Don't sell GUNS to Gore supporters
M.Cole
Fulcanelli wrote:
>
> >
> > You have a right to own a gun that cannot be taken away by government,
> > but you have no right to force others to sell you a gun.
> >
>
> If a person cannot buy a gun, then their right to keep and bear arms is
> basically denied in practice, because while a sheet of paper may say they
> have the right, if in practice they can't get guns they are nonetheless
> withheld from the right to protect themselves with weapons.
That would only mean that they couldn't buy a gun from that individual, they
still have the right to buy from anyone else. The same as if you walked into my
dealership and I refused to sell you a car, I have denied you service not your
right.
A "person" is not required to enforce or defend your rights your rights.
>
>
> > Same argument, which should be well-known to any educated person, which
> > goes like this: "You have the right to say what you wish, but not to use
> > my printing press."
>
> Which means your freedom of speech is rendered near-powerless, devoid of
> the ability to have any affect. As such, it steps on the right to freedom
> of speech by eliminating all power associated with that right, making it
> null and void.
>
> >
> > When you figure out how constitutional rights
>
> I seem to have just whupped your ass across this forum. Got anything else
> to say that's stupid and unintelligent?
>
> >
> >
> > --Tim May
> >
> > --
> > ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
> > Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
> > ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
> > W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
> > "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments.
>
> --
> To email me, remove "NOSPAM" from my address.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
M.Cole
Lee Harrison wrote:
> in article tcmay-8DBAF7....@news.got.net, Tim May at
> tc...@got.net wrote on 11/27/00 5:38 PM:
>
> > When you figure out how constitutional rights work, come back.
>
> Just cite the USSC cases saying having guns is a human right, dumbass.
>
> _______________
>
> UNITED STATES v. MILLER, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)
>
> "Most if not all the States have adopted provisions touching the right to
> keep and bear arms. Differences in the language employed in these have
> naturally led to somewhat variant conclusions concerning the scope of the
> right guaranteed. But none of them seem to afford any material support for
> the challenged ruling of the court below."
>
> The Lone Weasel <lonew...@justice.com>
> http://member.newsguy.com/~leehrsn/index.html
No USSC case has stated that it is not a right of the individual.
As for your sig, where is the rest of the quote that says what the riling of
the court was in re MILLER.
Tim May
<21...@gte.net> wrote:
> Let's get gun stores to put up signs
> saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> business is not welcome here!"
>
> No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
> Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> supporter).
>
>
>
> Sore / Loserman 2000
Furthermore, don't hire Demonrats, don't promote Demonrats, and don't do
business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
I will not hire a Democrat, knowingly. And if I find out they lied to
me, I'll find a way to fire them.
Jim Alder
>
> Let's get gun stores to put up signs
> saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> business is not welcome here!"
>
> No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
> Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> supporter).
Hey!! Hold on a second! What if they want to shoot
themselves?? Maybe they can't all afford a ticket out
of the country like Baldwin can! But they can afford a
gun. Just don't sell them a sniper rifle. It's usually
the left that snaps mentally, remember, and I can hear
them snapping all over the country as we speak.
--
"It's not your vote that counts ... It's how your vote
is counted!"
Bill Bonde
Tim May wrote:
>
> In article <8te32tk8e5tgtmj3b...@4ax.com>, N9NWO
> <21...@gte.net> wrote:
>
> > Let's get gun stores to put up signs
> > saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> > business is not welcome here!"
> >
> > No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
> > Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> > cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> > supporter).
> >
> >
> >
> > Sore / Loserman 2000
>
> Furthermore, don't hire Demonrats, don't promote Demonrats, and don't do
> business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
>
> I will not hire a Democrat, knowingly. And if I find out they lied to
> me, I'll find a way to fire them.
>
Don't you really mean, fire at them?
Lone Haranguer
redrum wrote:
>
> In article <8te32tk8e5tgtmj3b...@4ax.com>, 21...@gte.net
> says...
> >
> >Let's get gun stores to put up signs
> >saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> >business is not welcome here!"
> >
> >No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
> >Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> >cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> >supporter).
> >
> >
> >
> >Sore / Loserman 2000
>
> If we change our party affiliations to "do not state", and we repent and
> seek forgiveness from The Great W, can we be allowed at least one little
> revolver?
Starter pistols only. Sorry.
LZ
Lenny Stover
N9NWO <21...@gte.net> wrote in message
<8te32tk8e5tgtmj3b...@4ax.com>...
<snip>
>No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
>Leave them defenseless. (Like some
>cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
>supporter).
Some cops *are* Gore supporters.
El Vis
themselves?? Maybe they can't all afford a ticket out
of the country like Baldwin can! But they can afford a
gun. Just don't sell them a sniper rifle. It's usually
the left that snaps mentally, remember, and I can hear
them snapping all over the country as we speak."
Any liberal that wants to shoot themselves, I will lend them a gun for a
nominal fee. Hell, I won't even make them pay for the bullet.
I wonder if Alec Balwin needs help packing?
Lvis.
--
"In America people don't get "left behind" by economic growth. They just
sit there on their fat, lazy asses with a stupid expression on their faces
and refuse to hop on board."- Neil Boortz
"Those who cast the votes decide nothing.
Those who count the votes decide everything." Joseph V. Stalin
John Smith
news:tcmay-D02828....@news.got.net...
> > saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> > business is not welcome here!"
> >
> > Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> > cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> > supporter).
> >
>
> Furthermore, don't hire Demonrats, don't promote Demonrats, and don't do
> business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
>
> I will not hire a Democrat, knowingly. And if I find out they lied to
> me, I'll find a way to fire them.
Not to worry, most democrats refuse to work anyway...
John Smith
news:3A21D72C...@sssnet.com...
> N9NWO wrote:
> >
> > Let's get gun stores to put up signs
> > saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> > business is not welcome here!"
> >
> > No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
> > Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> > cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> > supporter).
>
> themselves?? Maybe they can't all afford a ticket out
> of the country like Baldwin can! But they can afford a
> gun. Just don't sell them a sniper rifle. It's usually
> the left that snaps mentally, remember, and I can hear
> them snapping all over the country as we speak.
Why can't they get their guns from the hood where all of their other little
democrat gangster friends get them?
Pagan
news:t23o46q...@corp.supernews.com...
> >Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> >cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> >supporter).
>
Nobody's perfect. :-)
Pagan
N9NWO
saying "If you voted for Gore, your
business is not welcome here!"
No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
Leave them defenseless. (Like some
cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
supporter).
Sore / Loserman 2000
redrum
If we change our party affiliations to "do not state", and we repent and
John Rower
what it is like in those places that Clinton/Gore sent them to.
John
"Bill Bonde" <std...@mail.com> wrote in message
news:3A21D5B5...@mail.com...
>
>
> Tim May wrote:
> >
> > In article <8te32tk8e5tgtmj3b...@4ax.com>, N9NWO
> > <21...@gte.net> wrote:
> >
> > Furthermore, don't hire Demonrats, don't promote Demonrats, and don't do
> > business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
> >
> > I will not hire a Democrat, knowingly. And if I find out they lied to
> > me, I'll find a way to fire them.
> >
Terry Russell
Section 1. The thirty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
Section 2.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people
,except Democrat voters, women, blacks, jews, irish, polish, indians, mexicans, definitely Canuks and Californians
or their immediate relatives, extending to anyone doing any business with them,
people who wear their caps back to front, and that taxi driver who didn't stop,
to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
"N9NWO" <21...@gte.net> wrote in message news:8te32tk8e5tgtmj3b...@4ax.com...
Aaron R. Kulkis
How about:
"140-day waiting period for registered Democrats"
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> Tim May wrote:
> >
> > In article <8te32tk8e5tgtmj3b...@4ax.com>, N9NWO
> > <21...@gte.net> wrote:
> >
> > business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
> >
> > I will not hire a Democrat, knowingly. And if I find out they lied to
> > me, I'll find a way to fire them.
> >
> Don't you really mean, fire at them?
Now THERE's and idea.
Aaron R. Kulkis
Haven't you guys just spent the last 20 years telling us that
handguns are evil.....HYPOCRITE...
Aaron R. Kulkis
> <snip>
> >No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
> >Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> >cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> >supporter).
>
Yeah...Political hacks in the "Chief of Police" office.
Marksman
"John Smith" <som...@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:b3mU5.3037$LQ3....@newsfeed.slurp.net...
> > business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
> >
> > I will not hire a Democrat, knowingly. And if I find out they lied to
> > me, I'll find a way to fire them.
>
>
Sad but true.
Marksman
"John Smith" <som...@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:b3mU5.3037$LQ3....@newsfeed.slurp.net...
> "Tim May" <tc...@got.net> wrote in message
> news:tcmay-D02828....@news.got.net...
> > In article <8te32tk8e5tgtmj3b...@4ax.com>, N9NWO
> > <21...@gte.net> wrote:
> >
Marksman
"John Smith" <som...@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:b3mU5.3037$LQ3....@newsfeed.slurp.net...
> "Tim May" <tc...@got.net> wrote in message
> news:tcmay-D02828....@news.got.net...
> > In article <8te32tk8e5tgtmj3b...@4ax.com>, N9NWO
> > <21...@gte.net> wrote:
> >
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> "Jim Alder" <jima...@sssnet.com> wrote in message
> news:3A21D72C...@sssnet.com...
> > N9NWO wrote:
> > >
> > themselves?? Maybe they can't all afford a ticket out
> > of the country like Baldwin can! But they can afford a
> > gun. Just don't sell them a sniper rifle. It's usually
> > the left that snaps mentally, remember, and I can hear
> > them snapping all over the country as we speak.
>
> Why can't they get their guns from the hood where all of their other little
> democrat gangster friends get them?
Fear.
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> "Jim Alder" <jima...@sssnet.com> wrote in message
> news:3A21D72C...@sssnet.com...
> > N9NWO wrote:
> > >
> > themselves?? Maybe they can't all afford a ticket out
> > of the country like Baldwin can! But they can afford a
> > gun. Just don't sell them a sniper rifle. It's usually
> > the left that snaps mentally, remember, and I can hear
> > them snapping all over the country as we speak.
>
> Why can't they get their guns from the hood where all of their other little
> democrat gangster friends get them?
Liberal white democrats just use ghetto-dwellers as political pawns....
they wouldn't be caught DEAD associating them in day-to-day life.
KB9WFK
> themselves??
I'm sure they can afford an elevator ride to the top of a tall building.
Jumping is free. :-)
Maybe they can't all afford a ticket out
> of the country like Baldwin can! But they can afford a
> gun. Just don't sell them a sniper rifle. It's usually
> the left that snaps mentally, remember, and I can hear
> them snapping all over the country as we speak.
>
Gene
So you're recommending that we deny them their right to keep and own
firearms based on them exercising yet another right (the right to vote
for whom they choose)? Weren't we arguing just a few days ago that even
convicted felons could not have that right taken away without due
process? Actually, if you were sane enough for people to take you
seriously (thank God you're not) this would be the first step in a
Nazi-style takeover.....disarming everyone who doesn't agree with you.
SIEG HEIL!!!!!
Noah Simoneaux
(snip)
>How about:
>
>"140-day waiting period for registered Democrats"
No, let's use the logic they like to abuse so much. Since the Department of
Justice study found that the average time of gun ownership before a gun was used
in a killing was 6 years, we should let them voluntarily submit to a 6 year
waiting period. ;)
Noah Simoneaux
The man who thinks he can do without the world is indeed mistaken, but the man who thinks the world cannot do without him is mistaken even worse.-Francois, duc de La Rochefoucauld
Panhead
> firearms based on them exercising yet another right (the right to vote
> for whom they choose)?
Not at all.
I believe he's just suggesting that the people who want to,
exercise their right to refuse service to anyone they want.
....or is that serve refuse?
Whatever.
Ed Hill, Atlanta
normally liberal Californians flooded into gun stores seeking arms to
protect their homes.
Despite the Media's demonization of armed Korean shop owners who fired
above the crowds of rioters to scare them off, normally liberal
Californians sought out the surest deterrent to looters: firearms.
It was ironic justice when the multi-day waiting period forced the
liberals, who now wanted guns, to wait without protection.
Let's hope this whole election mess is resolved peacefully, and Bush
who has now won the count 4 times, may take office.
Should the democrats throw a tamper tantrum, and riot against Bush's
electoral victory, armed conservatives are prepared to repel the violent
socialists called democrats.
It would be just like the hypocritical socialist-democrats to take up
the firearms they condemn to illegally overthrow Bush's electoral
victory.
Sorry, democrats. Looks like the conservative candidate won this one.
Ed Hill
Web Commerce programmer
Atlanta, GA
> So you're recommending that we deny them their right to keep and own
> firearms based on them exercising yet another right (the right to vote
> for whom they choose)? Weren't we arguing just a few days ago that
even
> convicted felons could not have that right taken away without due
> process? Actually, if you were sane enough for people to take you
> seriously (thank God you're not) this would be the first step in a
> Nazi-style takeover.....disarming everyone who doesn't agree with you.
>
> SIEG HEIL!!!!!
>
--
Ed Hill
Atlanta, GA
Database Analyst/Programmer
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Bert Hyman
>So you're recommending that we deny them their right to keep and own
>firearms based on them exercising yet another right (the right to
>vote for whom they choose)?...
You make the common mistake of confusing economic power with
government power.
He's not talking about denying anybody anything. He's talking about
just making a choice not to sell to certain people. This is really no
different from making a choice not to buy from certain people.
No force is involved, and the spurned potential buyer is free to seek
a seller elsewhere.
You're not opposed to choice, are you?
--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | be...@visi.com
Brown Thumb
> Furthermore, don't hire Demonrats, don't promote Demonrats, and don't do
> business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
Ummm, does this mean that someone who rapes, molests,
beats, robs, etc a Democrat would be released to
society if you were on the jury? If so, I'd be interested in
knowing what it is that Democrats are doing that you're
not doing (especially if you also don't want any of us in
the pro-gun camp, either!)
--
@-@-@-@-@-@-@-@-@-@-@-@-@-@-@-@-@-@-@-@-@-@
Liberal in favor of the 2nd Amendment
(I'd make that plural if I knew how....)
Noah Simoneaux
(snip)
>He's not talking about denying anybody anything. He's talking about
>just making a choice not to sell to certain people. This is really no
>different from making a choice not to buy from certain people.
>
>No force is involved, and the spurned potential buyer is free to seek
>a seller elsewhere.
>
>You're not opposed to choice, are you?
It's just like in the book Atlas Shrugged. Free people have the right to decide
who benefits from their efforts. Others don't.
chuck_u_...@my-deja.com
Tim May <tc...@got.net> wrote:
> In article <8te32tk8e5tgtmj3b...@4ax.com>, N9NWO
> <21...@gte.net> wrote:
>
do
> business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
>
> me, I'll find a way to fire them.
>
"Demonrats" good one! So what does that make you both?
RepubliKLANs? You both sound like a couple of inbred retards. Perhaps
your related? BTW, when is the next klan meeting? Be sure to have
your sheets cleaned and pressed. Fucking bigots.
##############################
Rush is REICH!
Jim Alder
>
> Jim writes:"Hey!! Hold on a second! What if they want to shoot
> themselves?? Maybe they can't all afford a ticket out
> of the country like Baldwin can! But they can afford a
> gun. Just don't sell them a sniper rifle. It's usually
> the left that snaps mentally, remember, and I can hear
> them snapping all over the country as we speak."
>
> nominal fee. Hell, I won't even make them pay for the bullet.
> I wonder if Alec Balwin needs help packing?
You'd charge them a fee? hell, I'd pay some of them
if I wasn't worried about charges of being the next
Kevorkian. But charge them? Hell, no. I've got a case
of .454 Casulls waiting. Line forms in the driveway!
<g> (For all you Dems who I know have no sense of
humor, that's what this is; humor. Dark, but humor.)
As for volunteers to help Baldwin pack, I'm sure
THAT line is forming already.
Jim Alder
>
> "Jim Alder" <jima...@sssnet.com> wrote in message
> news:3A21D72C...@sssnet.com...
> > N9NWO wrote:
> > >
> > themselves?? Maybe they can't all afford a ticket out
> > of the country like Baldwin can! But they can afford a
> > gun. Just don't sell them a sniper rifle. It's usually
> > the left that snaps mentally, remember, and I can hear
> > them snapping all over the country as we speak.
>
> democrat gangster friends get them?
That's a myth. They don't have any friends.
Conal Fitzgerald
What about us Libertarians? Can we have all the guns the democrats
wanted and paid for? :)
I'd let the Hagelin's Natural Law guys have some of the fun stuff,
too, but they have to pay for theirs.
Conal Fitzgerald
co...@drunkenbard.com
http://www.drunkenbard.com
Tim May
wrote:
> So you're recommending that we deny them their right to keep and own
> firearms based on them exercising yet another right (the right to vote
> for whom they choose)?
No, just don't _sell_ them any guns.
Their "right" to have firearms is not a right to buy them from us if we
don't want to sell to them.
--Tim May
--
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
"Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments.
Tim May
wrote:
> Tim May wrote:
> >
> > I will not hire a Democrat, knowingly. And if I find out they lied to
> > me, I'll find a way to fire them.
> >
> Don't you really mean, fire at them?
Probably so.
Killing a welfare hoe is a good deed.
Lee Harrison
wrote on 11/27/00 10:41 AM:
> Gene wrote:
>>
>> N9NWO wrote:
>>>
>>> Let's get gun stores to put up signs
>>> saying "If you voted for Gore, your
>>> business is not welcome here!"
>>>
>>> No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
>>> Leave them defenseless. (Like some
>>> cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
>>> supporter).
>>>
>>> Sore / Loserman 2000
>>
>> So you're recommending that we deny them their right to keep and own
>> firearms based on them exercising yet another right (the right to vote
>> for whom they choose)?
>
> Not at all.
> I believe he's just suggesting that the people who want to,
> exercise their right to refuse service to anyone they want.
> ....or is that serve refuse?
That's interesting. You guys who scream about guns being a human right
would infringe the human rights of Democrats because most of them voted
against Bush?
That's the best argument I've seen why guns are not a human right or a civil
right. There's absolutely no awareness or practice of it. If you had a
personal belief about guns and civil rights, you wouldn't even consider
denying civil rights to some Americans just because you disagreed with their
politics.
It's never been a part of our society or the law, so why should you suddenly
think that anybody has a human or civil right to have guns?
Thanks for pointing that out, Pinhead.
("POINTING that out - PINHEAD!" Laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh!)
________________
ADAMS v. WILLIAMS, 407 U.S. 143 (1972):
J. Douglas (Dissenting)
The police problem is an acute one not because of the Fourth Amendment, but
because of the ease with which anyone can acquire a pistol. A powerful lobby
dins into the ears of our citizenry that these gun purchases are
constitutional rights protected by the Second Amendment, which reads, "A
well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the
right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
There is under our decisions no reason why stiff state laws governing the
purchase and possession of pistols may not be enacted. There is no reason
why pistols may not be barred from anyone with a police record. There is no
reason why a State may not require a purchaser of a pistol to pass a
psychiatric test. There is no reason why all pistols should not be barred to
everyone except the police.
The leading case is United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 , upholding a
federal law making criminal the shipment in interstate commerce of a
sawed-off shotgun. The law was upheld, there being no evidence that a
sawed-off shotgun had "some reasonable relationship to the preservation or
efficiency of a well regulated militia." Id., at 178. The Second Amendment,
it was held, "must be interpreted and applied" with the view of maintaining
a "militia."
"The Militia which the States were expected to maintain and train is set in
contrast with Troops which they were forbidden to keep without the consent
of Congress. The sentiment of the time strongly disfavored standing armies;
the common view was that adequate defense of country and laws could be [407
U.S. 143, 151] secured through the Militia - civilians primarily, soldiers
on occasion." Id., at 178-179.
Critics say that proposals like this water down the Second Amendment. Our
decisions belie that argument, for the Second Amendment, as noted, was
designed to keep alive the militia.
The Lone Weasel <lonew...@justice.com>
http://member.newsguy.com/~leehrsn/index.html
Snake
Tim May wrote:
>
> In article <8te32tk8e5tgtmj3b...@4ax.com>, N9NWO
> <21...@gte.net> wrote:
>
> > Let's get gun stores to put up signs
> > saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> > business is not welcome here!"
> >
> > No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
> > Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> > cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> > supporter).
> >
Why do you wish to treat other people the way you have objected to
being treated?
> >
> >
> > Sore / Loserman 2000
>
> Furthermore, don't hire Demonrats, don't promote Demonrats, and don't do
> business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
>
> I will not hire a Democrat, knowingly. And if I find out they lied to
> me, I'll find a way to fire them.
So you are willing to flaunt the law if it makes you feel better, but
you do not want others to do the same? It is ok for you to be a bigot?
Are ALL Democrats vile, evil persons that deserve only what Republicans
can dish out? Are they not just as human as you, and have just the same
rights as you?
Now before you go calling me a Liberal, Democrat, Republican,
Libertairean, or any other political inity, I will tell that I am a
independent, I think for myself, no party thinks for me.
>
> --Tim May
>
> --
> ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
> Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
> ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
> W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
> "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments.
--
Snake
We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the
courts, not to overthrow
the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.
Abraham Lincoln
"The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution: neither
is it in any manner
dependent on that instrument for it's existence. The second amendment
means no more than that
it shall not be infringed by Congress, and has no other effect than to
restrict the powers of the
national government"
92 U. S. 542, U. S. v. Curishank
(U. S. la. 1875)
Robert Frenchu
>If you had a
>personal belief about guns and civil rights, you wouldn't even consider
>denying civil rights to some Americans just because you disagreed with their
>politics.
Oh come now Lee. I could very easily live with depriving both Clinton
AND Gore of their civil rights for the rest of their miserable lives.
It's called PRISON. And it's exactly where both of these traitorous
pigs belong.
___
"Xona deserves the Pulitzer Prize for editorial writing."
- Lee Harrison 8/6/2000
Tim May
<sea...@dcbudsters.com> wrote:
> > Furthermore, don't hire Demonrats, don't promote Demonrats, and don't
> > do
> > business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
> >
> > I will not hire a Democrat, knowingly. And if I find out they lied to
> > me, I'll find a way to fire them.
>
> So you are willing to flaunt the law if it makes you feel better, but
> you do not want others to do the same?
First, you must mean "flout" the law, not "flaunt."
Second, it is perfectly legal for me to not hire Demonrats. Though I
disagree strongly with the "Title 7" provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights
Act, Demonrats are not (yet) a "protected class."
If you think I'm flouting the law, try to sue me.
I'll hire or not hire whom I wish.
> Now before you go calling me a Liberal, Democrat, Republican,
> Libertairean, or any other political inity, I will tell that I am a
> independent, I think for myself, no party thinks for me.
Given your logic and spelling errors, I agree that no one thinks for you.
Tim May
<lee...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> That's interesting. You guys who scream about guns being a human right
> would infringe the human rights of Democrats because most of them voted
> against Bush?
You are _very_ confused about what "rights" are. I suggest you find a
night school class that can fill in the gaps in your high school
education.
Gene
> >personal belief about guns and civil rights, you wouldn't even consider
> >denying civil rights to some Americans just because you disagreed with their
> >politics.
>
> Oh come now Lee. I could very easily live with depriving both Clinton
> AND Gore of their civil rights for the rest of their miserable lives.
>
> It's called PRISON. And it's exactly where both of these traitorous
> pigs belong.
Probably so. Just don't forget the trial and due process.
Dana
Lee Harrison <lee...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:B647FC8B.D5B7%lee...@newsguy.com...
> That's interesting. You guys who scream about guns being a human right
And they are a human right
> would infringe the human rights of Democrats because most of them voted
> against Bush?
Just like we infringe on the rights of convicted criminals to legally have
weapons because the criminals have lost the trust of society, the same holds
true for the democrats. They (democrats) are not to be trusted.
> It's never been a part of our society or the law, so why should you
suddenly
> think that anybody has a human or civil right to have guns?
But we do
Panhead
>
> Tim May wrote:
>
> > Furthermore, don't hire Demonrats, don't promote Demonrats, and don't do
> > business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
>
> beats, robs, etc a Democrat would be released to
> society if you were on the jury?
Raping, molesting, beating, robbing, etc. a Democrat is not a
real crime.
Is it?
Raping, molesting, beating, robbing, etc. a human is.
Keeping those that are convicted of raping, molesting, beating,
robbing, etc. anybody should never have been released in the
first place.
Right?
> If so, I'd be interested in
> knowing what it is that Democrats are doing that you're
> not doing
Preventing the raping, molesting, beating, robbing, etc. humans.
from being prosecuted, AND releasing them after they were
convicted?
>(especially if you also don't want any of us in
> the pro-gun camp, either!)
If you are of the "pro gun camp" you are not a democrat.
>
> Liberal in favor of the 2nd Amendment
> (I'd make that plural if I knew how....)
You'd know how to make it plural if there were any.
ablea...@my-deja.com
N9NWO <21...@gte.net> wrote:
> Let's get gun stores to put up signs
> saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> business is not welcome here!"
>
> No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
Partial voluntary gun control - how ironic.
> Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> supporter).
There are plenty of cops who supported Gore themselves, and plenty of
cops who support gun control. Where did you get the silly idea that law
enforcement is on your side?
ablea...@my-deja.com
Panhead <panmy...@intac.com> wrote:
> Brown Thumb wrote:
> >
> > Tim May wrote:
> >
> > > Furthermore, don't hire Demonrats, don't promote Demonrats, and
don't do
> > > business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
> >
> > Ummm, does this mean that someone who rapes, molests,
> > beats, robs, etc a Democrat would be released to
> > society if you were on the jury?
>
> Raping, molesting, beating, robbing, etc. a Democrat is not a
> real crime.
> Is it?
> Raping, molesting, beating, robbing, etc. a human is.
And you guys wonder why everyone stereotypes you as hateful lunatics.
> Keeping those that are convicted of raping, molesting, beating,
> robbing, etc. anybody should never have been released in the
> first place.
> Right?
>
> > If so, I'd be interested in
> > knowing what it is that Democrats are doing that you're
> > not doing
>
> Preventing the raping, molesting, beating, robbing, etc. humans.
> from being prosecuted, AND releasing them after they were
> convicted?
>
> >(especially if you also don't want any of us in
> > the pro-gun camp, either!)
>
> If you are of the "pro gun camp" you are not a democrat.
This is, of course, untrue.
There are pro-gun rights Democrats, just like there are pro-gun control
Republicans. Which is why this partisan bullshit is so, so silly.
>
> >
> > Liberal in favor of the 2nd Amendment
> > (I'd make that plural if I knew how....)
>
> You'd know how to make it plural if there were any.
Um, I've been called a liberal by the likes of you, and I support a
(general) right to self-defense and gun ownership. So there's your
plural.
Now you explain why the most important gun control law of the last
decade is named after a (Republican) former Reagan Administration
official.
ablea...@my-deja.com
Tim May <tc...@got.net> wrote:
> In article <B647FC8B.D5B7%lee...@newsguy.com>, Lee Harrison
> <lee...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
right
voted
> > against Bush?
>
> night school class that can fill in the gaps in your high school
> education.
He clearly noted that the PRO-gun rights people are the ones who are
apparently confused about what rights are. That's the whole point,
genius.
Billzhere
media coup? Naw, that would be too easy!
--
"The language of the Constitution cannot be interpreted safely except by
reference to the common law and to British institutions as they were
when the instrument was framed and adopted." --- William Howard Taft
President of the United States and Chief Justice SCotUS.
Billzhere
hand, do have the right to deny service to anyone to whom they should
chose.
syd
helicopter-spotting interbreeding assholes any day! incidentally, I run a
business and now I'm going to start getting rid of all the conservatives on
the payroll. I think I'll start with the guy in receiving that listens to
Rush Dumbaugh. god this is gonna feel good!news:3A22A101...@sssnet.com...
> John Smith wrote:
> >
> > "Jim Alder" <jima...@sssnet.com> wrote in message
> > news:3A21D72C...@sssnet.com...
> > > >
> > > > Let's get gun stores to put up signs
> > > > saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> > > > business is not welcome here!"
> > > >
> > > > No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
> > > > cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> > > > supporter).
> > >
Tim May
<sigm...@excite.com> wrote:
> I'm armed, have many friends, willing to defend my way of life against
> you
> helicopter-spotting interbreeding assholes any day! incidentally, I run
> a
> business and now I'm going to start getting rid of all the conservatives
> on
> the payroll. I think I'll start with the guy in receiving that listens
> to
> Rush Dumbaugh. god this is gonna feel good!
Sounds good to me! The bleeding heart liberals get rid of their
conservative and liberty-loving employees and the conservatives get rid
of their liberal simp-wimp airy-fairy faggots and welfare breeders!
Since there aren't a lot of liberal faggots and dumb Palm Beach Jews
running businesses, I guess we know which way the war will go.
Let the war begin.
Robert Sturgeon
<panmy...@intac.com> wrote:
>Brown Thumb wrote:
>>
>> Tim May wrote:
>>
>> > Furthermore, don't hire Demonrats, don't promote Demonrats, and don't do
>> > business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
>>
>> Ummm, does this mean that someone who rapes, molests,
>> beats, robs, etc a Democrat would be released to
>> society if you were on the jury?
>
>Raping, molesting, beating, robbing, etc. a Democrat is not a
>real crime.
> Is it?
Yes, it is.
>Raping, molesting, beating, robbing, etc. a human is.
> Keeping those that are convicted of raping, molesting, beating,
>robbing, etc. anybody should never have been released in the
>first place.
> Right?
>
>> If so, I'd be interested in
>> knowing what it is that Democrats are doing that you're
>> not doing
>
>Preventing the raping, molesting, beating, robbing, etc. humans.
>from being prosecuted, AND releasing them after they were
>convicted?
>
>>(especially if you also don't want any of us in
>> the pro-gun camp, either!)
>
>If you are of the "pro gun camp" you are not a democrat.
I know several Democrats who are "pro gun." You need to get
out more.
>> Liberal in favor of the 2nd Amendment
>> (I'd make that plural if I knew how....)
>
>You'd know how to make it plural if there were any.
I know several.
--
Robert Sturgeon-
Proud member of The Vast Rightwing Conspiracy.
http://www.vistech.net/users/rsturge/
The Condor Chef
"syd" <sigm...@excite.com> puked:
> I'm armed,
Doesn't that make you a murderer, or a terrorist, or a risk to Rosie
O'Donnell's children or something?
You're off of Sarah Brady's Christmas list now...
CC
--
"Both oligarch and tyrant mistrust the people,
and therefore deprive them of their arms."
-- Aristotle, "Politics"
marc pinsonneault
Tim May wrote:
>
> Since there aren't a lot of liberal faggots and dumb Palm Beach Jews
> running businesses, I guess we know which way the war will go.
>
> Let the war begin.
>
> --Tim May
Well, there is only one possible response to drooling wit like that...
<killfile opening>
<plonk>
Marc
Tim May
<"pinsonnneault .1"@osu.edu> wrote:
Fair enough, as you are also in _my_ "kill file." Where do you live?
ablea...@my-deja.com
Billzhere <bil...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <8vufrs$8e0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> ablea...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > In article <3A22BA5E...@intac.com>,
> > Panhead <panmy...@intac.com> wrote:
> > > Brown Thumb wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Tim May wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Furthermore, don't hire Demonrats, don't promote Demonrats,
and
> > don't do
> > > > > business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
> > > >
> > > > Ummm, does this mean that someone who rapes, molests,
> > > > beats, robs, etc a Democrat would be released to
> > > > society if you were on the jury?
> > >
> > > Raping, molesting, beating, robbing, etc. a Democrat is not a
> > > real crime.
> > > Is it?
> >
lunatics.
> >
> > > robbing, etc. anybody should never have been released in the
> > > first place.
> > > Right?
> > >
> > > > If so, I'd be interested in
> > > > knowing what it is that Democrats are doing that you're
> > > > not doing
> > >
> > > Preventing the raping, molesting, beating, robbing, etc. humans.
> > > from being prosecuted, AND releasing them after they were
> > > convicted?
> > >
> > > >(especially if you also don't want any of us in
> > > > the pro-gun camp, either!)
> > >
> > > If you are of the "pro gun camp" you are not a democrat.
> >
> >
> > There are pro-gun rights Democrats, just like there are pro-gun
> control
> > Republicans. Which is why this partisan bullshit is so, so silly.
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > (I'd make that plural if I knew how....)
> > >
> > > You'd know how to make it plural if there were any.
> >
> > (general) right to self-defense and gun ownership. So there's your
> > plural.
> >
> > Now you explain why the most important gun control law of the last
> > decade is named after a (Republican) former Reagan Administration
> > official.
> >
as a
> media coup? Naw, that would be too easy!
Duh! Of course they did! So what? The obvious point, for those unable
to grasp it, is that the idea that gun control is a strictly partisan
issue is ridiculous (as it is for nearly every issue). Brady put his
name on that bill, and supported it, voluntarily - Clinton didn't do
it.
Oh, and it was a Democrat in Congress (John Dingell) who saved your
sorry NRA asses from the strict gun control laws you deserved after
Columbine.
Speaking of Dingell, here's a funny scenario that could come true
someday. To win enough Democratic votes to defeat a pro-gun rights
Democrat in a Democratic district, a moderate Republican supports gun
control. On paper, mindless freak gun-rights idiots would call that a
victory because a guy with a "D" next to his name was replaced by a guy
with an "R", even though you lost a gun-rights guy and won the
opposite.
Learn some politics, you fools.
Arne Langsetmo
>
> "Tim May" <tc...@got.net> wrote in message
> news:tcmay-D02828....@news.got.net...
> >
> > > Let's get gun stores to put up signs
> > > saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> > > business is not welcome here!"
> > >
> > > No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
> > > Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> > > cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> > > supporter).
> > >
> >
> > Furthermore, don't hire Demonrats, don't promote Demonrats, and don't do
> > business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
> >
> > me, I'll find a way to fire them.
>
4Q, azo.
Republicans . . . bigoted as ever.
Cheers,
-- Arne Langsetmo
Robert Frenchu
>Oh, and it was a Democrat in Congress (John Dingell) who saved your
>sorry NRA asses from the strict gun control laws you deserved after
>Columbine.
Even Democrats have brief flashes of intelligence now and then. A pity
you'll never know what that feels like.
--
If my "assault rifle" makes me a criminal
And my encryption program makes me a terrorist
Does Dianne Feinstein's vagina make her a prostitute?
Noah Simoneaux
(snip)
>That's interesting. You guys who scream about guns being a human right
>would infringe the human rights of Democrats because most of them voted
>against Bush?
Infringe their human rights? You mean the human right many Democrats insist is
NOT a human right?
Ah, that's that "Lee logic" again. Deny that it's a right, then complain when
someone wants to take that non-right away from them. :/
>
>That's the best argument I've seen why guns are not a human right or a civil
>right. There's absolutely no awareness or practice of it. If you had a
>personal belief about guns and civil rights, you wouldn't even consider
>denying civil rights to some Americans just because you disagreed with their
>politics.
I see nothing wrong with allowing people who claim something is NOT a personal
right to stand up for what they believe in and help them refuse to own any
firearms. If they're really sincere in their stand, then they wouldn't want to
own guns anyway.
(snip more garbage)
Noah Simoneaux
The man who thinks he can do without the world is indeed mistaken, but the man who thinks the world cannot do without him is mistaken even worse.-Francois, duc de La Rochefoucauld
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Lee Harrison
tc...@got.net wrote on 11/27/00 1:10 PM:
> In article <B647FC8B.D5B7%lee...@newsguy.com>, Lee Harrison
> <lee...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
>> That's interesting. You guys who scream about guns being a human right
>> would infringe the human rights of Democrats because most of them voted
>> against Bush?
>
> You are _very_ confused about what "rights" are.
The confusion is all yours.
You want to enjoy mythical rights but deny the same rights to others.
In reality, these are rights provided by your state. They're limited, as
you're probably aware. Federal law prohibits convicted felons from having
guns, for example.
And you don't legally own any guns, do you Timmyloon?
> I suggest you find a
> night school class that can fill in the gaps in your high school
> education.
Show me a USSC case that says your gun rights are anything but state level,
unless you belong to a well regulated militia which is federally recognized.
Just post those opinions right here.
_______________
UNITED STATES v. MILLER, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)
"Most if not all the States have adopted provisions touching the right to
keep and bear arms. Differences in the language employed in these have
naturally led to somewhat variant conclusions concerning the scope of the
right guaranteed. But none of them seem to afford any material support for
the challenged ruling of the court below."
Fulcanelli
> in article 3A228EB1...@intac.com, Panhead at panmy...@intac.com
> wrote on 11/27/00 10:41 AM:
>
> > Gene wrote:
> >>
> >> N9NWO wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Let's get gun stores to put up signs
> >>> saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> >>> business is not welcome here!"
> >>>
> >>> No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
> >>> Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> >>> cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> >>> supporter).
> >>>
> >>> Sore / Loserman 2000
> >>
It's nice when they show that their pro-gun viewpoints, purported to be
used for the protection of the populance, really aren't about the
populance at all, but merely the rights of certain viewpoints to have
power over - and thus the ability to cajole and threaten - under
viewpoints to their heart's content. Sound a bit like the people who
goosestep and wear swastikas on their clothing?
It blows the cover off the idea that the right-wing at all respects the
2nd Amendment, and shows them to, in fact, favor nothing more than the
disarming of all dissenting viewpoints, in the support of dominance and
tyranny over the same.
> >> So you're recommending that we deny them their right to keep and own
> >> firearms based on them exercising yet another right (the right to vote
> >> for whom they choose)?
> >
> > Not at all.
> > I believe he's just suggesting that the people who want to,
> > exercise their right to refuse service to anyone they want.
> > ....or is that serve refuse?
>
> That's interesting. You guys who scream about guns being a human right
> would infringe the human rights of Democrats because most of them voted
> against Bush?
>
> That's the best argument I've seen why guns are not a human right or a civil
> right. There's absolutely no awareness or practice of it. If you had a
> personal belief about guns and civil rights, you wouldn't even consider
> denying civil rights to some Americans just because you disagreed with their
> politics.
>
> It's never been a part of our society or the law, so why should you suddenly
> think that anybody has a human or civil right to have guns?
>
> The Lone Weasel <lonew...@justice.com>
> http://member.newsguy.com/~leehrsn/index.html
--
To email me, remove "NOSPAM" from my address.
Nick Hull
<Robert_Frenchu*REMOVE*@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Lee Harrison <lee...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
> >If you had a
> >personal belief about guns and civil rights, you wouldn't even consider
> >denying civil rights to some Americans just because you disagreed with their
> >politics.
>
> Oh come now Lee. I could very easily live with depriving both Clinton
> AND Gore of their civil rights for the rest of their miserable lives.
>
> It's called PRISON. And it's exactly where both of these traitorous
> pigs belong.
>
I am against prisons, even for such scum. Just deport them - 12 miles
(splash) ;)
--
Committees of Correspondence Web page:
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/
- free men own guns, slaves don't
Fulcanelli
> In article <B647FC8B.D5B7%lee...@newsguy.com>, Lee Harrison
> <lee...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
> > That's interesting. You guys who scream about guns being a human right
> > would infringe the human rights of Democrats because most of them voted
> > against Bush?
>
> You are _very_ confused about what "rights" are. I suggest you find a
> night school class that can fill in the gaps in your high school
> education.
The 2nd Amendment defends the right to keep and bear arms. If you steal a
person's rights based on political viewpoint, you are violating their
rights. It's interesting to note that, if you twist the law around enough
to punish any opinion which goes against the right-wing norm, or anything
which challenges your claims upon their accuracy, or asserts a different
way of solving a problem, you are indeed stepping on human rights in this
country.
>
>
> --Tim May
>
> --
> ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
> Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
> ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
> W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
> "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments.
--
Tim May
<sorcer-E-271...@ip-216-222-14-21.salmoninternet.com>,
sorc...@NOSPAM.mailcity.com (Fulcanelli) wrote:
> In article <tcmay-1D3C99....@news.got.net>, Tim May
> <tc...@got.net> wrote:
>
> > In article <B647FC8B.D5B7%lee...@newsguy.com>, Lee Harrison
> > <lee...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> >
> > > That's interesting. You guys who scream about guns being a human
> > > right
> > > would infringe the human rights of Democrats because most of them
> > > voted
> > > against Bush?
> >
> > You are _very_ confused about what "rights" are. I suggest you find a
> > night school class that can fill in the gaps in your high school
> > education.
>
> The 2nd Amendment defends the right to keep and bear arms. If you steal
> a
> person's rights based on political viewpoint, you are violating their
> rights.
You're still very confused.
You have a right to own a gun that cannot be taken away by government,
but you have no right to force others to sell you a gun.
Same argument, which should be well-known to any educated person, which
goes like this: "You have the right to say what you wish, but not to use
my printing press."
When you figure out how constitutional rights work, come back.
Lee Harrison
ra...@home.com wrote on 11/27/00 1:31 PM:
>> That's interesting. You guys who scream about guns being a human right
>
> And they are a human right
Nah, gun rights are generally provided by states. The Second Amendment
prohibits Congress from disarming a well regulated militia, basically the
National Guard and the Naval Militia.
>> would infringe the human rights of Democrats because most of them voted
>> against Bush?
>
> Just like we infringe on the rights of convicted criminals to legally have
> weapons because the criminals have lost the trust of society, the same holds
> true for the democrats. They (democrats) are not to be trusted.
Yeah, if having guns was a human right, depriving convicted felons - not all
criminals but mainly just convicted felons & misdemeanor domestic abusers -
of having firearms would be like depriving them of a right to free
expression, or freedom of religion, or due process.
And yet everybody knows that personal gun rights are all provided by some
states - not all - and federal law trumps state law.
And that's exactly why denying guns to convicted felons is not
unconstitutional - because there's not constitutional guarantee of gun
rights to individuals who don't belong to a well regulated militia.
Says so right in the militia amendment.
_______________
UNITED STATES v. MILLER, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)
"Most if not all the States have adopted provisions touching the right to
keep and bear arms. Differences in the language employed in these have
naturally led to somewhat variant conclusions concerning the scope of the
right guaranteed. But none of them seem to afford any material support for
the challenged ruling of the court below."
The Lone Weasel <lonew...@justice.com>
http://member.newsguy.com/~leehrsn/index.html
>> It's never been a part of our society or the law, so why should you
> suddenly
>> think that anybody has a human or civil right to have guns?
> But we do
Tim May
<lee...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> in article tcmay-1D3C99....@news.got.net, Tim May at
> tc...@got.net wrote on 11/27/00 1:10 PM:
>
> > In article <B647FC8B.D5B7%lee...@newsguy.com>, Lee Harrison
> > <lee...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> >
> >> That's interesting. You guys who scream about guns being a human
> >> right
> >> would infringe the human rights of Democrats because most of them
> >> voted
> >> against Bush?
> >
> > You are _very_ confused about what "rights" are.
>
> The confusion is all yours.
>
> You want to enjoy mythical rights but deny the same rights to others.
Asked and answered.
Your "right to own a gun" has nothing to do with a requirement another
gun owner sell you one.
> In reality, these are rights provided by your state. They're limited, as
> you're probably aware. Federal law prohibits convicted felons from
> having
> guns, for example.
>
> And you don't legally own any guns, do you Timmyloon?
I own many guns. Bought at gun shows, with no papers.
Wanna do something about it? Lots of folks like you need killing.
Fulcanelli
> > >If you had a
> > >personal belief about guns and civil rights, you wouldn't even consider
> > >denying civil rights to some Americans just because you disagreed
with their
> > >politics.
> >
> > Oh come now Lee. I could very easily live with depriving both Clinton
> > AND Gore of their civil rights for the rest of their miserable lives.
> >
> > It's called PRISON. And it's exactly where both of these traitorous
> > pigs belong.
>
> Probably so. Just don't forget the trial and due process.
Don't they always? Prejudice and assumption will do fine for the
right-wing. Who cares about proof? Who cares about evidence?
Fulcanelli
<ra...@home.com> wrote:
> Lee Harrison <lee...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
> news:B647FC8B.D5B7%lee...@newsguy.com...
> > That's interesting. You guys who scream about guns being a human right
>
> And they are a human right
>
> > would infringe the human rights of Democrats because most of them voted
> > against Bush?
>
> Just like we infringe on the rights of convicted criminals to legally have
> weapons because the criminals have lost the trust of society, the same holds
> true for the democrats. They (democrats) are not to be trusted.
Dana rejects human rights for viewpoints dissenting against the
right-wing. You agree with Dana, or you lose your rights!!!
Thanks for showing that you believe in human rights only for viewpoints in
agreement with yours, and throw out democratic rights for the rest. The
Fuerer would've been proud.
It's good the right-wingers print posts like this; It helps to show how
derangedly loony they really are!!!
> > It's never been a part of our society or the law, so why should you
> suddenly
> > think that anybody has a human or civil right to have guns?
> But we do
> >
> > Thanks for pointing that out, Pinhead.
> >
> > ("POINTING that out - PINHEAD!" Laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh!)
> >
> > The Lone Weasel <lonew...@justice.com>
> > http://member.newsguy.com/~leehrsn/index.html
> >
--
The Killgore Kid
syd wrote in message <3a22c517$0$12...@wodc7nh6.news.uu.net>...
>incidentally, I run a
>business and now I'm going to start getting rid of all the conservatives on
>the payroll.
But who will do the work then?
Tim May
Killgore Kid" <killg...@mypersonalemail.com> wrote:
Why does anyone have to work? Don't the liberals tell us that we can all
just go on welfare?
David L. Moffitt
> wrote on 11/27/00 10:41 AM:
>
> > Gene wrote:
> >>
> >> N9NWO wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Let's get gun stores to put up signs
> >>> saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> >>> business is not welcome here!"
> >>>
> >>> No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
> >>> Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> >>> cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> >>> supporter).
> >>>
> >>> Sore / Loserman 2000
> >>
> >> firearms based on them exercising yet another right (the right to vote
> >> for whom they choose)?
> >
> > Not at all.
> > I believe he's just suggesting that the people who want to,
> > exercise their right to refuse service to anyone they want.
> > ....or is that serve refuse?
>
> against Bush?
>
> personal belief about guns and civil rights, you wouldn't even consider
> denying civil rights to some Americans just because you disagreed with their
> politics.
>
> think that anybody has a human or civil right to have guns?
>
%%%% I see Tim's view of not selling a gun to a liberal as a free choice to not serve/sell to who he chooses. I would/do sell to
liberals and have gotten them hooked on shooting/ hunting/ and family/self defense. When I did this I no longer had a liberal
customer but, a new convert to conservatism because they saw the use of person right to bear arms and defend home and hearth. They
quickly then realize that gun control legislation affects only the law abiding and not the law breaker. A disarmed law abiding
citizen gets re-named to victim!
David Moffitt Lifetime NRA,GOA,JPFO,SAS,TFA Member and BASTARDS----and damn proud of it!
"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may
exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed." -Thomas Jefferson.
http://www.velek.com/bill/boycott/1.htm
David L. Moffitt
"syd" <sigm...@excite.com> wrote in message news:3a22c517$0$12...@wodc7nh6.news.uu.net...
> I'm armed, have many friends, willing to defend my way of life against you
> business and now I'm going to start getting rid of all the conservatives on
> Rush Dumbaugh. god this is gonna feel good!
%%%% How can you balance the internal conflict of being a gun owner and support someone who wants to confiscate all gun in civilian
hands?
David Moffitt Lifetime NRA,GOA,JPFO,SAS,TFA Member and BASTARDS----and damn proud of it!
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make
things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an
unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." -Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria.
http://www.velek.com/bill/boycott/1.htm
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> I'm armed, have many friends, willing to defend my way of life against you
> helicopter-spotting interbreeding assholes any day! incidentally, I run a
> business and now I'm going to start getting rid of all the conservatives on
> the payroll. I think I'll start with the guy in receiving that listens to
> Rush Dumbaugh. god this is gonna feel good!
When syd shoots himself in the foot...he sure is thorough about it!
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> N9NWO wrote:
> >
> > Let's get gun stores to put up signs
> > saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> > business is not welcome here!"
> >
> > No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
> > Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> > cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> > supporter).
> >
> > Sore / Loserman 2000
>
> So you're recommending that we deny them their right to keep and own
> firearms based on them exercising yet another right (the right to vote
No...based on their support for a man who opposes that right.
Obviously, if they support Gore, then they really don't give
a fuck about their 2nd amendment rights.
Let's give them a taste of what life would be like w/o 2nd Amendment.
> for whom they choose)? Weren't we arguing just a few days ago that even
> convicted felons could not have that right taken away without due
> process? Actually, if you were sane enough for people to take you
> seriously (thank God you're not) this would be the first step in a
> Nazi-style takeover.....disarming everyone who doesn't agree with you.
That's what Democrats want....so, let's GIVE IT TO THEM
>
> SIEG HEIL!!!!!
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> in article 3A228EB1...@intac.com, Panhead at panmy...@intac.com
> wrote on 11/27/00 10:41 AM:
>
> >>
> >> N9NWO wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Let's get gun stores to put up signs
> >>> saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> >>> business is not welcome here!"
> >>>
> >>> No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
> >>> Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> >>> cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> >>> supporter).
> >>>
> >>> Sore / Loserman 2000
> >>
> >> So you're recommending that we deny them their right to keep and own
> >> firearms based on them exercising yet another right (the right to vote
> >
> > Not at all.
> > I believe he's just suggesting that the people who want to,
> > exercise their right to refuse service to anyone they want.
> > ....or is that serve refuse?
>
> That's interesting. You guys who scream about guns being a human right
> would infringe the human rights of Democrats because most of them voted
> against Bush?
Yes..the GOVERNMENT may not infringe on that right.
IF they want a gun...they can get a lathe and make one.
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> > in article 3A228EB1...@intac.com, Panhead at panmy...@intac.com
> > wrote on 11/27/00 10:41 AM:
> >
> > > Gene wrote:
> > >>
> > >> N9NWO wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Let's get gun stores to put up signs
> > >>> saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> > >>> business is not welcome here!"
> > >>>
> > >>> No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
> > >>> Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> > >>> cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> > >>> supporter).
> > >>>
> > >>> Sore / Loserman 2000
> > >>
>
> used for the protection of the populance, really aren't about the
> populance at all, but merely the rights of certain viewpoints to have
> power over - and thus the ability to cajole and threaten - under
> viewpoints to their heart's content. Sound a bit like the people who
> goosestep and wear swastikas on their clothing?
>
> It blows the cover off the idea that the right-wing at all respects the
> 2nd Amendment, and shows them to, in fact, favor nothing more than the
> disarming of all dissenting viewpoints, in the support of dominance and
> tyranny over the same.
>
No...we're just demonstrating to you muddle-brained do-gooders
just exactly WHY the 2nd Amendment covers ALL PEOPLE.
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> in article 1EyU5.31564$15.77...@news1.rdc1.az.home.com, Dana at
> ra...@home.com wrote on 11/27/00 1:31 PM:
>
> >
>
BZZZZZZT! Wrong.
> prohibits Congress from disarming a well regulated militia, basically the
> National Guard and the Naval Militia.
Did you get that interpretation out of a CrackerJack box?
The 2nd Amendment prohibits Congress from disarming THE PEOPLE.
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> in article tcmay-1D3C99....@news.got.net, Tim May at
> tc...@got.net wrote on 11/27/00 1:10 PM:
>
> >> against Bush?
> >
>
> The confusion is all yours.
>
> You want to enjoy mythical rights but deny the same rights to others.
One can choose to conduct business with anybody they choose....or not.
As long as THE GOVERNMENT doesn't interfere, then there's no 2nd Amend. violation.
Aaron R. Kulkis
> > <lee...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> >
> > > That's interesting. You guys who scream about guns being a human right
> > > would infringe the human rights of Democrats because most of them voted
> > > against Bush?
> >
> > night school class that can fill in the gaps in your high school
> > education.
>
> The 2nd Amendment defends the right to keep and bear arms. If you steal a
> person's rights based on political viewpoint, you are violating their
The 2nd Amendment does not mention any requirement that others sell to you.
If you want to purchase a gun, then it might be advisable for you to
be on good relations with those who have them to sell.
[This is why the Demoncrook party coddles violent felons.]
> to punish any opinion which goes against the right-wing norm, or anything
> which challenges your claims upon their accuracy, or asserts a different
> way of solving a problem, you are indeed stepping on human rights in this
> country.
>
> >
> >
> > --Tim May
> >
> > --
> > ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
> > Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
> > ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
> > W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
> > "Cyphernomicon" | black markets, collapse of governments.
>
> --
> To email me, remove "NOSPAM" from my address.
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> > >If you had a
> > >personal belief about guns and civil rights, you wouldn't even consider
> > >denying civil rights to some Americans just because you disagreed with their
> > >politics.
> >
> > AND Gore of their civil rights for the rest of their miserable lives.
> >
> > It's called PRISON. And it's exactly where both of these traitorous
> > pigs belong.
>
> Probably so. Just don't forget the trial and due process.
"A fair trial and a proper hanging."
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> In article <3A22B18B...@zylay.com>, Gene <webm...@zylay.com> wrote:
>
> > > >If you had a
> > > >personal belief about guns and civil rights, you wouldn't even consider
> > > >denying civil rights to some Americans just because you disagreed
> with their
> > > >politics.
> > >
> > > Oh come now Lee. I could very easily live with depriving both Clinton
> > > AND Gore of their civil rights for the rest of their miserable lives.
> > >
> > > It's called PRISON. And it's exactly where both of these traitorous
> > > pigs belong.
> >
> > Probably so. Just don't forget the trial and due process.
>
> right-wing. Who cares about proof? Who cares about evidence?
Anita Hill doesn't.
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2000 01:38:40 GMT, N9NWO <21...@gte.net> wrote:
>
> >Let's get gun stores to put up signs
> >saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> >business is not welcome here!"
> >
> >No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
> >Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> >cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> >supporter).
>
> wanted and paid for? :)
YES!
>
> I'd let the Hagelin's Natural Law guys have some of the fun stuff,
> too, but they have to pay for theirs.
> Conal Fitzgerald
> co...@drunkenbard.com
> http://www.drunkenbard.com
Aaron R. Kulkis
>
> John Smith wrote:
> >
> > "Tim May" <tc...@got.net> wrote in message
> > news:tcmay-D02828....@news.got.net...
> > > In article <8te32tk8e5tgtmj3b...@4ax.com>, N9NWO
> > > <21...@gte.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Let's get gun stores to put up signs
> > > > saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> > > > business is not welcome here!"
> > > >
> > > > No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
> > > > Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> > > > cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> > > > supporter).
> > > >
> > >
> > > Furthermore, don't hire Demonrats, don't promote Demonrats, and don't do
> > > business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
> > >
> > > I will not hire a Democrat, knowingly. And if I find out they lied to
> > > me, I'll find a way to fire them.
> >
> > Not to worry, most democrats refuse to work anyway...
>
> 4Q, azo.
>
> Republicans . . . bigoted as ever.
How many Republicans are welfare-moochers?
>
> Cheers,
>
> -- Arne Langsetmo
Steve Lajoie
Fulcanelli <sorc...@NOSPAM.mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:sorcer-E-271...@ip-216-222-14-21.salmoninternet.com...
> > wrote on 11/27/00 10:41 AM:
> >
> > > Gene wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> Let's get gun stores to put up signs
> > >>> saying "If you voted for Gore, your
> > >>> business is not welcome here!"
> > >>>
> > >>> No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
> > >>> Leave them defenseless. (Like some
> > >>> cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
> > >>> supporter).
> > >>>
> > >>> Sore / Loserman 2000
> > >>
>
> used for the protection of the populance, really aren't about the
> populance at all, but merely the rights of certain viewpoints to have
> power over - and thus the ability to cajole and threaten - under
> viewpoints to their heart's content. Sound a bit like the people who
> goosestep and wear swastikas on their clothing?
Dude, get your own gun dealer license and sell guns to your own people.
GEEZUS KRIST! Are people of your politics so inept, so use to being
handed everything, that you expect your opponents to arm you against
them?
And if you are not willing to fight for your rights, as some of these guys
are, maybe you should just admit you're a gutless bag of wind willing
to roll over and shut up?
You really think the right wing military is going to defend your gutless
ass against their ideological bretheren?
Hello! History has shown that is a very stupid assumption! The indians
were told that the U.S. would protect them. They went along with it,
and were exterminated or put in concentration camps called "reservations".
> It blows the cover off the idea that the right-wing at all respects the
> 2nd Amendment,
How so? Get your own license and sell your own guns.
Again, you expect people who arm themselves against what
they perceive to be your tyranny (intentional or not, real or not)
to arm you too because you lack the will to do so?!
> and shows them to, in fact, favor nothing more than the
> disarming of all dissenting viewpoints, in the support of dominance and
> tyranny over the same.
No, you favor to disarm yourself.
Think about it, they are not disarming.
Now, want to give up your right to keep and bear arms?
Arne Langsetmo
>
> In article <3a22c517$0$12...@wodc7nh6.news.uu.net>, "syd"
> <sigm...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm armed, have many friends, willing to defend my way of life against
> > you
> > helicopter-spotting interbreeding assholes any day! incidentally, I run
> > a
> > business and now I'm going to start getting rid of all the conservatives
> > on
> > the payroll. I think I'll start with the guy in receiving that listens
> > to
> > Rush Dumbaugh. god this is gonna feel good!
>
> conservative and liberty-loving employees and the conservatives get rid
> of their liberal simp-wimp airy-fairy faggots and welfare breeders!
>
> Since there aren't a lot of liberal faggots and dumb Palm Beach Jews
> running businesses, I guess we know which way the war will go.
You might be surprised to find out exactly how many "liberal
faggots" and "dumb Palm Beach Jews" there are.
> Let the war begin.
I'm sure. "Onward White Aryan Christian Soldiers", on to
the battle of Armageddon, eh? I'm just waiting to see your
sorry ass locked up alongside of Timothy McVeigh's. . . .
Charlie
>In article <3A21D5B5...@mail.com>, Bill Bonde <std...@mail.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Tim May wrote:
>> >
>
>> > I will not hire a Democrat, knowingly. And if I find out they lied to
>> > me, I'll find a way to fire them.
>> >
>> Don't you really mean, fire at them?
>
>Probably so.
>
>Killing a welfare hoe is a good deed.
>
>--Tim May
So even when you paid for it, the ho wouldn't give up the booty?
Why am I not surprised.
Panhead
ablea...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> In article <8vugfs$8qk$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Billzhere <bil...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > In article <8vufrs$8e0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > ablea...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > > In article <3A22BA5E...@intac.com>,
> > > Panhead <panmy...@intac.com> wrote:
> > > > Brown Thumb wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Tim May wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Furthermore, don't hire Demonrats, don't promote Demonrats,
> and
> > > don't do
> > > > > > business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ummm, does this mean that someone who rapes, molests,
> > > > > beats, robs, etc a Democrat would be released to
> > > > > society if you were on the jury?
> > > >
> > > > Raping, molesting, beating, robbing, etc. a Democrat is not a
> > > > real crime.
> > > > Is it?
> > > > Raping, molesting, beating, robbing, etc. a human is.
> > >
> > > And you guys wonder why everyone stereotypes you as hateful
> lunatics.
You are not human?
> > > > Keeping those that are convicted of raping, molesting, beating,
> > > > robbing, etc. anybody should never have been released in the
> > > > first place.
> > > > Right?
> > > >
> > > > > If so, I'd be interested in
> > > > > knowing what it is that Democrats are doing that you're
> > > > > not doing
> > > >
> > > > Preventing the raping, molesting, beating, robbing, etc. humans.
> > > > from being prosecuted, AND releasing them after they were
> > > > convicted?
> > > >
> > > > >(especially if you also don't want any of us in
> > > > > the pro-gun camp, either!)
> > > >
> > > > If you are of the "pro gun camp" you are not a democrat.
> > >
> > > This is, of course, untrue.
This, of course, IS true.
If you voted smart one way or the other, you couldn't have voted
democratic.
> > > There are pro-gun rights Democrats, just like there are pro-gun
> > control
> > > Republicans. Which is why this partisan bullshit is so, so silly.
I agree that the two party system sucks big dog balls.
But to say that a democratic leadership is pro gun, well, that's
just absurd.
> > > > > Liberal in favor of the 2nd Amendment
> > > > > (I'd make that plural if I knew how....)
> > > >
> > > > You'd know how to make it plural if there were any.
> > >
> > > Um, I've been called a liberal by the likes of you, and I support a
> > > (general) right to self-defense and gun ownership. So there's your
> > > plural.
A "general" right to self defense and gun ownership?
How fascinating.
I have to wonder what that really means...to you.
> > > Now you explain why the most important gun control law of the last
> > > decade is named after a (Republican) former Reagan Administration
> > > official.
> > >
> > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > > Before you buy.
> > >
> > Could it have anything to do that the clinton administration saw it
> as a
> > media coup? Naw, that would be too easy!
>
> Duh! Of course they did! So what? The obvious point, for those unable
> to grasp it, is that the idea that gun control is a strictly partisan
> issue is ridiculous (as it is for nearly every issue). Brady put his
> name on that bill, and supported it, voluntarily - Clinton didn't do
> it.
Clinton didn't SUPPORT the Brady bill?
Surely, you must be snorting something very mind altering, Able.
>
> Oh, and it was a Democrat in Congress (John Dingell) who saved your
> sorry NRA asses from the strict gun control laws you deserved after
> Columbine.
Saved who from what?
Only a moron like you would think that after that one terrible
event took place, that that could have been prevented in the
first place if a "law" were put into place.
I bet you think that because of more goofy legislation presented
by the MAJORITY of demoncrats, this will never happen again?
You sicken me, ableamison.
Your thought process makes me want to barf.
Of course you forgot that what happened in Colombine already HAD
all laws broken to begin with.
Please do not have children.
You are not parent material.
Panhead
>
> ablea...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >Oh, and it was a Democrat in Congress (John Dingell) who saved your
> >sorry NRA asses from the strict gun control laws you deserved after
> >Columbine.
>
> you'll never know what that feels like.
Careful, Bob.
Ableamison will write us all telling you that he is not going to
respond to you...again.
Either that or say "Fuck you" ...again.
Allegro
>
> Since there aren't a lot of liberal faggots and dumb Palm Beach Jews
> running businesses, I guess we know which way the war will go.
>
> Let the war begin.
>
>
> --Tim May
>
How much are the bounties for the right-wing bigots? I hate to waste ammo
on ignorant white trash. There's got to be some financial rewards for
wasting bigots. It's also a public service. A dead bigot means less little
bigots in the future!
Lee Harrison
tc...@got.net wrote on 11/27/00 5:53 PM:
>> And you don't legally own any guns, do you Timmyloon?
>
> I own many guns. Bought at gun shows, with no papers.
Nah, you can't own guns illegally. Anybody could kick your ass and take all
your guns and there's nothing you could do about it.
Legally or otherwise.
> Wanna do something about it? Lots of folks like you need killing.
Step to the rear of the line, junior.
___________________
In Seattle, a Nazi Gets a TV Show
Five years after the radical right began to use the Internet to spread its
propaganda, the neo-Nazi World Church of the Creator has launched an effort
to reach people through an older medium: public access cable television.
Matt Hale, the publicity-hungry leader of the group, began showing a series
of programs entitled "The White Struggle" in the Seattle area at 11:30 p.m.
April 6 "as part of the World Church of the Creator零 drive to increase
membership." Programs in the series are to air weekly, followed by another
series, "White Revolution."
In the 1980s and early 1990s, many radical right groups used laws about
public access to cable TV to get racist programming on the air. Neo-Nazi Tom
Metzger, leader of White Aryan Resistance, led the charge in 1984, and by
1992 was showing his "Race and Reason" program in 62 cities in 21 states.
But in the latter part of the 1990s, such programming dropped off in favor
of Internet hate sites.
"Many will be offended by watching this show, but many will also be
pleased," Hale said of his new program. Although he bemoaned the late time
slot of the show, Hale was pleased to describe it as one of the most
controversial in the world.
http://www.splcenter.org/intelligenceproject/ip-index.html
Lee Harrison
tc...@got.net wrote on 11/27/00 5:38 PM:
> When you figure out how constitutional rights work, come back.
Just cite the USSC cases saying having guns is a human right, dumbass.
_______________
UNITED STATES v. MILLER, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)
"Most if not all the States have adopted provisions touching the right to
keep and bear arms. Differences in the language employed in these have
naturally led to somewhat variant conclusions concerning the scope of the
right guaranteed. But none of them seem to afford any material support for
the challenged ruling of the court below."
Lee Harrison
moff...@prodigy.net wrote on 11/27/00 7:05 PM:
>
> "Lee Harrison" <lee...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
> news:B647FC8B.D5B7%lee...@newsguy.com...
>> in article 3A228EB1...@intac.com, Panhead at panmy...@intac.com
>> wrote on 11/27/00 10:41 AM:
>>
>>> Gene wrote:
>>>>
>>>> N9NWO wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's get gun stores to put up signs
>>>>> saying "If you voted for Gore, your
>>>>> business is not welcome here!"
>>>>>
>>>>> No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
>>>>> Leave them defenseless. (Like some
>>>>> cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
>>>>> supporter).
>>>>>
>>>>> Sore / Loserman 2000
>>>>
>>>> So you're recommending that we deny them their right to keep and own
>>>> firearms based on them exercising yet another right (the right to vote
>>>> for whom they choose)?
>>>
>>> Not at all.
>>> I believe he's just suggesting that the people who want to,
>>> exercise their right to refuse service to anyone they want.
>>> ....or is that serve refuse?
>>
>> That's interesting. You guys who scream about guns being a human right
>> would infringe the human rights of Democrats because most of them voted
>> against Bush?
>>
>> That's the best argument I've seen why guns are not a human right or a civil
>> right. There's absolutely no awareness or practice of it. If you had a
>> personal belief about guns and civil rights, you wouldn't even consider
>> denying civil rights to some Americans just because you disagreed with their
>> politics.
>>
>> It's never been a part of our society or the law, so why should you suddenly
>> think that anybody has a human or civil right to have guns?
>>
>> Thanks for pointing that out, Pinhead.
>
> %%%% I see Tim's view of not selling a gun to a liberal as a free choice to
> not serve/sell to who he chooses. I would/do sell to
> liberals and have gotten them hooked on shooting/ hunting/ and family/self
> defense. When I did this I no longer had a liberal
> customer but, a new convert to conservatism
I'm very liberal and I like guns, Muppet. I also believe that tough gun
control is the best defense against gun violence.
Most gun owners feel the same way.
________________
May 25, 2000 New York Times
Gun Control a Women's Issue, Not a Mother's Issue
By MARJORIE CONNELLY
http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/052500poll-watch.html
While most men and women favor making gun control laws more strict, women
support stricter gun control by a much larger proportion. In a recent Gallup
Poll conducted for Women.com, 52 percent of men said the laws covering the
sale of firearms should be made more strict. Among women, that figure jumps
to 72 percent. Only a quarter of women said the laws should made less strict
or kept as they are now. Among men, 47 percent said gun control laws should
be made less strict or kept the same.
When questioned more specifically about handguns, 78 percent of women in the
latest New York Times/CBS poll said laws covering the sale of handguns
should be made stricter, compared with 62 percent of the men.
In the Times/CBS poll, large majorities of both men and women support a ban
on assault weapons and favor compelling gun manufacturers to install child
safety locks on handguns.
Even most gun owners support these measures, although they are less inclined
to say gun control laws need to be made more strict.
The Lone Weasel <lonew...@justice.com>
http://member.newsguy.com/~leehrsn/index.html
> because they saw the use of person
> right to bear arms and defend home and hearth. They
> quickly then realize that gun control legislation affects only the law abiding
> and not the law breaker. A disarmed law abiding
> citizen gets re-named to victim!
>
> David Moffitt Lifetime NRA,GOA,JPFO,SAS,TFA Member and BASTARDS----and damn
> proud of it!
>
Tim May
jher...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2000 13:00:12 -0800, Tim May <tc...@got.net> wrote:
>
> >Since there aren't a lot of liberal faggots and dumb Palm Beach Jews
> >running businesses, I guess we know which way the war will go.
>
> Clue-by-fours are not regarded as an appropriate rhetorical technique
> for the soc.culture.jewish* hierarchy.
I don't listen to people like you when I choose where to post. Nothing
you can do about it, either.
don
> > > >personal belief about guns and civil rights, you wouldn't even consider
> > > >denying civil rights to some Americans just because you disagreed
> with their
> > > >politics.
> > >
> > > AND Gore of their civil rights for the rest of their miserable lives.
> > >
> > > It's called PRISON. And it's exactly where both of these traitorous
> > > pigs belong.
> >
> > Probably so. Just don't forget the trial and due process.
>
> Don't they always? Prejudice and assumption will do fine for the
> right-wing. Who cares about proof? Who cares about evidence?
Let me see now. Which administration was it that did a sweep of urban
housing for guns without a warrant and doing no knock entries if
occupants demurred. Evidence, proof? Hmmmmmm.......?
d'geezer
--
"Wherever is found what is called a paternal government,
there is found state education. It has been discovered
that the best way to insure implicit obedience is to
commence tyranny in the nursery." -- Benjamin Disraeli
N9NWO
:>Let's get gun stores to put up signs
:>saying "If you voted for Gore, your
:>business is not welcome here!"
:>
:>No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
:>Leave them defenseless. (Like some
:>cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
:>supporter).
:>
:>
:>
:>Sore / Loserman 2000
: Is violence the only thing conservatives think is the answer to
:disagreements? Sorry, Adolf, Dems aren't the ones who have created riots. Dems
:aren't the ones who have threatened physical harm. Dems aren't the ones who
:chant "guns guns guns" at every turn.
: I suppose we should thank conservatives for not assassinating Bill Clinton.
Dems have always rioted when they did not get their way.
Look at the Chicago '68 convention. Or Watts. Or the
bombing of university buildings by ELF.
:"Government is my shepherd,
:I shall not think."
: --Dipshitpsalm
Sore / Loserman 2000
N9NWO
:>In article <8te32tk8e5tgtmj3b...@4ax.com>, N9NWO
:><21...@gte.net> wrote:
:>
:>> Let's get gun stores to put up signs
:>> saying "If you voted for Gore, your
:>> business is not welcome here!"
:>>
:>> No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
:>> Leave them defenseless. (Like some
:>> cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
:>> supporter).
:
We expect the Left to hold massive riots in the very
near future. It is just a matter of not equipping them.
The Left throws temper tantrum will they do not get
their way.
:>> Sore / Loserman 2000
:
:Yeah I saw all the signs and the Bush people acting like thugs.
:
:I hope you lose in the worst way. After you thought you won.
That is what we have hoped for you. Make you think
that you have won, then take it back at the last moment.
Look at the polls, over 60% (that includes a lot of Gore
supporters) want Gore to give it up.
:>Furthermore, don't hire Demonrats, don't promote Demonrats, and don't do
:>business with Demonrats. And vote against them on juries.
:>
:>I will not hire a Democrat, knowingly. And if I find out they lied to
:>me, I'll find a way to fire them.
:
:What business are you in, Tim? I'd love to see your crazy want ads.
:
:Who else would you refuse to hire?
Why would we want to hire people who are our
sworn enemies? We can not trust liberals.
Sore / Loserman 2000
N9NWO
:> > Let's get gun stores to put up signs
:> > saying "If you voted for Gore, your
:> > business is not welcome here!"
:> >
:> > No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
:> > Leave them defenseless. (Like some
:> > cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
:> > supporter).
:>
:> themselves??
:
:I'm sure they can afford an elevator ride to the top of a tall building.
:Jumping is free. :-)
Or they could just overdose on their favorite
recreational drug.
:
:Maybe they can't all afford a ticket out
:> of the country like Baldwin can! But they can afford a
:> gun. Just don't sell them a sniper rifle. It's usually
:> the left that snaps mentally, remember, and I can hear
:> them snapping all over the country as we speak.
:>
:> --
:> "It's not your vote that counts ... It's how your vote
:> is counted!"
:
N9NWO
:> Let's get gun stores to put up signs
:> saying "If you voted for Gore, your
:> business is not welcome here!"
:>
:> No guns for anyone who voted for Gore.
:> Leave them defenseless. (Like some
:> cop is going to take a bullet for a Gore
:> supporter).
:>
:
:So you're recommending that we deny them their right to keep and own
:firearms based on them exercising yet another right (the right to vote
:convicted felons could not have that right taken away without due
:process? Actually, if you were sane enough for people to take you
:seriously (thank God you're not) this would be the first step in a
:Nazi-style takeover.....disarming everyone who doesn't agree with you.
:SIEG HEIL!!!!!
Well, we do not have to sell them the rope to hang
us with, do we?