Sticks with US flags are more dangerous than guns in Virginia....

neo96
Guess some people need to make 'sticks' constitutionally protected rights.

So only what you believe to be "arms" is Constitutionally protected? Is that what you are getting at here Neo? This would be interesting because there are threads in where you have argued opposite of which you have presented if I remember.

Besides It is a state issue.

To an extent, but even so, here is the Virginia State Constitution...Article I, Section 13:

...the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed...

But we don't live there so who cares....

reply to post by ownbestenemy

So only what you believe to be "arms" is Constitutionally protected? Is that what you are getting at here Neo? This would be interesting because there are threads in where you have argued opposite of which you have presented if I remembe

Yeah 'sticks' are the same thing as guns.

Guess we should arm the police and military with them since they are considered 'arms'.

And then place all the same GD restrictions on them.

I will be waiting for the pundits going around spreading propaganda about 'stick' violence.

The opposite of what I have argued ?

They aren't even the same GD thing.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


You could poke an eye out with those things... how horrifying. Of course we must be kept safe from such rampant dangers as a woman with a stick!

neo96
reply to post by ownbestenemy

 

So only what you believe to be "arms" is Constitutionally protected? Is that what you are getting at here Neo? This would be interesting because there are threads in where you have argued opposite of which you have presented if I remembe

Yeah 'sticks' are the same thing as guns.

Guess we should arm the police and military with them since they are considered 'arms'.
...

We do: they're called "batons", "clubs", et cetera.

I guess this thread is sponsored by the National Stick Association.

No wait there's no such thing.

neo96
I guess this thread is sponsored by the National Stick Association.

No wait there's no such thing.

At this point Neo, I do not believe it is you that is posting, so I am going to have to levy a complaint. Such obtuseness is beyond anything you normally present....

With any luck they'll ban all guns ...

and issue every U>S citizen with a remote for every nuclear weapon in the country .

That would soon end the gun debate !

But I think the point is ... the law is an ass .

or as bright as one !

But honestly , don't you all have stress much ?
or stress marks ?!

ownbestenemy

neo96
I guess this thread is sponsored by the National Stick Association.

No wait there's no such thing.

At this point Neo, I do not believe it is you that is posting, so I am going to have to levy a complaint. Such obtuseness is beyond anything you normally present....

I would complain, but don't know where on those who are trying to make a false equivocation with the comparison of guns and sticks.

The article from the Daily Kos was to mock gun owners to begin with.

Here is another thing that is LEFT OUT.

Every single gun owner HAS ALREADY been vetted BY THE FEDS, and THE LOCAL LEOS.

background checks, and CCW's people.

The article Is a biased hit piece.

According to Virginia Capitol Police, the groups were informed beforehand of the restriction barring sticks at permitted rallies, because they can be used as weapons.

According to the VCP.

Cops don't write the laws.

LAWMAKERS do.

reply to post by neo96


Agreeing so, but I attempted to transcend that argument to show how the other side of the debate (the pro-second amendment protesters) could benefit from this; in which they stand by their enemies in principle against the real enemy of the State -- which is denying one portion of the society access because they have determined that "pointy" objects are "dangerous" -- they are "arms". Not only that, they are an expression of speech and thus protected under the First Amendment as well as my arguments of the Second.

Either you are for the Constitution, or just in it for yourself when it benefits your narrative -- that is how I see it. I defend these that were denied because of "flags" and their "pointy sticks" because they were merely expressing themselves; even it was against what I believe in.

Be for liberty, not your party Neo....

reply to post by neo96


The "alert" function is in the menu that opens if you click the small "person" icon under all the stats in the members panel on the left of each post.

don't know who it is you think equates guns with sticks - it certainly can't be me....but you should go for it - have the courage of your convictions....

reply to post by neo96



Vetted by veterinarians

and certified by the asylum !!!

hardly a character reference

neo96
Here is another thing that is LEFT OUT.

Every single gun owner HAS ALREADY been vetted BY THE FEDS, and THE LOCAL LEOS.

background checks, and CCW's people.

So people with sticks would be let in if they had had background checks, and that would be OK??

The article Is a biased hit piece.

And of course nothing you write is ever biased, and all the "pro-gun" literature is unbiased, and so forth...because......er......because what??

This was a stupid reaction by cops that contrasts over - exuberance against sticks as potential weapons with guns as actual weapons.

Had you stuck to that you wouldn't' have come across like such a numpty!

According to Virginia Capitol Police, the groups were informed beforehand of the restriction barring sticks at permitted rallies, because they can be used as weapons.

According to the VCP.

Cops don't write the laws.

LAWMAKERS do.

Indeed...and what is your point on that??

reply to post by ownbestenemy

Either you are for the Constitution, or just in it for yourself when it benefits your narrative -- that is how I see it.

That makes me different how ?

Whether its sticks from one group.

Guns for another ?

Abortion for another ?

Or trying to ban rich people.

The argument has many faces no different than anyone else.

But once again.

I have zero rights to tell another state what to do.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

on't know who it is you think equates guns with sticks - it certainly can't be me....but you should go for it - have the courage of your convictions....

The person who wrote the article.

You clearly read it.

Clearly agreed with it.

From the first article:

You can't have American flags on sticks in the Virginia capitol, but you can have a gun

And then went into a diatribe:

The lesson of all of this is that we really are that insane. You are not allowed to carry anything in certain portions of the public square that someone might suspect could be used as a weapon, but the almighty gun is sacrosanct, and trumps all other public safety laws. It is not a weapon, so say we all, it is shiny metal Freedom. The reason that the 2nd amendment does not allow axes to be carried into the capitol is solely because axe manufacturers have not paid great gobs of money into political coffers in order to make it happen. There is no National Pointed Stick Association, no glossy magazines suggesting you cannot possibly defend your family unless you own a

Guess Own should alerted the article author.

National pointed stick association.

Here is the interesting thing; I am sure in a straight debate about "guns", Aloysius the Gaul and I would be head to head (and honestly, regarding the reason for this debate, we probably are), but in the instance of the State House not allowing those with flags enter the State House while allowing firearm owners in, bugs me. It doesn't bug me because I do believe an armed citizen, acting responsibly, should be able to enter a public place.

No, it bugs me because those with what others may not deem to be "arms"; even though that is what the State deemed them as to deny them access (IRONY -- CAREFUL) are arguing against their fellow citizens for partisan reasons.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

So people with sticks would be let in if they had had background checks, and that would be OK??

Never going to happen.

Besides sticks are not even a local,state or even federal manufactured problem yet unlike that article author is trying to use it as.

Once again the police are only doing as they are TOLD.

And of course nothing you write is ever biased, and all the "pro-gun" literature is unbiased, and so forth...because......er......because what??

Yeah well I took issue with this bias:

Looks like the big business gun conspiracy is winning this one

In the op.

This was a stupid reaction by cops that contrasts over - exuberance against sticks as potential weapons with guns as actual weapons.

Sorry what way is it ?

Cops fault or lawmakers ?

Indeed...and what is your point on that??

Proves the article is pure garbage.

neo96
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

So people with sticks would be let in if they had had background checks, and that would be OK??

Never going to happen.

Besides sticks are not even a local,state or even federal manufactured problem yet unlike that article author is trying to use it as.

Once again the police are only doing as they are TOLD.

I didn't say it was going to happen - I asked if that would make it OK - it's called a "hypothetical question".

Yeah well I took issue with this bias:

Looks like the big business gun conspiracy is winning this one

In the op.

Yep - that's me - I think your US worship of the 2nd amendment is ludicrous, but that's just me ...I do understand that other people disagree, you being one of them, but I see no reason to apologise for daring to have my own opinion.

This was a stupid reaction by cops that contrasts over - exuberance against sticks as potential weapons with guns as actual weapons.

Sorry what way is it ?

Cops fault or lawmakers ?

good pint - and one which you had not clearly made before, although looking back I see you were angling at it- certainly blame eth lawmakers rather than the cops.

Indeed...and what is your point on that??

Proves the article is pure garbage.

no = still shows that the state is stupid - and since the cops are an arm of the state they get tarred with that brush.

Tough.

neo96
[
The person who wrote the article.

You clearly read it.

Clearly agreed with it.

From the first article:

You can't have American flags on sticks in the Virginia capitol, but you can have a gun

A statement of fact - aer you saying otherwise??

And then went into a diatribe:

The lesson of all of this is that we really are that insane. You are not allowed to carry anything in certain portions of the public square that someone might suspect could be used as a weapon, but the almighty gun is sacrosanct, and trumps all other public safety laws. It is not a weapon, so say we all, it is shiny metal Freedom. The reason that the 2nd amendment does not allow axes to be carried into the capitol is solely because axe manufacturers have not paid great gobs of money into political coffers in order to make it happen. There is no National Pointed Stick Association, no glossy magazines suggesting you cannot possibly defend your family unless you own a

Guess Own should alerted the article author.

And what is actually incorrect there?

Sorry that someone has an opinion that you don't like - but then the 1st amendment does come before eth 2nd...so that's tough for you too....

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

I didn't say it was going to happen - I asked if that would make it OK - it's called a "hypothetical question".

Then it is not an issue since it is 'hypothetical'.

Yep - that's me - I think your US worship of the 2nd amendment is ludicrous, but that's just me ...I do understand that other people disagree, you being one of them, but I see no reason to apologise for daring to have my own opinion.

I think some peoples worship of the state banning guns is ludicrous for reasons already stated.

And I see no need to apologize.

good pint - and one which you had not clearly made before, although looking back I see you were angling at it- certainly blame eth lawmakers rather than the cops.

Clearly guns were to blame according to the article,

no = still shows that the state is stupid - and since the cops are an arm of the state they get tarred with that brush.

I say tough to those who don't like guns.

And who only want them in the hands of the police because that is the epitome of a police state.