Firearms rally scheduled for Chambersburg's square

Mar 29, 2013 Full story: Chambersburg Public Opinion 11,004

Two local organizations are hosting a Second Amendment Freedom Rally on from noone to 2 p.m. April 6 on Courthouse Plaza in downtown Chambersburg.

Full Story

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6675 Sep 12, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Pretty sure that I stated on no less than THREE posts that I didn't assume what color you are because I really don't give a shit. But you can continue with that LIE if you feel you must.
And it is YOU who continues to dodge and deflect and throw out personal ad hominem attacks becasue you can't hold up your side of the argument, you f-ing loser. The only one playing games here is YOU.
You are lying. The proof is here:
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/chambersburg-...

Until you can explain how those posts mean something other than what they plainly say, your denials are just meaningless hot air.

Come on, AV - show a little integrity of character. Man up and be honest.

For a change.

LOL!

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6676 Sep 12, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Please point out the part of the 2nd-Amendment where the federal govt has the power to infringe on my right to protect myself with an effective weapon. I'm pretty sure is says that my right to do such "shall NOT be infringed".
Obviously you don't understand what 'infringed' means.

Obviously guns can be regulated without your right being infringed. The USSC has always said so.

Is it your position that everyone has the unlimited right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose?

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6678 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
You are lying. The proof is here:
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/chambersburg-...
Until you can explain how those posts mean something other than what they plainly say, your denials are just meaningless hot air.
Come on, AV - show a little integrity of character. Man up and be honest.
For a change.
LOL!
And here was the response: http://www.topix.com/forum/city/chambersburg-...

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6679 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
You are lying. The proof is here:
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/chambersburg-...
Until you can explain how those posts mean something other than what they plainly say, your denials are just meaningless hot air.
Come on, AV - show a little integrity of character. Man up and be honest.
For a change.
LOL!
And why are you still doding this?

Please point out the part of the 2nd-Amendment where the federal govt has the power to infringe on my right to protect myself with an effective weapon. I'm pretty sure is says that my right to do such "shall NOT be infringed".

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6680 Sep 12, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
The only thing you have "shoved" is your own head up your own ass. And the only thing that you have posted regarding Heller is the OPINION of ONE justice......NOT the entirety of the decision, so you just got caught in ANOTHER lie, ball-peen. Because as you are wont to repeat "you lie when you blink".
Scalia was writing for the majority. It was the majority opinion, not the opinion of ONE justice.

If you can't understand this simple fact about Supreme Court opinions, then you've just proven that you simply aren't intellectually equipped to speak intelligently on this issue.

I knew your opinions here are irrational and emotional. Thanks for proving that they're also based on complete ignorance.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6681 Sep 12, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
And here was the response: http://www.topix.com/forum/city/chambersburg-...
Sorry, there's no such post.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6682 Sep 12, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
And why are you still doding this?
Please point out the part of the 2nd-Amendment where the federal govt has the power to infringe on my right to protect myself with an effective weapon. I'm pretty sure is says that my right to do such "shall NOT be infringed".
Why don't you try reading what I actually post some time. I fully answered that tired, tedious question more than once. Here's the most recent, from 15 MINUTES AGO.
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Obviously you don't understand what 'infringed' means.
Obviously guns can be regulated without your right being infringed. The USSC has always said so.
Is it your position that everyone has the unlimited right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose?
You're asking a nonsensical question based on a false assumption. Your rights aren't being infringed by current law and I'm not proposing anything that would infringe on your rights.

Formulate a rational, reality-based question or move on. You're embarrassing yourself now.
Aphelion

Melbourne, FL

#6684 Sep 12, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
The only thing you have "shoved" is your own head up your own ass. And the only thing that you have posted regarding Heller is the OPINION of ONE justice......NOT the entirety of the decision, so you just got caught in ANOTHER lie, ball-peen. Because as you are wont to repeat "you lie when you blink".
Dan believes that his opinions are facts.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6685 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Why don't you try reading what I actually post some time. I fully answered that tired, tedious question more than once. Here's the most recent, from 15 MINUTES AGO.
<quoted text>
You're asking a nonsensical question based on a false assumption. Your rights aren't being infringed by current law and I'm not proposing anything that would infringe on your rights.
Formulate a rational, reality-based question or move on. You're embarrassing yourself now.
Any hurdle that one must jump over in order to exercise and right IS an infringement of that right, Danny Boy. And the SCOTUS has NOT always said so. Heller was the first 2nd-A case to come before it since the Miller decision.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6687 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Why don't you try reading what I actually post some time. I fully answered that tired, tedious question more than once. Here's the most recent, from 15 MINUTES AGO.
<quoted text>
You're asking a nonsensical question based on a false assumption. Your rights aren't being infringed by current law and I'm not proposing anything that would infringe on your rights.
Formulate a rational, reality-based question or move on. You're embarrassing yourself now.
ANY law that requires a background check, waiting period, limits the number of firearms one may purchase (such as VA's now defunct one-gun-a-month law), requiring permits to carry (a tax on a right), etc. IS an infringement of the 2nd-Amendment. All these type of laws do is discourage the law-abiding from exercising their rights while not doing a damn thing to criminals who shirk the law.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6688 Sep 12, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
I made no reference or inferrence to YOUR skin color. That was YOUR assumption.
In a quote you specifically attributed to me, you said, "Oh poor me. My skin is a different color. I can't make it on my own. I need the govt to take care of me. Oh boo hoo hoo."

How do I know you specifically attributed that quote to me? Because YOU SAID SO.
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong again, Danny Boy. I did not say all African Americans have been brainwashed. I said it was YOU who has been brainwashed.
Try again.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6689 Sep 12, 2013
Aphelion wrote:
<quoted text>
Dan believes that his opinions are facts.
Aphelion believes that his opinions are facts.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6690 Sep 12, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Any hurdle that one must jump over in order to exercise and right IS an infringement of that right, Danny Boy. And the SCOTUS has NOT always said so. Heller was the first 2nd-A case to come before it since the Miller decision.
Every time the SCOTUS has approved of laws regulating the sale, purchase, or ownership of guns it has, by definition, said that those laws are not an infringement on anyone's rights.

So why are you avoiding my question? Is it your position that everyone has the unlimited right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose?

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6691 Sep 12, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Infringe - to do something that does not obey or follow (a rule, law, etc.); defeat or frustrate; encroach
So basically, any law that puts up roadblocks or hurdles that one must jump over in order to exercise a right is an INFRINGEMENT.
Try again, moron.
That's your opinion. The SCOTUS disagrees and always has.

Is it your position that everyone has the unlimited right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose?

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6692 Sep 12, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
ANY law that requires a background check, waiting period, limits the number of firearms one may purchase (such as VA's now defunct one-gun-a-month law), requiring permits to carry (a tax on a right), etc. IS an infringement of the 2nd-Amendment. All these type of laws do is discourage the law-abiding from exercising their rights while not doing a damn thing to criminals who shirk the law.
So is it your position that everyone has the unlimited right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose?

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#6693 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
What an intelligent, logical, and rational argument.
You're not an unhinged extremist at all.
LOL!
I don't think he likes you, Danny Boy. He may be a bit harsh but the truth of the matter is.........YOU are the extremist here. Your message and the government infringements on individual rights that you endorse are far more detrimental to American freedom than a one man lynch mob. You and your ilk are a clear and present danger to the peace and safety of the American people. You see, the majority of us would rather die fighting to keep our individual rights and freedoms than give up one single iota of them just to give you leftist liberals a false sense of security. Try again, Danny Boy.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#6694 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Aphelion believes that his opinions are facts.
If that's the case, then he's emulating you.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6695 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Every time the SCOTUS has approved of laws regulating the sale, purchase, or ownership of guns it has, by definition, said that those laws are not an infringement on anyone's rights.
So why are you avoiding my question? Is it your position that everyone has the unlimited right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose?
Not all laws are put through a SCOTUS review you idiot. Miller was passed which was in BLATANT opposition to the 2nd-Amendment. It claimed that short-barrelled shotguns had no militia purpose and thus could be regulated by the fed govt. When in fact, short-barreled shotgun did has a militia purpose. They were used in WWI and called "trench guns". The GCA's of 1968 and 1986, the AWB....none for these were brought before the SCOTUS for approval. Heller was the first case in DECADES to be brought before the court.

And I have addressed your question. I said the Scalia was WRONG in his OPINION. As a law-abiding citizen, in complying with Scalia, as long as I don't carry my gun into a govt building or other "sensitive" locations such as a school, I should be good to go, right?

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6696 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
In a quote you specifically attributed to me, you said, "Oh poor me. My skin is a different color. I can't make it on my own. I need the govt to take care of me. Oh boo hoo hoo."
How do I know you specifically attributed that quote to me? Because YOU SAID SO.
<quoted text>
Try again.
And I stand by that statement. It is YOU who is brainwashed into believing that minorities can't make it on their own without a leg up from the govt. I NEVER said that you ARE a minority.

Trya again....again.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6697 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
So is it your position that everyone has the unlimited right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose?
If it is a weapon in use by the common ground soldier today, and it used for my own self-defense or the defense of the innocent, or any other LAWFUL purpose....YOUR DAMN RIGHT! Because that is EXACTLY what the 2nd Amendment means.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 6 min sonicfilter 1,144,526
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 7 min Agents of Corruption 128,000
'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 8 min Calvin_Coolish 163,281
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 9 min Joe Biden 180,984
New fear: What happens in Ferguson if no charges? 21 min Cat74 3,153
Executive orders a courageous way to protect pe... 23 min wild child 18
Republicans closing in on ninth Senate pickup i... 24 min tha Professor 3
Immigrants Social Security eligible in Obama plan 1 hr RustyS 23
Obama's Amnesty Action Fuels Flood of Immigrati... 3 hr Jeff Brightone 9
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Released from Hospital Afte... 3 hr Jeff Brightone 1
Russian Navy successfully tests new missile 3 hr Jeff Brightone 1
Immigrants' chances tied to their state's polices 3 hr Jeff Brightone 1

US News People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE