Firearms rally scheduled for Chambers...

Firearms rally scheduled for Chambersburg's square

There are 10952 comments on the Chambersburg Public Opinion story from Mar 29, 2013, titled Firearms rally scheduled for Chambersburg's square. In it, Chambersburg Public Opinion reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chambersburg Public Opinion.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6731 Sep 12, 2013
AnswersRus wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh.
So then you do agree that the right to keep and bear shall not be infringed.
I knew if you tossed it around amongst the voices in your head, that they would eventually reach a consensus opinion.
I, of course, agree with the Bill of Rights.

It's the extremist rightwing interpretation of it that I (and most Americans as well as the SCOTUS) disagree with.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6732 Sep 12, 2013
AnswersRus wrote:
<quoted text>
No one is kidding anyone here Mr. Chambersburg.
We all agree that we prefer to make our own choices, take responsibility for ourselves and our own, respect the rights of others and their freedoms, share our bounty with those who need it in our circles, defend our rights, and if need be, take that defense to the end so that others may breathe free too.
Everybody agrees with that. You're not as special or unique as you wish to believe.
AnswersRus wrote:
You prefer, by your own words, to receive government handouts, ban the tools of self defense, spy on your neighbor to report any wrong doing to the government, extort funds from private citizens to distribute to others as your handlers see fit, hamstring private free enterprise so that the government can take over business and our heath care, make decisions for doctors without training and proper licensure, and uphold uncostitutional legislation and sing the praises thereof.
This is complete and utter horseshit. I don't believe, nor have I said, anything remotely like that.

This is the strawman argument you've created to avoid arguing with what I've ACTUALLY said and believe.
AnswersRus wrote:
No one is kidding here Mr. Chambersburg.
You would be well advised to remember that.
Why that almost sounds like a threat.

Since I know you're armed, I'm really glad you don't know who I really am.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6733 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Right. And laws that people believe to be unconstitutional are brought before them.
You specifically said Scalia was WRONG. Are you now saying he was right? Make up your mind.
A claim that, "everyone has the unlimited right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose" is far outside the mainstream of US public opinion and SCOTUS rulings. Sorry, but that's a fact.
Protecting the minority from the opinions of the majority, huh? Hmmmm. So you support gay marriage then?
Scalia OPINION is NOT in line with the 2nd Amendment because the 2nd SPECIFICALLY states that the right of WE THE PEOPLE to keep (possess & own) and bear (carry) arms "shall not be infringed". Please post the part of the Amendment that gives the govt the power to infringe on that right. This challenge has been put before you NUMEROUS times, and yet you keep dodging and deflecting away from it.

The Bill Of Rights was written so that the political whims of the generation could NOT override the RIGHTS of the few. That is why they are called "rights" and not "privileges", and they are inherent in our beings. They are not given by anyone, and can only be removed by due process (as also written in the Bill Of Rights).

As far as gay marriage goes.....sure. Homosexuals have the right to be just as miserable as everyone else. LOL Do I think we need a constitutional amendment defining such. Hell no. Marriage is a religious doctrine, and I am a firm believer in the separation of church and state. Legally, what you are referring to is civil unions. And the answer is yes again. BUT, just because I believe they have a right to civil unions, that does NOT mean I agree with the lifestyle. Personal opinion.....your mileage may vary.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6734 Sep 12, 2013
AnswersRus wrote:
<quoted text>
We were born with the unalienable right to defend our lives with whatever we can successfully employ in that endeavor.
Really? Interesting religion you have there. Where did you get it from?

Or did you just make it up because that's what you want to believe?

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6735 Sep 12, 2013
AnswersRus wrote:
<quoted text>
"to believe what people themselves tell me"
We are well aware that you believe what the gubment tells you.
Now drink your milk.
Do you deny that's what he said?

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6736 Sep 12, 2013
AnswersRus wrote:
<quoted text>
We will defend ourselves and our own.
You're dodging the question.

Is your position is that the unlimited right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever but only for self-defense?

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6737 Sep 12, 2013
Aphelion wrote:
<quoted text>
You are unbelieveable
post 6697
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?
AV wrote:
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.
**********
Again you stated, "So is it your position"
Keep spinning Dan
Look at the post I REPLIED TO. It's not hard to do - you responded to my post where I replied. Read what it says. It's BEFORE the post you're now referencing.
AnswersRus

Riverton, WY

#6738 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
I, of course, agree with the Bill of Rights.
It's the extremist rightwing interpretation of it that I (and most Americans as well as the SCOTUS) disagree with.
uuuuummmmm, that "extremist rightwing interpretation of it" is your projected interpretation Mr. Chambersburg.
You argue facts not in evidence.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6739 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Not seeing links to SCOTUS decisions there, so...
So you choose to remain WILLFULLY ignorant. Got it.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6740 Sep 12, 2013
AnswersRus wrote:
<quoted text>
That is what I have been telling you Mr. Chambersburg ... grow up and put on your big boy panties.
You are finally getting it I see.
Well at least one voice may be getting it.
Aphelion wrote:
It appears that Dan cannot even keep his own misinformation straight.
AnswersRus wrote:
<quoted text>
No worries mate.
The manner in which they will be used, will be well regulated Mr. Chambersburg.
AnswersRus wrote:
<quoted text>
No worries mate.
The manner in which they will be used, will be well regulated Mr. Chambersburg.
When you can no longer debate the facts, you have to resort to name-calling and personal attacks. It shows you know you've been defeated.

I accept your surrender, boys. LOL!
AnswersRus

Riverton, WY

#6741 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Everybody agrees with that. You're not as special or unique as you wish to believe.
<quoted text>
This is complete and utter horseshit. I don't believe, nor have I said, anything remotely like that.
This is the strawman argument you've created to avoid arguing with what I've ACTUALLY said and believe.
<quoted text>
Why that almost sounds like a threat.
Since I know you're armed, I'm really glad you don't know who I really am.
1 - incorrect. Damn few in this world agree with that approach to living as free individuals. You are mistaken.
2 - yes you have.
3 - yes you use that approach all the time. Your "extremist right wing interpretation" stands as evidence.
4 - you are paranoid, but rest assured if you were ever to be threatened ... you would have no doubt.
5 - you are paranoid without just cause.
AnswersRus

Riverton, WY

#6742 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? Interesting religion you have there. Where did you get it from?
Or did you just make it up because that's what you want to believe?
Religon?
Where the hell did you come up with that crap?
Religon has nothing to do with unalienable rights.
AnswersRus

Riverton, WY

#6743 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you deny that's what he said?
That is your interpretation of what he said.
AnswersRus

Riverton, WY

#6744 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
You're dodging the question.
Is your position is that the unlimited right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever but only for self-defense?
I have answered your question, repeatedly in fact.
We will employ whatever we can successfully employ when under attack.
AnswersRus

Riverton, WY

#6745 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Look at the post I REPLIED TO. It's not hard to do - you responded to my post where I replied. Read what it says. It's BEFORE the post you're now referencing.
Yes, we are well aware that you moved the goal posts and shifted your position from one post to another.
AnswersRus

Riverton, WY

#6746 Sep 12, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
When you can no longer debate the facts, you have to resort to name-calling and personal attacks. It shows you know you've been defeated.
I accept your surrender, boys. LOL!
Name calling?
The other poster called you "Dan".
I called you "Mr. Chambersburg".

Sounds pretty respectful to me Mr. Chambersburg.
If you have a problem with the name you chose for yourself. I suggest you take it up with the other voices in your head.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6747 Sep 12, 2013
AnswersRus wrote:
<quoted text>
1 - incorrect. Damn few in this world agree with that approach to living as free individuals. You are mistaken.
2 - yes you have.
3 - yes you use that approach all the time. Your "extremist right wing interpretation" stands as evidence.
4 - you are paranoid, but rest assured if you were ever to be threatened ... you would have no doubt.
5 - you are paranoid without just cause.
1. We're not talking about the world, are we? We're talking about rights in the US.
2. Show me.
3. This is why I'm trying to nail you down on what you believe. You're working really hard to avoid making a plain statement. When you decide to be honest and direct, then we'll have something to work with.
4. If it's not a thread - good.
5. Hardly.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6748 Sep 12, 2013
AnswersRus wrote:
<quoted text>
Religon?
Where the hell did you come up with that crap?
Religon has nothing to do with unalienable rights.
It's a faith-based belief. That's why I called it a religious belief.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6749 Sep 12, 2013
AnswersRus wrote:
<quoted text>
That is your interpretation of what he said.
I'm asking you what he meant. He said Scalia's statement was wrong - in plain English. You don't agree with my understanding of it - tell me what he meant then.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6750 Sep 12, 2013
AnswersRus wrote:
<quoted text>
I have answered your question, repeatedly in fact.
We will employ whatever we can successfully employ when under attack.
I'll take that as a yes.

Don't know why you can't just say that simple word.

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 Secret Service Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News In gubernatorial campaign, Lamb shifts to empha... May 12 greenshoeexpress 1
News Dems: Did EPA security staffer steer contract t... Mar '18 Used to be a demo... 2
News Secret Service: Man shoots himself outside Whit... Mar '18 YouDidntBuildThat 13
News Watauga bookkeeper pleads guilty to embezzlemen... Feb '18 John 1
News TPD Seeks Man Suspected Of Passing Counterfeit ... Feb '18 terrorheartland 1
News Called to a spot near the White House, DC fire ... Jan '18 Watson 1
News Murder suspect Ager Hasan extradited back to Ca... Jan '18 snow on the way f... 1