6 pages of BS don't bother to click

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Gulf Coast States

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Little Jack

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Joined
    Sep 28, 2012
    Messages
    4,958
    Points
    113
    Location
    Milton
    Please read and more importantly understand my comment to the thread before you criticize or deflect. BTW Focus and please try to stay on point.
     

    BluesBrother

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    109   0   0
    Joined
    Mar 12, 2018
    Messages
    2,407
    Points
    113
    Location
    Pensacola
    Little Jack said "It's on the first page"

    "What was your "original question?" Now that was sarcasm and didn't require a response. However, I expected you would not take it in the way it was intended. BTW I'm documenting my definition. Sarcasm definition: criticize something in a humorous way:"
     

    M60Gunner

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Joined
    Sep 14, 2017
    Messages
    3,070
    Points
    113
    wouldn’t they be forced to lie on a 4473? Separately, I see the bill of rights as checks on gov infringement not as granting anything.
     

    Snake-Eyes

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Joined
    Jun 22, 2013
    Messages
    3,463
    Points
    113
    Location
    Florida
    Interesting discussion.

    As a corollary, convicted felons and firearms. Convicted felons and voting.

    How a person feels about those scenarios “should” be consistent if you replace the “convicted felons” part of a statement with “illegal invader”, correct?

    Society recognizes a person’s inalienable Rights, but the other part of that relationship (society vs the individual) is the individual potentially losing the Freedom to EXERCISE some of those Rights (infringed upon) if society deems it so (prisoners lose freedom of travel, and potentially loss of life itself via death sentence, etc). That determination… that classification that makes a person vulnerable to losing the Freedom to Exercise their Rights…. THAT is where individuals get passionate about “no, not ME, not MY situation, I’M not that bad”.

    What actions are considered reprehensible enough to justify a representative of Society to deny an individual the Freedom to Exercise an inalienable Right while IN that society?


    Makes ya think, huh?
     

    BluesBrother

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    109   0   0
    Joined
    Mar 12, 2018
    Messages
    2,407
    Points
    113
    Location
    Pensacola
    God please take me out of this thread. Detente is not possible. Please take note this is the way certain groups wear you down. It's by changing the focus or topic again and again until you no longer want to participate. Don't allow this to happen on November 5, 2024.
     
    Last edited:

    stage20

    Master
    GCGF Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    89   0   0
    Joined
    Jun 30, 2018
    Messages
    8,153
    Points
    113
    Location
    pensacola
    The vibe I'm getting is it's ok for an illegal to just walk in your house and go take a big shit in your master bedroom because we are all equal.
     
    Top Bottom