Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Armed Mafia Goons Stalk Alex Jones Post Piers Morgan Debate


Asheron

Recommended Posts

0
HOLA441
  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1
HOLA442
2
HOLA443

that was the gun lobby point...the massacres took place in the gun free zones.

You cant disarm a nation without severe restrictions on freedom...this is the whole point of the protest...the measures required to carry out the law...it would be a tyranny.

Which law?

If you read the 2nd amendment you'll see that you're wrong.

A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, being the best security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; but no person religiously scrupulous shall be compelled to bear arms

It really doesn't say anything about paranoid delusionals having the right to shoot school kids with semi-automatic weapons I'm afraid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3
HOLA444
Which law?

If you read the 2nd amendment you'll see that you're wrong.

It really doesn't say anything about paranoid delusionals having the right to shoot school kids with semi-automatic weapons I'm afraid.

A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, being the best security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; but no person religiously scrupulous shall be compelled to bear arms

A well regulated militia doesn't mean gun control, it means subject to the rule of law i.e. armed people do not march about shooting or threatening people (including school children) indiscriminately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4
HOLA445
5
HOLA446

Which law?

If you read the 2nd amendment you'll see that you're wrong.

It really doesn't say anything about paranoid delusionals having the right to shoot school kids with semi-automatic weapons I'm afraid.

there is no law to collect the guns...yet...

and criminals kill people...they are outside the law when they carry it out...constitution, Statute, Sharia or Biblical law. They have no right to do as you say.

Why should the law say anything other than prescribe a penalty for the breach?

EDIT, not sure where your "but" addition to the 2nd Amendment is coming from...Ive googled several and they are this: ( from the NYT)

The following is the text of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6
HOLA447

Its in the Constitution, and this was included at number 2 after free speech because the British were expelled by local militias using arms, which, apparently, the British were trying to disarm, as well as all the taxation without representation stuff going on at the time.

Its an amendment to their constitution (the clue is in the bit where they refer to it as the second amendment).

If you have any evidence that there was any attempt to disarm the colonists then you are welcome to post it.

And the rebels won the war not through local gangs of militias but because of a French-trained regular army and a French naval blockade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7
HOLA448
8
HOLA449
9
HOLA4410

I'm sure. Read "The Ungoverned" by Vernor Vinge, where a farmer in an anarchist USA defends his land from Mexican state invasion by burrowing down and setting off a nuclear weapon.

Thank you for the link. It sounds an interesting read. I am looking through the anarcho-capitalist literature page which is linked. Looks like something I might enjoy.

Cheers. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10
HOLA4411

Its in the Constitution, and this was included at number 2 after free speech because the British were expelled by local militias using arms, which, apparently, the British were trying to disarm, as well as all the taxation without representation stuff going on at the time.

My point is that Americans are happy to ram the history lessons down our throats at every opportunity but they aren't acting on them. The question still stands: what are they waiting for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11
HOLA4412

Its an amendment to their constitution (the clue is in the bit where they refer to it as the second amendment).

If you have any evidence that there was any attempt to disarm the colonists then you are welcome to post it.

And the rebels won the war not through local gangs of militias but because of a French-trained regular army and a French naval blockade.

I presume BL was referring to this...

The Battles of Lexington and Concord were the first military engagements of the American Revolutionary War.[9][10] They were fought on April 19, 1775, in Middlesex County, Province of Massachusetts Bay, within the towns of Lexington, Concord, Lincoln, Menotomy (present-day Arlington), and Cambridge, near Boston. The battles marked the outbreak of open armed conflict between the Kingdom of Great Britain and its thirteen colonies in the mainland of British North America.

About 700 British Army regulars, under Lieutenant Colonel Francis Smith, were given secret orders to capture and destroy military supplies that were reportedly stored by the Massachusetts militia at Concord. Through effective intelligence gathering, Patriot colonials had received word weeks before the expedition that their supplies might be at risk and had moved most of them to other locations. They also received details about British plans on the night before the battle and were able to rapidly notify the area militias of the enemy movement...

wiki: Battles of Lexington and Concord

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12
HOLA4413

My point is that Americans are happy to ram the history lessons down our throats at every opportunity but they aren't acting on them. The question still stands: what are they waiting for?

The release of Police State 5: Let's Go Totally Batsh*t!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13
HOLA4414

Its an amendment to their constitution (the clue is in the bit where they refer to it as the second amendment).

If you have any evidence that there was any attempt to disarm the colonists then you are welcome to post it.

And the rebels won the war not through local gangs of militias but because of a French-trained regular army and a French naval blockade.

And we won the second world war at El Alamain.

come on, a war is more than just a couple of battles...there is the unrest that leads up to it...could have been years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14
HOLA4415

A well regulated militia doesn't mean gun control, it means subject to the rule of law i.e. armed people do not march about shooting or threatening people (including school children) indiscriminately.

Well regulated means subject to the rule of law. As you rightly point out.

If the democracry decides that means you can't have a cupboard full of automatic weapons then the ranty idiot screaming nonsense at Morgan will have to suck it up.

He's pretending to believe in a democratic republic but quite clearly just wants to do whatever he personally wishes and screw anybody that he doesn't agree with.

Not the same thing at all, and not even what the constitution itself (which he pretends to defend) calls for. Not that there's any reason whatsoever why the democracy of today shouldn't change any part of the constitution anyway, whether him and his Texas nutjobs agree with it or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15
HOLA4416

Well regulated means subject to the rule of law. As you rightly point out.

If the democracry decides that means you can't have a cupboard full of automatic weapons then the ranty idiot screaming nonsense at Morgan will have to suck it up.

He's pretending to believe in a democratic republic but quite clearly just wants to do whatever he personally wishes and screw anybody that he doesn't agree with.

Not the same thing at all, and not even what the constitution itself (which he pretends to defend) calls for. Not that there's any reason whatsoever why the democracy of today shouldn't change any part of the constitution anyway, whether him and his Texas nutjobs agree with it or not.

automatic are banned in the US and have been for years.

He beleives in the Republic..not democracy.

He believes in the Bill of Rights ( the First 10 Amendments)

He doesnt like foreigners coming over "here" and demanding a cessation of rights...specially Brits, and especially prize tools like Morgan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16
HOLA4417
17
HOLA4418
18
HOLA4419
19
HOLA4420

I really don't know how anyone can even think of suggesting Jones came across well during any of that. It was cringe worthy. What a missed opportunity!

Jones is so used to ranting incoherent shite as his default setting, he's become woefully amateurish. However, i think that's more of an indictment on his audience considering how big his operation is.

I'm certain he's on the CIA payroll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20
HOLA4421

Some say Jones is 'controlled propaganda' - ie. get a crazy person talking about government skullduggery and people will see talk of such things as crazy. He can also be used to blame nebulous conspiracies rather than actual public figures up to no good.

It works too. Twitter was 99% talk of Jones the 'crazy man' with virtually no one asking if all the claims he breathlessly blurted out have any validity. A lot of them do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21
HOLA4422

I really don't know how anyone can even think of suggesting Jones came across well during any of that. It was cringe worthy. What a missed opportunity!

Jones is so used to ranting incoherent shite as his default setting, he's become woefully amateurish. However, i think that's more of an indictment on his audience considering how big his operation is.

I'm certain he's on the CIA payroll.

he blurted....pure an simple.

a fail in the debate stakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22
HOLA4423
23
HOLA4424

he blurted!?

he was a complete and utter shambles

he was...a wasted opportunity...I said so right up thread too

Still, the presenters later joked about shooting him and his children. The whole affair with Morgan and mates id disgusting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24
HOLA4425

he was...a wasted opportunity...I said so right up thread too

Still, the presenters later joked about shooting him and his children. The whole affair with Morgan and mates id disgusting.

yeah, i'm no fan of morgan either

but there's too many who cant see the woods for the trees here esp. on zero hedge were he 'totally pwned morgan'

yeah right

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information