Samwise
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2019
- Messages
- 2,040
- Reaction score
- 200
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Independent
You can't cite the language you claim exists? Weak.
I did, if you want to read the full text, Google Joseph Story, Secession
Tell me what you find
Even during the worst— and last— days of Nazi Germany you didn’t have people trying to whack the family members of SS personnel. Targeting people simply because of who they are related to makes one every bit as bad as those one claims to oppose. Even if the rebels were to somehow succeed, it’s be a great way to end up with their leadership at The Hague, because the international community would not normalize relations with people who made targeting non combatants a deliberate matter of policy.
Again, no matter how well armed you are, you can’t stop an armored column or a helicopter gunship, and you’d die rather quickly.
Hypotheticals are all well and good, but targeting non-combatants is wrong, no matter who they are related to.
Its been done time and again. Chechnya the Russian got a very expensive lesson.
Chechnya is currently a Russian puppet state, so probably not the best example.
The Russian military was also in shambles after the fall of the USSR.
Do you really think the US government would nuke a city because it has declared itself a gun sanctuary? Most military personnel lean right and support the Constitution. At worst, they’d stand down rather than commit mass murder of Americans revolting over loss of their Constitutional rights. At best, they’d turn their tanks and machine guns on Washington DC.I don't support a total repeal.
The idea that the 2nd amendment keeps oppressive governments under control has never worked and will never work. Do you think that the weapons that the DoD has at their disposal would blink at some yahoo's AR15 or a hunting rifle? If they are intent on ignoring the US Constitution then mowing down those yahoos would be child's play. It's time to stop with the wild west fantasy. More guns also don't make us safer. That is a marketing idea from the NRA to sell more guns.
You can't cite the language you claim exists? Weak.
Do you really think the US government would nuke a city because it has declared itself a gun sanctuary? Most military personnel lean right and support the Constitution. At worst, they’d stand down rather than commit mass murder of Americans revolting over loss of their Constitutional rights. At best, they’d turn their tanks and machine guns on Washington DC.
Unalienable rights of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. All good, sane, intelligent and educated Americans understand this point. Others, not so much.What rights ?
You're just making yourself look foolish
Come back when you've learned how to use a search engine.
A puppet state. What did it cost them? A lot. There is always a risk reward ratio. People can only be pushed so far till the risk to reward favors action.
Unalienable rights of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. All good, sane, intelligent and educated Americans understand this point. Others, not so much.
Come back when you can cite the language you have been for the past month claiming to exist and yet mysteriously are unable to cite.
I'm tired of your pathetic pantomime act.
You'll be ignored from now on.
Their entire objective was to establish Russian dominance. They succeeded. The Chechens, even with the help of the terrain, lost.
Their entire objective was to establish Russian dominance. They succeeded. The Chechens, even with the help of the terrain, lost.
The Russians succeeded at cost, a very high cost. They also didnt get everything they wanted.
But they succeeded none the less. “Almost” winning is still a loss
You rarely do get everything you want in life, but the Russians got enough of what they wanted.
The Russians succeeded at cost, a very high cost. They also didnt get everything they wanted.
What didn't they get ?
None of those rights are under threat - indeed a gun ban enhances them.
Just your right tp bear arms.
The word "ban" means taking away rights.
Got a pet amendment you'd like to see proposed to the Constitution?
One you think would break the status quo and redirect the ship of state?
What subject matter do you think supersedes others in importance for an amendment today?
I support the efforts of the group Move To Amend, who are trying to amend the Constitution to make it clear that corporations are not persons, hoping to end the pernicious effects of Citizens United.
What would be the benefits of that ?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?