72 Hours Before Rally: 'We Are Being Set Up' in VA

[29again]

How about nukes? Should any old joe be able to have one of those in their garage?

But...if a mega money individual can afford those things and use them against you, then what? You think you could stand up to them with an AR/AK?

Doubtful. But that would be MY problem, wouldn't it? It doesn't quite seem right to say that because I can't afford one, then you shouldn't have one.

If you're smart enough to get the things you need and put the thing together.... why not?

[moviestar]

If it were legal to have them the materials wouldn’t be so difficult to obtain. I don’t want to add “might get nuked” to the list of things i need to worry about when i send my kids to school, do you?


can you give one reason why an individual with no supervision or oversight should have the means to wipe out entire cities? Can you really see no reason to limit the ability to kill people at will to whatever extent we can?

How about nukes? Should any old joe be able to have one of those in their garage?

Doubtful. But that would be MY problem, wouldn't it? It doesn't quite seem right to say that because I can't afford one, then you shouldn't have one.

If you're smart enough to get the things you need and put the thing together.... why not?

[WellPreserved]

How about nukes? Should any old joe be able to have one of those in their garage?

Doubtful. But that would be MY problem, wouldn't it? It doesn't quite seem right to say that because I can't afford one, then you shouldn't have one.

If you're smart enough to get the things you need and put the thing together.... why not?

You're joking, right? Please say you're joking.

[WellPreserved]

So if the popular vote was in favor of forcing everyone to become adherent Catholics, you would dive right in to Catholicism?

In this country we express our will and pursue our interests with the ballot box not armed resistance. Virginia has a duly elected governing body in Richmond to pursue the will of that majority that put them there but that is limited by both the State and Federal Constitutions. Additionally we have a Judiciary to weigh the consistency with those Constitutions and protect the rights of citizens. That is the way the Constitution set it up and the way that the system has worked for 233 years. Any attempt to resist by force of arms the will of the people is subversive and unlawful.

The idea that "they're coming to take your guns" is absurd. No state can totally disarm its citizenry as Federal courts have precedence and would demand injunctive relief immediately. However, SCOTUS has ruled that the 2nd amendment is not violated by reasonable regulation and every one of the regulations currently under consideration in Virginia have already been judged Constitutional.

No body likes being in the minority but the path to change is to change the minds of the citizenry, not threaten armed rebellion.

Constitutional rights are not subject to the will of the people, which is my point that seems to escape many.

It's amazing that our constitution has held with no changes (at least to the Bill of Rights). However, SCOTUS has been given the authority to interpret the Constitution and they have consistently interpreted it to mean that rights are not absolute - i.e., "fire" regarding free speech and legitimate gun legislation being constitutionally legal.

I am wondering what will happen if Virginia declares independent/municipal gun militias as unconstitutional? The violence that could be brewing regarding this situation is more than concerning. I don't think that people will wait for SCOTUS ruling and I don't think that they will be "happy" with the SCOTUS ruling. We just have to wait and see but again, it's concerning.

[29again]

If it were legal to have them the materials wouldn’t be so difficult to obtain. I don’t want to add “might get nuked” to the list of things i need to worry about when i send my kids to school, do you?


can you give one reason why an individual with no supervision or oversight should have the means to wipe out entire cities? Can you really see no reason to limit the ability to kill people at will to whatever extent we can?

How about nukes? Should any old joe be able to have one of those in their garage?

If you're smart enough to get the things you need and put the thing together.... why not?

But the materials are NOT that easy to obtain. And just any old Joe does NOT have the knowledge to use those materials.

[29again]

You didn't have a problem with it when Trump won the presidential election over Hilary despite her having the popular vote. (Aka more individuals voting for her). That's because the electoral college took over. You only disagree with it when it's your side losing whatever the vote was and sorry but that's just not the way things work. I get that city life is different than small town life and what's ideal for one is not ideal for the other, but our voting system designed to reflect the voice of the people ALL the people, not just the country bumpkins, and not just the spoiled city slickers. Someone is ALWAYS going to disagree with the result and voice their disdain, especially when things don't go the way they want it to

So if the popular vote was in favor of forcing everyone to become adherent Catholics, you would dive right in to Catholicism?

In this country we express our will and pursue our interests with the ballot box not armed resistance. Virginia has a duly elected governing body in Richmond to pursue the will of that majority that put them there but that is limited by both the State and Federal Constitutions. Additionally we have a Judiciary to weigh the consistency with those Constitutions and protect the rights of citizens. That is the way the Constitution set it up and the way that the system has worked for 233 years. Any attempt to resist by force of arms the will of the people is subversive and unlawful.

The idea that "they're coming to take your guns" is absurd. No state can totally disarm its citizenry as Federal courts have precedence and would demand injunctive relief immediately. However, SCOTUS has ruled that the 2nd amendment is not violated by reasonable regulation and every one of the regulations currently under consideration in Virginia have already been judged Constitutional.

No body likes being in the minority but the path to change is to change the minds of the citizenry, not threaten armed rebellion.

And yet there is always some politician campaigning on the promise of taking the guns away. They've been doing that for decades now. I would think the idea absurd, myself, if I hadn't heard the promises time and time again. In just this current campaign season, Beto and Bloomberg specifically want that. I'm not sure about some of the others, because I haven't really listened to them. I heard the clip of Beto, all "Hell yeah, we're gonna take your guns!" and Bloomberg lives for a gun ban across the nation. I don't know why you want to say it's absurd!

[moviestar]

... because privately owned nukes are illegal. But you are saying they shouldn’t be. If they weren’t, the materials would be more easily attainable and the knowledge wouldn’t be as closely guarded/monitored.

If it were legal to have them the materials wouldn’t be so difficult to obtain. I don’t want to add “might get nuked” to the list of things i need to worry about when i send my kids to school, do you?


can you give one reason why an individual with no supervision or oversight should have the means to wipe out entire cities? Can you really see no reason to limit the ability to kill people at will to whatever extent we can?

If you're smart enough to get the things you need and put the thing together.... why not?

But the materials are NOT that easy to obtain. And just any old Joe does NOT have the knowledge to use those materials.

[morgan]

People make nukes in their kitchen sinks now? Are the ignorant conservative southerners who prefer women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen all day making them? Is there room in the kitchen with all that going on in the double wide?

[Della]

So if the popular vote was in favor of forcing everyone to become adherent Catholics, you would dive right in to Catholicism?

In this country we express our will and pursue our interests with the ballot box not armed resistance. Virginia has a duly elected governing body in Richmond to pursue the will of that majority that put them there but that is limited by both the State and Federal Constitutions. Additionally we have a Judiciary to weigh the consistency with those Constitutions and protect the rights of citizens. That is the way the Constitution set it up and the way that the system has worked for 233 years. Any attempt to resist by force of arms the will of the people is subversive and unlawful.

The idea that "they're coming to take your guns" is absurd. No state can totally disarm its citizenry as Federal courts have precedence and would demand injunctive relief immediately. However, SCOTUS has ruled that the 2nd amendment is not violated by reasonable regulation and every one of the regulations currently under consideration in Virginia have already been judged Constitutional.

No body likes being in the minority but the path to change is to change the minds of the citizenry, not threaten armed rebellion.

And yet there is always some politician campaigning on the promise of taking the guns away. They've been doing that for decades now. I would think the idea absurd, myself, if I hadn't heard the promises time and time again. In just this current campaign season, Beto and Bloomberg specifically want that. I'm not sure about some of the others, because I haven't really listened to them. I heard the clip of Beto, all "Hell yeah, we're gonna take your guns!" and Bloomberg lives for a gun ban across the nation. I don't know why you want to say it's absurd!

Which clip was that?

“Hell, yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47, and we’re not going to allow it to be used against your fellow Americans anymore,” the former Texas congressman declared during Thursday night’s debate.
https://apnews.com/07f65423a9814f1b9279afd0fba0a50c

If you choose to quote someone, it's a good idea to actually quote their words instead of someone's interpretation of what was said.

[moviestar]

Did you read the thread? 29again is of the opinion that civilian access to arms should not be restricted, including tanks and warships. I wondered if there was a limit in her opinion... there is not.

You have a very Laura Ingrahm quality about you.

People make nukes in their kitchen sinks now? Are the ignorant conservative southerners who prefer women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen all day making them? Is there room in the kitchen with all that going on in the double wide?