Firearms rally scheduled for Chambersburg's square

Mar 29, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Chambersburg Public Opinion

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.

Comments
5,981 - 6,000 of 11,003 Comments Last updated Apr 3, 2014

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6633
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
^This^ is what happens when you marinate your brain in bullshit by listening to NPR radio and watching CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, etc. all day -
^^^^^^^^^^ this is what happens to douchephags that have their ears pressed up to the AM radio listening to draft dodging junkies all day.
Punching for Justice

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6634
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Federal gun laws are illegal and unconstitutional. You can nullify laws that are illegally passed by the feds.

Bearing arms is a right and the government can't take it from you.

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6635
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Punching for Justice wrote:
Federal gun laws are illegal and unconstitutional. You can nullify laws that are illegally passed by the feds.
Bearing arms is a right and the government can't take it from you.
Unfortunately the US Supreme Court doesn't agree with you.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6636
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

1

Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Unfortunately the US Supreme Court doesn't agree with you.
Another lie. The supreme court has ruled that the right to keep and bear arms IS AN INDIVIDUAL RIGHT that the government is PROHIBITED from infringing on. It's simply a matter of beginning to undo all of the wrongs that have been comitted against the American people by socialist law makers. Try again Danny Boy.
Punching for Justice

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6637
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Unfortunately the US Supreme Court doesn't agree with you.
They are breaking the law. It is best they are hung for breaking the law of the land. The constitution is the law and the supreme court is to uphold it. If they fail in their duties they are to be summarily executed.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6638
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
*yawn*
You have great skill at taking my statements and turning them around. Good for you.
Let me know when you're interested in getting back to debating the issues.
Still debating the issues. I just figured, why reinvent the wheel when the template is laid out before you.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6639
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Unfortunately the US Supreme Court doesn't agree with you.
Fortunately, the Supreme Court doesn't agree with YOU. And has ruled as such TWICE in the last five years.

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6640
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Punching for Justice wrote:
<quoted text>
They are breaking the law. It is best they are hung for breaking the law of the land. The constitution is the law and the supreme court is to uphold it. If they fail in their duties they are to be summarily executed.
LOL! Nothing like broadcasting that you're an extremist.

Justice Scalia in Heller:

Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.
...
Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6641
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Still debating the issues. I just figured, why reinvent the wheel when the template is laid out before you.
You're playing games. Let me know when you're ready to be serious.

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6642
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

4

3

3

Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Fortunately, the Supreme Court doesn't agree with YOU. And has ruled as such TWICE in the last five years.
Ummm, I don't think so...

Justice Scalia in Heller:

Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.
...
Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6643
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Ummm, I don't think so...
Justice Scalia in Heller:
Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.
...
Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms
Right. So as long as I don't carry into any "sensitive places" such as schools and govt buildings, and I follow the law when buying commercially, I am good to go.

Oh....before I forget, 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". Just because someone is a supreme court justice, that doesn't mean they CAN'T make a mistake.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6644
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL! Nothing like broadcasting that you're an extremist.
And you do it so loud and clear too, Danny Boy!

The madman must be answered.......

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6645
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Right. So as long as I don't carry into any "sensitive places" such as schools and govt buildings, and I follow the law when buying commercially, I am good to go.
Oh....before I forget, 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". Just because someone is a supreme court justice, that doesn't mean they CAN'T make a mistake.
You said the SCOTUS doesn't agree with me. But they do - as I just showed you.

So what was your point again?

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6646
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
You said the SCOTUS doesn't agree with me. But they do - as I just showed you.
So what was your point again?
Dodge

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6647
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
You said the SCOTUS doesn't agree with me. But they do - as I just showed you.
So what was your point again?
Wow! You really have an overactive imagination. Justice Scalia is NOT infallible nor does his comment "agree" with your leftist attempts to disarm the American people. As a matter of fact the court ruled AGAINST you gun-grabbers in affirming that the right to keep and bear arms is an INDIVIDUAL right separate and distinct from any membership in an organized militia effectively slamming the door on that particular assault you've made on the 2nd amendment. Drop back five yards and punt ‘cause you’re not going to get anywhere near the end zone.

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6648
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Dodge
False

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6649
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
False
Okay, so it was an evasive maneuver. Stop splitting hairs. Next step......deflection. You're very predictable.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6650
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
False
One more time for you Danny Boy. Here is your homework assignment for this evening:

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

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6651
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
One more time for you Danny Boy. Here is your homework assignment for this evening:
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".
Existing laws do not prevent you from exercising that right.

But you're going off track here. I was talking to the poster from Huston who claims that all existing laws are a violation of the Constitution, and that's simply false. He claims that judges who have upheld those laws should be executed, and that's simply nuts.

Are those your claims too? Do you claim that existing gun laws are unconstitutional? Do you claim that ANY gun law is unconstitutional?

I don't think you do, but here you are defending those whackadoo claims. Why? Are you really so obsessed with attacking me that you'll take the side of an unhinged extremist?

Since: May 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6652
Sep 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
One more time for you Danny Boy. Here is your homework assignment for this evening:
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".
Scalia said:

"Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.
...
Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

.

I agree with that statement and have never proposed anything here in conflict with that principle.

So where are your bullshit criticisms of me coming from except from your fevered imagination?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

•••