Second Amendment Supporters Have All Failed!

a reply to: Elton

Being necessary for a free state.

So, you don't think the freedom if the press is as a necessary, right?

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I don't have a gun.

But, i at least supported our soldiers fighting for their first amendment rights which you also with your guns failed to protect.

It's easy to blame you since you seem to have no idea of what the Constitution stands for. The first two Admendments back up all the rest. Without one or the other, the entire thing crumbles.

My guns haven't protected me from anything, except starvation. But as a liberal City folk, you have no idea how food gets upon your table I'm thinking.

originally posted by: HauntWok
So, you don't think the freedom if the press is as a necessary, right?

Was the press unable to report from Ferguson? Were they being censored? Have they been prevented from discussing the events in Ferguson?

a reply to: HauntWok

Which means that even when reporters are in peril from a tyrannical government it is your task to defend them from tyranny.

Is it? Should we not exhaust all legal means to justice before we start shooting? Or should we just start shooting first any time there is injustice?

You have a very nihilistic view of not just the Constitution, but how everyone but you should act when you cry out injustice.

Did any member of the press complain about being placed into their free speech zones?

a reply to: TDawgRex

Let's try not to insult me in order to make your point.

I constantly try to exert my first amendment rights, no matter who it pisses off (hence this thread was moved to the rant forum so it can die without proper discussion)

I grew up with guns, fired many guns, and cleaned many more guns.

I decided that if shtf that a gun will be a luxury, That knowledge will be a necessity.

Anyway, this has been thrown into the rant forum. So, it's all worthless to talk about now.

Screw it.

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: Elton

Being necessary for a free state.

So, you don't think the freedom if the press is as a necessary, right?

The press reported on the events. They were not forced to suppress information and they were not killed.

Who was I supposed to shoot again?

Sorry I wasted everyone's time. This thread has been thrown into the rant forum. Which means it's not worthy of being discussed by ATS at large.

Might as well been thrown in the trash bin.

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: TDawgRex
Let's try not to insult me in order to make your point.

In this one instance, I will lower myself to childish standards.

You started it!

I'm sorry, were your feelings hurt that not every one thinks like you do and want to be individuals?

originally posted by: HauntWok
I constantly try to exert my first amendment rights...

It would appear your inability to understand the Constitution is systemic and not solely limited to the Second Amendment. None of us should be surprised.

This is a private website, you have no First Amendment rights when posting here.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Forget it. According to ATS I'm wrong.

No needed further discussion.

a reply to: HauntWok

And more importantly, according to both the Framers and Constitution, you are wrong.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

That's a matter for debate, but not on ATS.

a reply to: HauntWok

This site is for debate. Maybe if you did it properly.

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

That's a matter for debate, but not on ATS.

Actually, it can be a matter of debate, even here on ATS. I'm just not sure you are up to the challenge.

a reply to: TDawgRex

don't worry about it, y'all win.

Its in the rant forum, might as well be the trash forum.

Is this guy for real??? Ha ha ha. Just FYI when things started going down in Ferguson my Militia and I were put on alert status. One man being shot by police under unknown or unclear circumstances is not a valid reason to grab our guns and start shooting the police. If the reporters were being executed in the streets then we would of shown up guns blazing. Or if civilians were being shot unprovoked then we would of shown up.

A bunch of armed guys showing up to a already volatile situation is going to escalate things even more. (sounds like that’s what you want though) But as others already said don’t fire until fired upon. But I was put on alert don’t think we were not watching the situation carefully and weighing our options.

a reply to: Fargoth

Apparently nothing.

originally posted by: HauntWok
Fundamentally, every single second Amendment supporter that cited defence against a tyrannical government had completely failed.

Therefore, you have also failed.

FERGUSON!

Can't protect your fellow countrymen? What use are you? What use are your guns?

Oh, now it's personal protection? Ok, you selfish bastards, how good do you think you are individually against the US military?

They came for your brothers. And you didn't lift a damn finger, you didn't care, you argued semantics, you argued against the unarmed American gunned down.

You have failed. Know your failure, and know that your argument for the second Amendment is just as invalid. YOU HAVEN'T EARNED IT!

You are all failures, and have no argument left.

Do you really think law abiding citizens are going to come to FERGUSON to assist a bunch of CRIMINALS tearing up the "hood"? How would that make 2nd amendment supporters and/or the Militia look?
Firepiston