TypicalFish

Part of a society with laws to promote the common welfare? A citizen of the United States? "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Not true at all. The reason that the amendment process was put in place was to allow the document to evolve with the changing times.Notice the recent furor over the gay marriage ban. Or, for something nearer and dearer to skydiver's hearts, PROHIBITION was an amendment, just as important and enforceable as the Second amendment, whose time came and went. When it stopped making sense, it was repealed. (And before the dz.com gun lobby has a collective meltdown, I AM NOT SAYING THE 2ND SHOULD BE REPEALED). "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

This is a VERY powerful point that quite frankly can probably be applied to most arguments of this nature. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Exactly my point. At the time of the authoring of the Declaration Of Independence, the thought was that there should not be a standing army. That has changed. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

This is a good point, though I think you are putting me a bit too far to the "as strictly as possible" side. I just think that there is room for interpretation without blaspheming the original document and intent. Absolutely not, as I said, you raise an important point. When was the last time you saw a pedophilia magazine on the news stands? Or a drug magazine? (No, I am not comparing those things to gun ownership. Not at all.) You don't see those things because they are a perversion of that right. What I am saying is that there is room for restriction in the name of the common good without destroying the original intent. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

You know, I genuinely didn't know what that one () meant... Hmmm; I don't know that I would say I am "pro-gun", at least in the common definition. It is my "one vote" opinion that the 2nd amendment has been "interpreted" based on the prejudices of the group doing the interpretation. I personally believe that the founding fathers wanted to ensure that every American could adequately defend his home, state, or country against aggressors. However, I do not believe that they envisioned the type of weapons that are available now, the utter indiscriminate destruction that can be wreaked by one wacko with an automatic weapon. I think that we as a society have taken the original intention of the statement and perverted it according to our own wants and wishes (as we do most things). Additonally, at the time of the authoring of the Constitution, the universal thought was that the existence of a standing army in peacetime was the most serious threat to liberty, therefore, there was a real NEED on the part of citizens to do their own defending and policing. Quite frankly, the conditions under which the Second Amendment were written no longer exist. Does that mean that it should be done away with? No, but I do think it means that it should be open to intelligent interpretation in the name of the common good. So, honestly I am not sure how you would define position other than "Matt's position".... "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

You trying to say it's not?! Does the Second Amendment say "the right of the people to keep and bear ALL TYPES OF arms shall not be infringed?" I'm pretty sure not. I am not saying that makes the case for the ban (which quite frankly I think is based on a pretty arbritrary set of standards); I just do not think that it is a powerful enough justification for the argument. By that rationale, you should also be allowed to have a guided nuclear tipped missle. Is the fact that you can't also a "total blasphemy with regards to the U.S. Constitution"? Or how about just a grenade launcher? "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Ummm, it started as a "what gun are you going to buy to overcompensate for your insecurities" (JUST KIDDING JEFFREY) thread and has wandered to "the Constitution as toilet paper"... Ahhhhhhhhh, Speaker's Corner... "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

But it does have that cool red/orange HK logo, as opposed to the stick figure "G" on my Glock toilet paper.... "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

OMG, i'm so offended. I much prefer the word cock. And you forgot "fat"... "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Oh, MY GOD, I just laughed out loud. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

This is America -- you don't have to do it... - All right, I laughed out loud. Touche'. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

There is a difference between "inflammatory" and "humorous/sarcastic". And quite frankly, I did not know there was a "Smiley Code". Sounds kind of idiotic, to tell the truth. I will spare you the "Chill out, dude!". Are you saying that your penis-size comment -- which, absent a "" or a smiley of some sort to indicate it was a JOKE, is easy to take as serious -- was meant to be a sarcastic "this-is-what-an-anti-gun-person-would-say" joke? It's the opposite of your actual stance and belief? What would be the harm in making that a little clearer next time? - I think you are missing my point. So, if I said to you in the context of conversation "You have a small penis", you would take it serious and freak out? I know I wouldn't. I would assume it was a joke, or some kind of hyperbole and react accordingly, not immediately get defensive. That is all I am trying to say. Do I think that some people

Dont live for the smilies Jeff. They aint always there. It's just that if someone wants an inflammatory post to be taken as a tongue-in-cheek joke, it behooves him to make that clear. Yes? - There is a difference between "inflammatory" and "humorous/sarcastic". And quite frankly, I did not know there was a "Smiley Code". Sounds kind of silly, to be honest.Truth be told, I don't preface every joke or lighthearted jibe with "the following is a joke". Or follow it with a wink. Unless I am talking to a pretty girl. I will spare you the "Chill out, dude!". Edited (as usual) for spelling. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Because, again, you are SO far off base as to my intention or mindset that your "knee jerk" reaction is almost laughable. Oh, and burbleflyer, no need for the apology. I am actually a gunowner; a Beretta autoloader 12 G shotgun and a Glock 19. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

You should do something about it sticking up out of your collar like that, though. Who said anything about guns being penis substitutes? Will your big dick do anything to repel a home invasion robbery? What about women who buy guns to protect themselves against rapists and robbers and abductors? Are they compensating for small clitorises? Gimme a fuckin' break. There's always one in every crowd who, for reasons of his own insecurity, wants to imply that everyone else who owns guns does so because of insecurity. Nice try. - A whole 11 minutes. I am impressed. Eeeeeeeaaassssyyyy there, big fella. It's called "sarcasm" or "poking fun"... Try it sometime, you might loosen up a bit. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Nothing. My d$%# is big enough and I am secure in myself enough so I don't feel the need to rush out and compensate. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

I guess you are right, Whoopi DOES sit in the center square, after all. I don't doubt they have some influence, just not as much as they THINK they do. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

I think the part that is really interesting about this thread is that it misses the simplest point of all: In the big picture, what the Hollywood bubbleheads think is pretty irrelevant. Most people don't "vote their star"; and I think you would find that corporate contributions to campaigns FAR outweigh anything that Tinseltown can produce. Let them have their self-important moment; when what they say or do has no real effect on the world as a whole outside of Malibu Canyon and the Vanity Fair Oscars party the joke will be on them. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Nope. Not a joke. In Indiana, it is now officially 3.2. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

I don't know how he discovered our plot to take over the world, but we have changed the meeting place to Alpha Indigo Sigma. Add 15 to the previously agreed upon date, divide by 3 and then miltiply time pi. See you there. Please delete this message after reading. ok to how many places do i carry out PI? This wasn't covered in the briefing OR the SOP. Well, if you are in Indiana, only one. By state law, they recently changed the official number to make it easier for the kids in school. No Joke. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Yeah, well, even a busted clock is right twice a day... "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Somebody called it "Liberal " one time that made me laugh out loud. Anybody remember what it was? "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

I'm praying for that. - Look for the glowing "Hollywood stars come out to support the Nation's New Hope" story in next month's Vanity Fair. Accompanied with a fawning Graydon Carter editorial. He's on my list right next to Michael Moore and Whoopi. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

EXACTLY. I am always amazed by the decisions directly affecting cops, firefighters, soldiers et.al. in the field, that are made by the people sitting comfortably behind desks. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET