thought was a failure.
 

2lion70

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2004
16,137
5,369
1
Democrats cheated and committed voter fraud. You are a girly man. And your not infringing on 2nd amendment rights 2Lying.
If you want a gun join a well-regulated militia. That's what is required in the 2nd Amendment.
 

2lion70

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2004
16,137
5,369
1
Liar. This is why you're a joke. It is not required whatsoever. There is no law in America that states that. Joke.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The above is the entire text of the 2nd Amendment. The 'right of the people' is dependent on the need for a Well regulated militia. The second part of the amendment is based on the prior need of the militia and was interpreted that way for over 150 years. The right of the individual was first declared in the Heller Case just a few years ago in the Alito Opinion.
 

BicyclePete

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
15,069
10,239
1
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The above is the entire text of the 2nd Amendment. The 'right of the people' is dependent on the need for a Well regulated militia. The second part of the amendment is based on the prior need of the militia and was interpreted that way for over 150 years. The right of the individual was first declared in the Heller Case just a few years ago in the Alito Opinion.
Why do you think democrats are so hellbent on getting rid of the 2nd Amendment?
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
20,295
23,271
1
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The above is the entire text of the 2nd Amendment. The 'right of the people' is dependent on the need for a Well regulated militia. The second part of the amendment is based on the prior need of the militia and was interpreted that way for over 150 years. The right of the individual was first declared in the Heller Case just a few years ago in the Alito Opinion.
You’ve had that explained multiple times . Goof.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psuted

2lion70

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2004
16,137
5,369
1
You’ve had that explained multiple times . Goof.
The 2nd Amendment is still a hotly debated issue - Heller reversed over 70 years of precedent and was based a a faulty 'originalist' view expressed by Alito.
 

Hotshoe

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Feb 15, 2012
25,536
41,469
1
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The above is the entire text of the 2nd Amendment. The 'right of the people' is dependent on the need for a Well regulated militia. The second part of the amendment is based on the prior need of the militia and was interpreted that way for over 150 years. The right of the individual was first declared in the Heller Case just a few years ago in the Alito Opinion.
The hell it does. No law in America is based on that. Heller is specifically against your bullsh&t. Liar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

Hotshoe

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Feb 15, 2012
25,536
41,469
1
The 2nd Amendment is still a hotly debated issue - Heller reversed over 70 years of precedent and was based a a faulty 'originalist' view expressed by Alito.
You're nothing bit a liar. No Supreme Court Justice believes your lies. The right of the people is an entirely separate clause. What a fraud you are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

2lion70

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2004
16,137
5,369
1
The hell it does. No law in America is based on that. Heller is specifically against your bullsh&t. Liar.
Please do some research and stop being a fool. Below is is the entire text of the 2nd Amendment. It's easy to find a lot of very good research and background as to why there was ever a 2nd Amendment
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

A very short amount of words that have created so much controversy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NJPSU

Hotshoe

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Feb 15, 2012
25,536
41,469
1
It's not really need since we now have a standing army. The militia was the way the Founders envisaged the country being defended.
5 minutes on a ranch in Montana by yourself and you'd be crying like the bit%h you are. I'd pay to watch you face a griz unarmed. Stay in your basement, beta city boy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

Hotshoe

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Feb 15, 2012
25,536
41,469
1
Please do some research and stop being a fool. Below is is the entire text of the 2nd Amendment. It's easy to find a lot of very good research and background as to why there was ever a 2nd Amendment
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

A very short amount of words that have created so much controversy.
You're a liar. Do some research. You have zero research in your post. I've presented real Founder's documents regarding the 2nd on this page, numerous times. You have nothing but lies you present. There's a comma, you fraud.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

2lion70

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2004
16,137
5,369
1
5 minutes on a ranch in Montana by yourself and you'd be crying like the bit%h you are. I'd pay to watch you face a griz unarmed. Stay in your basement, beta city boy.
It may surprise you to learn that I own a couple of hunting rifles and an antique pistol. I'm just not a fanatic about guns and think we have far too many guns in the hands of folks that are deranged. Your comment seems to indicate you have very weighty rage issues and could even be deranged.
The deer I hunted with my uncles were in PA - they never attacked me.
 

BicyclePete

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
15,069
10,239
1
It's not really need since we now have a standing army. The militia was the way the Founders envisaged the country being defended.
I would argue that the tyrannical government represented by the democrats proves that the 2nd Amendment is more necessary than ever.

541845abfffb35e29a50e40c8d48bffa.jpg
 

Hotshoe

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Feb 15, 2012
25,536
41,469
1
It may surprise you to learn that I own a couple of hunting rifles and an antique pistol. I'm just not a fanatic about guns and think we have far too many guns in the hands of folks that are deranged. Your comment seems to indicate you have very weighty rage issues and could even be deranged.
The deer I hunted with my uncles were in PA - they never attacked me.
I don't care what you own, how you feel, or what you think. You're a liar when it comes to the Founders and the 2nd Amendment. They are individual rights. Now I know you're a fraud mentioning hunting. The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting. You're nothing but a lying lib fraud. Piss off.
 

2lion70

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2004
16,137
5,369
1
I don't have to, it's one part of the 2nd Amendment. I've presented this numerous times from the person that fking wrote it.
You seem to think the idea of a militia is meaningless which is far from the truth.
Who wrote the 2nd Amendment and what did he/they mean when they wrote it? Was it based on English Common Law? Did the writers fear a standing army? How about the Militia Act of 1787?
 

2lion70

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2004
16,137
5,369
1
I don't care what you own, how you feel, or what you think. You're a liar when it comes to the Founders and the 2nd Amendment. They are individual rights. Now I know You're a fraud mentioning hunting. The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting. You're nothing but a lying lib fraud. Piss off.
They were originally rights of the group known as 'citizens' to keep and bear arms so they could fight to protect the country as part of the militia.

You really should try to control your anger. People with anger issues like you should be barred from owning guns.
 

Hotshoe

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Feb 15, 2012
25,536
41,469
1
They were originally rights of the group known as 'citizens' to keep and bear arms so they could fight to protect the country as part of the militia.

You really should try to control your anger. People with anger issues like you should be barred from owning guns.
You're constantly, fos.

“The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.” – Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

2lion70

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2004
16,137
5,369
1
An interesting discussion:
There is a lot of information presented in this. There is no simple answer to the debate.

Second Amendment​

CONTENTS​

  1. Right to Bear Arms
  2. State Militias
  3. Well-Regulated Militia
  4. District of Columbia v. Heller
  5. McDonald v. Chicago
  6. Gun Control Debate
  7. Mass Shootings
  8. Sources
The Second Amendment, often referred to as the right to bear arms, is one of 10 amendments that form the Bill of Rights, ratified in 1791 by the U.S. Congress. Differing interpretations of the amendment have fueled a long-running debate over gun control legislation and the rights of individual citizens to buy, own and carry firearms.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Hotshoe

Hotshoe

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Feb 15, 2012
25,536
41,469
1
“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.” – Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778
 

Hotshoe

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Feb 15, 2012
25,536
41,469
1
An interesting discussion:
There is a lot of information presented in this. There is no simple answer to the debate.

Second Amendment​

CONTENTS​

  1. Right to Bear Arms
  2. State Militias
  3. Well-Regulated Militia
  4. District of Columbia v. Heller
  5. McDonald v. Chicago
  6. Gun Control Debate
  7. Mass Shootings
  8. Sources
The Second Amendment, often referred to as the right to bear arms, is one of 10 amendments that form the Bill of Rights, ratified in 1791 by the U.S. Congress. Differing interpretations of the amendment have fueled a long-running debate over gun control legislation and the rights of individual citizens to buy, own and carry firearms.
Seriously? The History Channel. Lmao.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

2lion70

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2004
16,137
5,369
1
You're constantly, fos.

“The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.” – Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824
What did Madison have to say on the topic? How about Washington? The Bill of Rights had many authors and represented the results of differing groups.
 

Hotshoe

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Feb 15, 2012
25,536
41,469
1
What did Madison have to say on the topic? How about Washington? The Bill of Rights had many authors and represented the results of differing groups.
This is why I don't waist my time with liars like you. You have Google and that's it. I post real words and documents from our Founders, not nonsense from the fking History Channel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

2lion70

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jul 1, 2004
16,137
5,369
1
Seriously? The History Channel. Lmao.
There are many other sources of research. And, yes the History Channel has some really good sources in their presentation. You might learn something if you took the time to read and try to understand an issue in more than 'bumper sticker' logic.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: psuted

BicyclePete

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
15,069
10,239
1
They were originally rights of the group known as 'citizens' to keep and bear arms so they could fight to protect the country as part of the militia.

You really should try to control your anger. People with anger issues like you should be barred from owning guns.
If you look at who is doing most of these shootings, I'd argue that we should ban democrats from owning guns.
 

Hotshoe

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Feb 15, 2012
25,536
41,469
1
There are many other sources of research. And, yes the History Channel has some really good sources in their presentation. You might learn something if you took the time to read and try to understand an issue in more than 'bumper sticker' logic.
No one with a brain quotes the History Channel. You don't know sh&t about this. I do.