Hmmm, so all of those “well regulated militia means the national guard, the only people who should have guns are the cops and the national guard because they’re the only ones responsible enough” people are going to finally admit that cops and weekend warriors aren’t actually all that special and the training they recieve doesn’t make them good people it only makes them more effective should they decide to be bad people?
Why? No one, zero people, who join the military or the police, do so without the intention of using force over others. These aren’t good people, I’m not going to concern myself with what category of shitty to put them under.
Maybe they should differ. I think that anyone who hasn’t proven themselves a danger to others should be able to own one, even people with PTSD which shouldn’t be stigmatized simply because some people with it do violent things. Most people with PTSD do not.
Unfortunately a fact that few are willing to recognize is that if you have been homeless in the US for more than 4 weeks there is a very high (like high 90s percent) chance that you have PTSD. It’s not just the military, though us vets certainly have it as well. I’ll also wager that anyone that has spent any amount of time in our jails also has PTSD. The point I’m making is that despite the common person thinking that PTSD is just exclusive to the military, it is in fact, not.
I haven’t actually looked into it, but I would wager that globally we have better than 6 billion people walking around with some form of PTSD.
That and survivors of rape, assault (sexual or otherwise,) b&e, the list of potential causes is a mile long. I’d wager your wager is not at all unreasonable.
I have seen no indication that he had left the service, every report I have seen thus far has indicated that he was an active member of the US Army reserve serving as Sergeant First Class assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 304th Infantry Regiments in Saco, Maine.
People who say that actually want a complete and total ban on guns, but acknowledge the constitution says what it says and amendments are literally impossible in today’s political climate.
Also, one could argue a “well regulated” militia wouldn’t send guns home with its members. It could be kept at a central facility.
I know they do, I was actually specifically calling that out, as they always say “nuh uh” when you point out that they do in fact want a total ban on self defense.
One could argue anything, doesn’t make them actually correct. “The militia” is defined “as all able bodied males age 17-45,” not as “the national guard, which is a military branch not a militia.” As such, this argument says to me that “all able bodied males age 17-45” should be able to own guns and nobody else, no women, nobody in a wheelchair or with anything that would disqualify one medically from service like colorblindness, etc. Of course, that is ridiculous, but that’s why I prefer the “actually knows english” approach to that particular argument.
It’s still not necessary to qualify it that way. “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” stands on its own with the preceding sentence explaining Why.
Regardless of semantics, the Supreme Court has confirmed individual rights to bear arms in triplicate and that matter is settled.
We really need to get them to review Harlow V Fitzgerald, and present them with the full text of section 1983 with the 16 missing words, as the 1871 Congress passed that law.
Well the case I referenced occurred in 1982, but I think it was mainly because no one took the time to look at the Congressional Record, and compare it to the text in the Federal Register.
That’s an interesting idea. Maybe in situations like this, the governor should activate the militia to hunt this guy down. Allow the community to protect itself instead of relying only on the cops. Lots of things could go wrong, but still, it could show the intent of the 2a.
In a sense this is already in effect to the degree that is…necessary, or maybe the word I should use is “appropriate.” If anyone who is carrying arms runs into this guy, knows what he looks like and gets a positive ID, and knows what he’s done, while it isn’t 100% legal to draw on him unless he’s presenting an active threat (i.e he has a gun out), no DA in the country would charge you with brandishing. Then from there you say freeze, he reaches for his gun, shit happens.
The problem with deputizing the entire county for a manhunt though is giving people real authority can have some ill effects, and is pretty much guaranteeing mob justice to become a norm again. I’d say we’re at the happy medium of “nobody will question you if you do find him, but I’m not going to imbue you with the authority of the state per se.”
Theodor Heuss was never a member of the NSDAP. Lübke is indeed a stain on the history of post war Germany. Can you tell me why you’re not fighting in the war for the greater glory of your Great Führer Putin? Are you a coward?
I wonder what a work day is like for the person who comes up with the concept for the stock photos
They’ve gotta just take random nouns from a list and mash em together, right? “Let’s see, I got ‘cyborg’, and… ‘corn’. Alright, Jennifer, let’s get you into that shiny unitard. Where’s catering? Someone get me an ear of corn from catering! Raw, dammit, with the husk!”
My best guess is that they hope some agriculture or GMO company might have a use for it. Basically crops + future theme. Maybe they were trying to stand out from the likely vastly more common corn + person in lab coat?
I didn’t understand the comic until I read your comment. I guess I’m too deep into the weird to understand that normal people don’t understand/do the collar thing and thought the animal was like a dinner sacrifice or something. Very confused until I read your comment.
I have noticed that a lot of leftist memes are just walls of text. Right-wing memes tend to be concise and to the point, often only containing a few short words. They target very different demographics.
Edit: this was meant to roast the right for being simple-minded, but I worded it poorly.
I think the science actually supports this. Studies have shown leftists tend to be more self-critical and are concerned for the nuances - the “shades of grey”. So their memes must cover more angles of an argument to be effective. Right-wing are more black and white thinking, and don’t question themselves once they make a decision. So their meme’s are straight to the point and simple (and usually so full of logic holes and lacking in comedy that leftists say: “the right can’t meme”).
I think they meant that they dont attribute either brevity to the level of not conveying a point effectively or verbosity to the point of eroding interest as being particularly good means of communication.
That’s literally what I’m saying. People seem to have misinterpreted my tone. I was roasting the right, though the irony of being misunderstood here is not lost on me lol.
I only commented as you come from a non English speaking instance. It’s a common error in English, so I figured I’d point it out. Were I making a mistake in Dutch I would like such corrections
Mangers daughter and a friend of hers where about to go for season work in Australia and do a bit of travel around and found a very cheap ticket to Sidney, bought it and went off.
memes
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.