 |
|
 PoliticsForum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics. All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc.. As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself. Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!! *"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned." Non ti è possibile inserire messaggi in questo forum. Il livello minimo di sottoscrizione per linvio dei messaggi è {0}. Modalità: Chiunque può inviare messaggi
3. Marzo 2010, 22:10:29  I think people should be free to own nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, too. There will be a few irresponsible owners, but far more will be responsible.  3. Marzo 2010, 23:18:38 Argomento: Re: Pedro Martínez: there is no responsible use for a private citizen to have a nuclear weapon, there are multiple responsible uses for guns however, so your comment is apples to oranges 3. Marzo 2010, 23:46:57 Argomento: Re: Vikings: LOL. One of the amendments to your constitution actually provides that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. It does not specify what arms, so it applies to all weapons, just like the word “people” applies to all the people within the jurisdiction of the constitution. So I don't understand your comment. By the way, I'm not trying to sound intelligent here, so I don't have to ask for help with the big words. 4. Marzo 2010, 02:33:32 Argomento: Re: Pedro Martínez: The problem with people that make ridiculous claims such as this is that they look at what the constitution says and make a general statement like yours, what they fail to overlook is that is such a thing as "original intent", nuclear weapons are obviously not what the original intent had in mind, in fact the original intent was for the people to protect them selves from the governments and a nuclear weapon would negate that purpose 4. Marzo 2010, 02:52:42 Argomento: Re: Vikings: You can't be serious there. You want to have your courts rule according to and people abide by the original intent of an instrument written in the 18th century? 4. Marzo 2010, 03:34:38 Argomento: Re: Modificato da Vikings (4. Marzo 2010, 03:35:07) Pedro Martínez: absolutely!!!, the constitution was set up to protect the people from the tyranny of the government, but it has been perverted to the point that we are now at the mercy of the tyrannic government. The constitution is all about FREEDOM and that cannot be outdated 4. Marzo 2010, 03:36:33 Argomento: Re: Vikings: by the way, how did that gun controll work out for Germany? 4. Marzo 2010, 00:46:38 Argomento: Re: Pedro Martínez: One of my relatives got concerned I know how to make thermite and the plastic version of it... Went on about terrotists and all.. I admit I like fire.. love a bonfire. But I have respect for what it is. |
Data e ora
Amici in linea
Forum preferiti
Gruppi
Consiglio del giorno
|
|
Moderatore: 
Copyright © 2002 - 2024 Filip Rachunek, all rights reserved. Torna all'inizio |