Lessnt wrote:WHatcha gonna do bout that then?
Merely hope that you don't don't pose too much of a danger to yourself and others.
Advertisement

by Calldar » Sat Sep 24, 2011 1:13 am
Lessnt wrote:WHatcha gonna do bout that then?

by Des-Bal » Sat Sep 24, 2011 1:17 am
Lessnt wrote:Uh-huh.
WHatcha gonna do bout that then?
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos

by Des-Bal » Sat Sep 24, 2011 1:20 am
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos

by Des-Bal » Sat Sep 24, 2011 1:22 am
Lessnt wrote:Courts are losing legitimacy.
Many unconsitutional things continue to happen.
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos

by Calldar » Sat Sep 24, 2011 1:25 am

by Des-Bal » Sat Sep 24, 2011 1:27 am
Calldar wrote:
You may want to read this. http://reference.pafoa.org/statutes/PA/ ... -firearms/
Pay specific attention to article A.1, section C, paragraph 4.
Cekoviu wrote:DES-BAL: Introverted, blunt, focused, utilitarian. Hard to read; not verbose online or likely in real life. Places little emphasis on interpersonal relationships, particularly with online strangers for whom the investment would outweigh the returns.
Desired perception: Logical, intellectual
Public perception: Neutral-positive - blunt, cold, logical, skilled at debating
Mindset: Logos

by Lessnt » Sat Sep 24, 2011 1:36 am
Des-Bal wrote:Calldar wrote:
You may want to read this. http://reference.pafoa.org/statutes/PA/ ... -firearms/
Pay specific attention to article A.1, section C, paragraph 4.
No see if he doesn't know the law it can't hut him.

by Calldar » Sat Sep 24, 2011 1:39 am
Lessnt wrote:And you see how it is unconsitutional?
No one is saying unconsitutional laws do not exist.
You all have just gotten use to them.

by Lessnt » Sat Sep 24, 2011 1:40 am
Calldar wrote:Lessnt wrote:And you see how it is unconsitutional?
No one is saying unconsitutional laws do not exist.
You all have just gotten use to them.
"A person who has been adjudicated as an incompetent or who has been involuntarily committed to a mental institution"
That means "stupid people" and "crazy people" should not own guns. Which they shouldn't.
You most certainly belong to the first group, but I wouldn't totally rule out the 2nd group either. If somebody is incapable of using a firearm responsibly then they have no business owning one.

by Calldar » Sat Sep 24, 2011 1:42 am
Lessnt wrote:That is unconsitutional in my opinion.

by Calldar » Sat Sep 24, 2011 1:45 am
Lessnt wrote:no I did not say convicted felon.

by Calldar » Sat Sep 24, 2011 1:47 am

by Calldar » Sat Sep 24, 2011 1:54 am
As passed by the Congress:
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.

by Lessnt » Sat Sep 24, 2011 1:58 am
Calldar wrote:Lessnt wrote:It is.
No, it is not.As passed by the Congress:
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.
A person who is incapable of rational though, who has a mental illness, or poses a danger to themselves or others can not belong to the United States military, the National Guard or a citizens militia.

by Calldar » Sat Sep 24, 2011 1:59 am
Lessnt wrote:Sure they can.

by Calldar » Sat Sep 24, 2011 2:04 am

by Calldar » Sat Sep 24, 2011 2:07 am
Lessnt wrote:Calldar wrote:
...the hell does that have to do with anything?
Not to mention that some mental illnesses may even have their roots in genetics, or simple neurocognitive screw ups.
Simple simple.
You cannot stop mentally ill people from hiding mental illness.
SO>>>>>>> there have been mentally ill people who served in the militia.military.national guard.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Bombadil, Eskos, Eternal Algerstonia, Floofybit, Honghai, Old Temecula, Senkaku, The Jamesian Republic, Trump Almighty, Washington Resistance Army, Washington-Columbia, Yasuragi
Advertisement