Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews

Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews (1682044)	Home · Maps · About

Home > OTChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

[1 2 3]

< Previous Page

Page 2 of 3

Next Page >

(1682216)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by Train Dude* on Thu Dec 12 19:43:49 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by ntrainride on Thu Dec 12 18:59:05 2019.* Truer words were never spoken. I remember then Mad Magazine did an issue based on a political assassination with an ice pick.
Post a New Response

(1682231)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by Dave* on Thu Dec 12 21:23:04 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by https://salaamallah.com/ on Thu Dec 12 16:58:40 2019.* What are you mumbling on about this time?
Post a New Response

(1682232)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by Dave* on Thu Dec 12 21:23:31 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Dec 12 18:54:06 2019.* LOL!!
Post a New Response

(1682233)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by https://salaamallah.com/* on Thu Dec 12 21:33:18 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by Dave on Thu Dec 12 21:23:04 2019.* What are you mumbling on about this time?
Post a New Response

(1682239)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by https://salaamallah.com/ on Thu Dec 12 22:56:53 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by https://salaamallah.com/ on Thu Dec 12 21:33:18 2019. HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA Dave
Post a New Response

(1682242)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by BILLBKLYN* on Thu Dec 12 23:20:41 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by AlM on Thu Dec 12 12:04:53 2019.* Who gets to decide? One man's opinion shouldn't. The Heller reference has been beat to death already.
Post a New Response

(1682243)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by BILLBKLYN* on Thu Dec 12 23:22:06 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Dec 12 07:51:16 2019.* You tell 'im!!
Post a New Response

(1682245)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by BILLBKLYN* on Thu Dec 12 23:23:12 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by chicagomotorman on Thu Dec 12 08:28:24 2019.* Agree!
Post a New Response

(1682246)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by BILLBKLYN* on Thu Dec 12 23:23:29 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Dec 12 07:30:45 2019.* Yep!
Post a New Response

(1682247)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by BILLBKLYN* on Thu Dec 12 23:25:40 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by AlM on Thu Dec 12 15:44:36 2019.* Lo@lm!
Post a New Response

(1682254)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by AlM* on Fri Dec 13 04:29:58 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by BILLBKLYN on Thu Dec 12 23:20:41 2019.* Nine people get to decide. And Heller is the current best evidence of what they think.
Post a New Response

(1682257)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by BILLBKLYN* on Fri Dec 13 07:02:29 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by AlM on Fri Dec 13 04:29:58 2019.* But they are merely humans!
Post a New Response

(1682259)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by AlM* on Fri Dec 13 08:16:41 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by BILLBKLYN on Fri Dec 13 07:02:29 2019.* Well, yeah. Our Constitution calls for humans to make the decisions.
Post a New Response

(1682260)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by BILLBKLYN* on Fri Dec 13 08:19:27 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by AlM on Fri Dec 13 08:16:41 2019.* Then it should be the citizenry doing it.
Post a New Response

(1682262)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by AlM* on Fri Dec 13 08:22:47 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by BILLBKLYN on Fri Dec 13 08:19:27 2019.* Fine. Drum up the support for a Constitutional Amendment calling for a national plebiscite on gun control. You were the one who brought up the Constitution, not me.
Post a New Response

(1682267)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by BILLBKLYN* on Fri Dec 13 09:17:40 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by AlM on Fri Dec 13 08:22:47 2019.* Bottom line is, gun control is unconstitutional
Post a New Response

(1682270)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by mtk52983* on Fri Dec 13 09:28:02 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by BILLBKLYN on Fri Dec 13 09:17:40 2019.* Some forms of arms are not protected. I don't think the framers intended for anti-aircraft missiles to be possessed by citizens. The First Amendment also speaks in absolutes yet there are recognized limits. That being said, all of the proposals I have seen from bingbong and other leftists on OTChat do not pass constitutional muster.
Post a New Response

(1682271)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by 3-9* on Fri Dec 13 09:32:33 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by chicagomotorman on Thu Dec 12 08:28:24 2019.* "All lives matter."
Post a New Response

(1682273)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by AlM* on Fri Dec 13 09:39:18 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by mtk52983 on Fri Dec 13 09:28:02 2019.* That being said, all of the proposals I have seen from bingbong and other leftists on OTChat do not pass constitutional muster. Agreed. But the Supreme Court has never objected to: - Training requirements - Criminal background checks - Registration of weapons - Rigid regulation of arms dealers Further, none of these infringes on the right to bear arms.
Post a New Response

(1682274)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by AlM* on Fri Dec 13 09:40:06 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by BILLBKLYN on Fri Dec 13 09:17:40 2019.* Not until and unless Justice Roberts + 4 say so.
Post a New Response

(1682276)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by bingbong* on Fri Dec 13 10:20:04 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by BILLBKLYN on Fri Dec 13 09:17:40 2019.* No, it isn't. In papers composed by the founders as they created the Constitution, the intent to strongly regulate this "right" is made quite clear. Gun regulations were among the first laws passed by the first Congress. They required registration and competency training. There was a public list of gun owners. Nothing unconstitutional about any of it.
Post a New Response

(1682277)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by Olog-hai* on Fri Dec 13 10:21:17 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by AlM on Fri Dec 13 08:22:47 2019.* Stop trying to hijack the thread. And no, a plebiscite or referendum is not one of the ways to amend the Constitution. Shows how unfamiliar you are with it.
Post a New Response

(1682278)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by Olog-hai* on Fri Dec 13 10:22:31 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by BILLBKLYN on Fri Dec 13 09:17:40 2019.* Exactly. And you can't create a constitutional amendment by plebiscite; even if you could, the Second Amendment would never be repealed by the people, but soundly reaffirmed.
Post a New Response

(1682279)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by mtk52983* on Fri Dec 13 10:30:42 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by AlM on Fri Dec 13 09:39:18 2019.* Though today, on the third anniversary of her husband's passing, maybe I should have refrained from calling out bingbong specifically.
Post a New Response

(1682280)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by AlM* on Fri Dec 13 10:32:35 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by mtk52983 on Fri Dec 13 10:30:42 2019.* Sigh. A great guy!
Post a New Response

(1682281)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by BILLBKLYN* on Fri Dec 13 10:37:21 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by mtk52983 on Fri Dec 13 09:28:02 2019.* But we will never know, because aircraft and modern ammo and firearms when I even thought of as possible at that time.
Post a New Response

(1682282)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by BILLBKLYN* on Fri Dec 13 10:37:53 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by AlM on Fri Dec 13 09:40:06 2019.* Because they happen to agree with me it shouldn't make them the end-all-be-all either.
Post a New Response

(1682283)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by BILLBKLYN* on Fri Dec 13 10:39:00 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by bingbong on Fri Dec 13 10:20:04 2019.* Sorry, but you're wrong about it not being unconstitutional.
Post a New Response

(1682284)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by AlM* on Fri Dec 13 10:46:11 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by BILLBKLYN on Fri Dec 13 10:37:21 2019.* Cannons existed. Do you contend that private individuals were permitted to have working models?
Post a New Response

(1682285)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by AlM* on Fri Dec 13 10:47:42 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by BILLBKLYN on Fri Dec 13 10:37:53 2019.* OK, so you don't like the US Constitution as it is written. That puts you in the same league as those who don't like its Electoral College provision. That's why there is an amendment procedure.
Post a New Response

(1682294)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by Orange Blossom Special* on Fri Dec 13 11:16:35 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Dec 12 18:54:06 2019.* It's Pat, not Patti.
Post a New Response

(1682296)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by Orange Blossom Special* on Fri Dec 13 11:17:33 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by Dave on Thu Dec 12 16:16:39 2019.* Defaming Liberals is a narrow carveout by the Supreme Court made in 2022 when Trump replaces the the last of the libs.
Post a New Response

(1682299)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by bingbong* on Fri Dec 13 11:34:26 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by BILLBKLYN on Fri Dec 13 10:39:00 2019.* If you read the actual text, you'd see this ancient language which actually pertains to police forces and state militias (a/k/a National Guard). In the eighteenth century those were comprised of ordinary citizens, raised as necessary, not paid specialists. This was pushed for by slave holders, who wanted to be able to contain slave escapes quickly and most importantly cheaply. (This occurred in rural areas, not in population centers) We haven't had slaves anywhere in America for over a hundred years now. Those parameters and others are TOTALLY constitutional. Get over it.
Post a New Response

(1682303)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by Train Dude* on Fri Dec 13 11:48:15 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by bingbong on Fri Dec 13 10:20:04 2019.* You've been told numerous times, here, that your interpretation of that passage in the 2nd Amendment is wrong. Read and learn.
Post a New Response

(1682309)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by Spider-Pig* on Fri Dec 13 12:35:29 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by bingbong on Fri Dec 13 11:34:26 2019.* The prefatory clause explains the motivation for enacting the amendment, for the benefit of future generations who might be confused as to the amendment's purpose. It does not constrain the language of the operative clause. The second amendment had little, if anything, to do with slavery.
Post a New Response

(1682310)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by Spider-Pig* on Fri Dec 13 12:41:25 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by Olog-hai on Fri Dec 13 10:21:17 2019.* He said "Drum up the support for a Constitutional Amendment calling for a national plebiscite on gun control. " Learn to read things other than the Bible and the Soviet Constitution.
Post a New Response

(1682313)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by bingbong* on Fri Dec 13 12:44:24 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Dec 13 12:35:29 2019.* Au contraire. It was pushed for by the south. The population centers representatives in the North wanted local control of arms, so they could be controlled / banned around towns and cities.
Post a New Response

(1682314)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by bingbong* on Fri Dec 13 12:44:58 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by Train Dude on Fri Dec 13 11:48:15 2019.* And none of you GCMs are expert.
Post a New Response

(1682317)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by JayZeeBMT* on Fri Dec 13 12:49:59 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Dec 12 15:35:41 2019.* Why haven't you admonished anyone else who has continued to discuss guns in this thread, to start a new thread, too?
Post a New Response

(1682318)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by mtk52983* on Fri Dec 13 12:54:20 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Dec 13 12:35:29 2019.* Though that begs the question about what effect to give the operative clause if the basis for the prefatory clause is no longer present. Personally, I believe that Justice Scalia was correct in Heller regarding the scope of the Second Amendment. The problem with cases dealing with the Second Amendment is that you often have equally legit competing interests (such as right to keep and bear arms vs. potential of domestic violence) as compared to similar absolutes in the First Amendment where the equities clearly tilt in favor of one side. While we can (almost) all agree regarding those convicted of domestic violence crimes, what about those that were charged and pled to a lesser charge that isn't domestic violence? What about those that were not charged with a domestic violence crime but could lead to one (I am thinking about alcohol related offenses)? Turning to another point, what about those laws that don't prevent anybody from exercising their right to keep and bear arms, but make the process or ownership onerous? For example, everybody is allowed to own a firearm, but you can't transport a loaded firearm (see what NYC tried), you have to carry $10 Million insurance, etc. or the process requires you to publish that you are looking to obtain a license to possess a handgun and if even one person raises an objection you are denied without providing you any due process to determine the accuracy of the objection.
Post a New Response

(1682321)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by Spider-Pig* on Fri Dec 13 13:04:24 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by JayZeeBMT on Fri Dec 13 12:49:59 2019.* Because it takes one person to hijack a thread.
Post a New Response

(1682327)	view threaded
Am I Still Being Paranoid? (Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews)
Posted by Mitch45* on Fri Dec 13 13:18:13 2019, in response to Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by Dave on Thu Dec 12 07:19:05 2019.* There was an asshole poster here some time back who accused me of being paranoid for believing that anti-Semitism was on the rise everywhere. Wonder what he is thinking now.
Post a New Response

(1682329)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by AlM* on Fri Dec 13 13:24:00 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by mtk52983 on Fri Dec 13 12:54:20 2019.* Turning to another point, what about those laws that don't prevent anybody from exercising their right to keep and bear arms, but make the process or ownership onerous? For example, everybody is allowed to own a firearm, but you can't transport a loaded firearm (see what NYC tried), you have to carry $10 Million insurance, etc. or the process requires you to publish that you are looking to obtain a license to possess a handgun and if even one person raises an objection you are denied without providing you any due process to determine the accuracy of the objection. I grant you that those kinds of restrictions are unlikely to pass muster. Canada has none of these restrictions, and yet they have a non-gun murder rate comparable to the US, and a gun-murder rate one seventh that of the US. So it's not as though Canadians are intrinsically more peaceful people.
Post a New Response

(1682330)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by bingbong* on Fri Dec 13 13:25:03 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by mtk52983 on Fri Dec 13 12:54:20 2019.* This falls into the scope of background checks, which need to be wider in scope and modernized so as to be much more accurate than they are currently. Citizenship, mental health history, arrest/criminal (involving violence only) records must be included. This would ensure that plea bargain recipients are kept from holding firearms. Can't do much WRT nonviolent arrests/convictions, nor should we. Mandating character references like they do in Canada is also a good idea that should be considered. Disputes can be investigated further by the prospective buyer. I'm totally in favor of strict transport laws nationally, and a ban on those to my mind is better. Heller was about protecting one’s home, not flying cross country to shoot guns. I think every gun owner should carry $10 million liability insurance, and be held completely liable for what happens with their firearms. That includes potential end result(s) of its theft.
Post a New Response

(1682331)	view threaded
Re: Am I Still Being Paranoid? (Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews)
Posted by AlM on Fri Dec 13 13:27:04 2019, in response to Am I Still Being Paranoid? (Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews), posted by Mitch45 on Fri Dec 13 13:18:13 2019. I recall you making a much stronger statement than "anti-Semitism is on the rise everywhere." You are probably paranoid, but yes, anti-Semitism is on the rise in much of the world, including the United States.
Post a New Response

(1682332)	view threaded
Re: Am I Still Being Paranoid? (Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews)
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Dec 13 13:28:16 2019, in response to Am I Still Being Paranoid? (Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews), posted by Mitch45 on Fri Dec 13 13:18:13 2019. No, it isn't because you believed that antisemitism was on the rise. It's because you were being paranoid.
Post a New Response

(1682333)	view threaded
Re: Am I Still Being Paranoid? (Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews)
Posted by Orange Blossom Special on Fri Dec 13 13:28:52 2019, in response to Am I Still Being Paranoid? (Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews), posted by Mitch45 on Fri Dec 13 13:18:13 2019. From experience, as I practice battling on here for sport, they're thinking one or two things. A) They still think so (which I believe to be the likely scenario from what I still see); or B) They re-phrase and modify their statement to mean something that in no way reflects the post you're referring to, so they can pretend they were no wrong, meanwhile, still combining options B with A. C) Which means, if you choose B, you really already choose all of the above.
Post a New Response

(1682335)	view threaded
Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews
Posted by Orange Blossom Special* on Fri Dec 13 13:29:16 2019, in response to Re: Onlookers at Scene of JC Terror Attack Blame the Jews, posted by JayZeeBMT on Thu Dec 12 16:10:04 2019.* That type of post requires an alibi.
Post a New Response

(1682340)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by mtk52983* on Fri Dec 13 13:35:06 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by bingbong on Fri Dec 13 13:25:03 2019.* So you want to make a constitutional right more onerous than owning an automobile, which you have no legal right to, got it!
Post a New Response

(1682341)	view threaded
Re: The Constitution of the United States of America
Posted by Spider-Pig* on Fri Dec 13 13:37:38 2019, in response to Re: The Constitution of the United States of America, posted by bingbong on Fri Dec 13 13:25:03 2019.* Citizenship, Mental health history, arrest history (not ending in conviction or equivalent finding) should not be included. As for plea bargains, there is no reason why that shouldn't be treated the same as conviction after trial. There also should be no requirement for character references. That's the worst bullshit ever. What about when people move? What if the gun range in the other part of the country is an award-winning range? What about hunting different animals indigenous to different areas? SMH.
Post a New Response

[1 2 3]
< Previous Page	Page 2 of 3	Next Page >

[ Return to the Message Index ]