When your only tool is a GE M134 Minigun, every problem looks like confetti Larry Pratt, the "executive director emeritus" of Gun Owners of America (sorry we missed your retirement party!), issued another of his periodic calls for Americans to prepare to start shooting their constitutional leaders to preserve the Constitution, as the Constitution calls for in Larry Pratt's very fertile if singleminded imagination. Gun Owners of America, you'll recall, is the hardcore Second Amendment-lovin' group for people who think the NRA has gotten too liberal. And Larry Pratt is a guy who knows how to protect the Constitution, even from
I have a cousin who liked to post those 'by ballot or bullet' memes on FB all the time. When I asked if he really meant to start shooting people who disagree with him, he stopped. I'm not sure if that makes him a thoughtless dumbass or a deranged psychopath who is learning better kill strategy.
Also, there is no more chance of passing their "except for those icky people" amendments than there is of passing an amendment repealing or modifying the second (or reversing Citizens United). Since the failure of the ERA, new amendments just haven't gotten traction.
If these guys want to prove that their polite conversations via the 2nd amendment is the best way to go, I suggest that they hold a demonstration of such...using each other.
That way the rest of us can safely judge if that's the sort of thing America needs.
It's sort of standard for them not to get traction. After the first ten in one fell swoop back in 1791, we've only had 17 take hold in the intervening 224 years. That's one every 13 years.
The 20th century was actually a good one for amendments, with 11 passed, although one of them canceled out the previous one. Between 1791 and 1909 there had been only 5 passed, and three of those were in a narrow window of 1865-1869.
It's the only Commandment with footnotes.
Gun Owners of America = Terrorists
I have a few things to Zeon the matter.
Let your geek flag fly!
Quite a few people are asking that exact question.
I hope she makes it back to Metaluna with Jim Webb.
I have a cousin who liked to post those 'by ballot or bullet' memes on FB all the time. When I asked if he really meant to start shooting people who disagree with him, he stopped. I'm not sure if that makes him a thoughtless dumbass or a deranged psychopath who is learning better kill strategy.
accommodate my beliefs !!!
http://s33.postimg.org/5vwq...
That's at least a six-head.
That's not what they have "been sort of taught".
I'm all for free speech, but this crap is downright reprehensible.
Also, there is no more chance of passing their "except for those icky people" amendments than there is of passing an amendment repealing or modifying the second (or reversing Citizens United). Since the failure of the ERA, new amendments just haven't gotten traction.
If these guys want to prove that their polite conversations via the 2nd amendment is the best way to go, I suggest that they hold a demonstration of such...using each other.
That way the rest of us can safely judge if that's the sort of thing America needs.
I'd love it all the people breaking this one were in jail instead of all the marijuana smokers.
They especially hate the first one that allows people to not be christers and to speak their minds, even about not agreeing with christers.
And they're not too keen on the 4th, 5th and 6th ones, either.
It's sort of standard for them not to get traction. After the first ten in one fell swoop back in 1791, we've only had 17 take hold in the intervening 224 years. That's one every 13 years.
The 20th century was actually a good one for amendments, with 11 passed, although one of them canceled out the previous one. Between 1791 and 1909 there had been only 5 passed, and three of those were in a narrow window of 1865-1869.