Reply With Quote
Like you & Effy believe everything you read on twitter than boosts your , Dumps. It's human.hater believes every single thing he reads on twitter
Because no "President" gives 2 s about their GI's; Not Biden, Not Putin, Not Z. None of 'em.
Like you & Effy believe everything you read on twitter than boosts your , Dumps. It's human.
Cool own nukes but how is someone going to own a nuke, do tell... Your logic is so ing stupid bro regardless of how many times you repeat this nonsense. You live in a make believe world and that's why you use such an asinine example as citizen ownership of nukes. How the are you even in our legal system?
And no, I understand restrictions in place rn but I don't agree with them. I agree with our Cons ution and no restrictions whatsoever but I live in the real world and in a country with restrictions currently regardless of our Cons ution our Politicians took an oath to but constantly trample on.
so if somebody were able to procure a nuke, you'd be ok with it
and you think it should be legal for a 7 year old citizen to go into a gun store and purchase automatic weapons and ammunition for it. since you want no restrictions whatsoever
interesting world you want to live in
I don't play make believe you stupid ! You're such a dumb bro.
Btw so interesting as we used to sell tommy guns in hardware stores back in the 20s-30s. Then the commies came in and started pushing their narrative to take our individuality and protection away from us all and you're a willing participant because you're weak af in your faculties.
so you dont object to children buying automatic weapons
You keep saying the same as if it'll stick. Bro you're a pussy and it's no wonder you bow down to such a ideology and then what others like me to play into your delusions and flawed logic. You're dumb af bro.
I object to your stupidity and asinine scenarios.so you dont object to children buying automatic weapons
the entire purpose of making laws is to contemplate what will/might happen in the future and whether that outcome is good or desirable. laws arent retroactive. if you are going to brush off the bolded as "playing make believe" or "asinine scenarios" then you arent really in a place to have discussions about policy of any kind tbh. like i said, you just havent thought this through much
"i dont think there should be any restrictions on gun laws. you used to be able to buy them at hardware stores!"
"so you think it should be legal for children to buy automatic weapons"
"i'm not going to consider your make believe scenarios!"
you're a child. its literally in the range of outcomes of what you claim to be your desired state of things
a nuke I'm getting me a Stealth Bomber! See how ing stupid that is? Same with your dumb logic/scenarios of make believe. I am literally talking with a re and it's not entertaining in the least SR. Look outside your dumb bubble already.
He has absolutely thought this through. He has reached his zenith regarding this topic.
Since the much of the BoR doesn't pertain to children, it's a stupid argument to suggest kids be able to purchase nukes or weapons. This is the same stupid SR21 did regarding the suggestion of increased security at schools. Instead of addressing it head on, he came at it sideways with "kids in prison" comparisons. Seems he chose the right profession.
What's it like being the fluffer for all your eFriends you twink?
o calf tats
o you weak
its not my proposal to make it legal for kids to buy guns, its koriwhat's. he claims to believe there should be absolutely no regulation on gun ownership. i'm convinced he doesnt actually believe that. im sure even he would agree that children shouldnt be able to buy guns. but that would require him to rethink his moronic blanket statement of having absolutely no restrictions whatsoever
what he really means is there should be some restrictions/regulations on guns. we just differ on where the line is as to what is or isnt an acceptable regulation. but he wont actually admit that because he's a dishonest , or really just hasnt thought this through beyond slogans and talking points
and yes, dealing with hypothetical outcomes of laws is an important part of making and enforcing laws, so it does come up in my profession. other side argues that the law should be applied in a certain manner, and its my job to figure out if that makes sense. if the law as they want it to be applied would lead to absurd results in other situations, then its a good argument against their position. thats how things work.
if a state passes a blanket abortion ban, and somebody says "hm, so this is going to force a raped 13 year old girl to carry her pregnancy to term", you cant just brush that off as a stupid hypothetical. because its absolutely what is contemplated by the law as proposed.
what's next, are you going to mock engineers for always wanting everything to be precisely calculated?
where does the BoR claim that children are exempt?
The poor guy must be on some heavy meds
Cut him some slack
They are getting tired of skull ing us
Omg
Props to this Ukronazi for this one
Good one
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions