Firearms rally scheduled for Chambers...

Firearms rally scheduled for Chambersburg's square

There are 11003 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.

FormerParatroope r

Mount Pleasant, SC

#7860 Sep 25, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
I support blocking gun sales to people with severe mental illness like Lindsey Graham proposed.
Done with the GCA of 1968.

I asked you answer the question you posed. That does not answer your question.
FormerParatroope r

Mount Pleasant, SC

#7861 Sep 25, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
You're joking, right?
You asked if armed citizens ever stopped a out of control government. The Battle of Athens meets that criteria, does it not?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#7863 Sep 25, 2013
Tray wrote:
<quoted text> I never said being armed is a guarantee of safety but the odds are greatly increased.
Not to the people who live with you.

Wipe your chin, dear.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#7864 Sep 25, 2013
Tray wrote:
<quoted text>????? would you think only 30 were guilty?
Most people are smart enough to look at this kind of survey and see that it is cr@p from the title page.

The NRA certified loon killed 28 in one day.

Most would think those 5 and 6 year olds were innocent.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#7865 Sep 25, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>This is exactly what many other countries have thought right up to the point where the dictator took over.
Oh boy, we get to pretend the USA is going to be taken over by a dictator again.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#7866 Sep 25, 2013
Marauder wrote:
"Mr. Alexis did not attempt to buy an AR-15 from Sharpshooters Small Arms Range," Attorney J. Michael Slocum
HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAHAHA!

I see... because we know the LAWYERS always tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

INCLUDING THIS ONE WHO HAS CHANGED HIS STORY.

And that the killer was just in the gun shop looking for NRA literature.

And the fact that he rented an AR-15, shot off the AR-15, and then was told he couldn't take it with him had nothing to do with him them choosing a shotgun instead.

HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAH!

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#7867 Sep 25, 2013
Marauder wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, the free execise of an individual right doesn't end at the door step, property line, city limits, county line or State line.
.
It certainly does, dipsh!t.

Run your assertion back through the spell checker and then the rhetoric filter and see if you can 't figure out what it is you think you want to say.

A persons "rights" change depending on where he stands, and certainly those change when it crosses the threshold, the property line, the city line, the county lines and certainly state lines.

What you think you know of law you got from an NRA brochure written at a seventh grade level so it could appeal to their members and, in your case, present a reading challenge.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#7868 Sep 25, 2013
FormerParatrooper wrote:
<quoted text>
You asked if armed citizens ever stopped a out of control government. The Battle of Athens meets that criteria, does it not?
It does not. You're referencing an incident where local citizens took the law into their own hands when there was no threat to their liberty and where there was no dictatorial government. Their armed intervention was an unnecessary over-reaction.

Besides, we've clearly been talking on a national scale. There has never been a time when our federal government would have become autocratic or dictatorial but was only stopped by armed resistance from the citizenry. And given the strength of our democratic process and legal system, there never will be.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#7869 Sep 25, 2013
FormerParatrooper wrote:
<quoted text>
Done with the GCA of 1968.
I asked you answer the question you posed. That does not answer your question.
When it goes days between your responses, I lose track of what you're referring to.

As near as I can tell, you raised the GCA of 68 in response to my question about why we can't regulate guns. I explained that I was asking that question to those who claim that any regulation is unconstitutional.

Then you later made a comment about not being able to identify the dangerously mentally ill until they do something dangerous or lock up everyone with a mental illness. I said it sounds like you think preventing the mentally ill from having firearms is impossible.

Then you asked for my solution, and I answered by saying I support Graham's NCIS improvement bill. You say that doesn't answer the question, but it certainly does. The GCA of 68 only references having been committed to a mental health institution. Graham's bill goes further, adding more conditions by which someone would be denied a firearm.

So I guess I don't know what you're after. If you could be more specific, I'd be glad to answer more specifically.
Another

Santa Fe, NM

#7870 Sep 25, 2013
FormerParatrooper wrote:
<quoted text>
You asked if armed citizens ever stopped a out of control government. The Battle of Athens meets that criteria, does it not?
terrorist wet dream.
Marauder

North Pole, AK

#7871 Sep 25, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
I did.
But you wouldn't know that because you can't be bothered to stop your irrational and obsessive attacks on me long enough to GO READ THE THREAD.
"I did."

I know you're a liar because YOU didn't bring up the FACT that he DID NOT buy an AR-15.

From Armed Veteran;

Not true: http://www.thenation.com/blog/176280/did-navy ...#

From the article: "Then Talking Points Memo talked to the same lawyer for the store and now he denied that Alexis tried to buy the AR-15. Mediaite talked to a salesman at the store, who refused to give his name, who also claimed that Alexis did not try to purchase the assault rifle."

Your reply;

Oh, so he tried to buy a handgun, not an AR, first, but the restrictions under the law caused him to change his mind.

IOW - gun regulation limited the weaponry he took in with him, thus limiting the casualties. Gun regulations worked.

BTW - he did get a handgun and used it during his assault so no law prevented him from getting anything.
Marauder

North Pole, AK

#7872 Sep 25, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't leap to any conclusion. It was reported in the news. When I saw it was inaccurate, I corrected myself.
That's what people with integrity do.
Emotional reactionaries don't bother finding the correct information, much less actually correct themselves.
No, no-character losers such as yourself just blindly attack and attack and attack based on incomplete information - even when they've been corrected.
If you have even a speck of character, you'd apologize now.
But we all know you won't do that, don't we?
LOL!
"I didn't leap to any conclusion. It was reported in the news. When I saw it was inaccurate, I corrected myself."

Liar...I and others challenged you for sources and proof many times. "Reported in the news"...without having proof or a source...is NOT proof.

YOU did not correct yourself...the facts where shoved into your face.

"No, no-character losers such as yourself just blindly attack and attack and attack based on incomplete information - even when they've been corrected."

ROTFLMAO...that's funny.

"If you have even a speck of character, you'd apologize now."

I'm sorry for proving you a liar...again...(wink, wink).
Marauder

North Pole, AK

#7873 Sep 25, 2013
Another wrote:
<quoted text>
terrorist wet dream.
And the "Santa Fe Spammer" knows all about wet dreams...don't you...?

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#7874 Sep 26, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
LMAO!
Looks like somebody is waving his white flag.
I guess when all your arguments have been proven to be morally and intellectually bankrupt, you have to resort to childish games.
Come back when you graduate to high school, son. You're embarrassing yourself here and you're not even self-aware enough to know it.
LOL!
And yet MORE dodging, and now spinning.

The one waving the white flag would be YOU. Nothing more.....nothing less. The rest of ^that^ bullshit is nothing more than pure projection.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#7875 Sep 26, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Unlawful orders like the illegal invasion of Iraq?
What was unlawful about it? You seem to forget that the decision to go into Iraq was passed in Congress, and we were only one of about 35 countries to go AFTER Saddam had violated 17 UN resolutions.
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Unlawful orders like torturing prisoners?
And those who were caught were busted for it. Remember Abu Ghraib?
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Unlawful orders like warrantless wiretaps on American citizens?
Passed by the Patriot Act. Not unlawful.(and no, I did NOT agree with it...any of it)
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, there are certainly some dumb enough to follow their CIC no matter how unlawful the order. The rightwing in this country proved that over 10 years ago.
If authoritarianism every comes to the United States, it will CERTAINLY come from the right.
Is it the right who is spending billions of dollars on ammo and armored personnel carriers for the DHS? Didn't think so. What does the DHS need all those APCs for anyway if not to use on our own people?
FormerParatroope r

Mount Pleasant, SC

#7876 Sep 26, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
It does not. You're referencing an incident where local citizens took the law into their own hands when there was no threat to their liberty and where there was no dictatorial government. Their armed intervention was an unnecessary over-reaction.
Besides, we've clearly been talking on a national scale. There has never been a time when our federal government would have become autocratic or dictatorial but was only stopped by armed resistance from the citizenry. And given the strength of our democratic process and legal system, there never will be.
That is your take. It was a local government that was corrupt and used it power to change local election results.

Corruption is corruption regardless the level of government.
FormerParatroope r

Mount Pleasant, SC

#7877 Sep 26, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
When it goes days between your responses, I lose track of what you're referring to.
As near as I can tell, you raised the GCA of 68 in response to my question about why we can't regulate guns. I explained that I was asking that question to those who claim that any regulation is unconstitutional.
Then you later made a comment about not being able to identify the dangerously mentally ill until they do something dangerous or lock up everyone with a mental illness. I said it sounds like you think preventing the mentally ill from having firearms is impossible.
Then you asked for my solution, and I answered by saying I support Graham's NCIS improvement bill. You say that doesn't answer the question, but it certainly does. The GCA of 68 only references having been committed to a mental health institution. Graham's bill goes further, adding more conditions by which someone would be denied a firearm.
So I guess I don't know what you're after. If you could be more specific, I'd be glad to answer more specifically.
Pardon my absence from this forum. Often I am out of the realm of virtual reality enjoying the outdoors.

I bring up the GCA because you seem to assert that firearms are not regulated.

You stated on numerous occasions that everyone is law abiding citizen until they are not, then ask how to keep firearms out of the hands of people who could possibly cross the line.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#7879 Sep 26, 2013
Marauder wrote:
<quoted text>
"I did."
I know you're a liar because YOU didn't bring up the FACT that he DID NOT buy an AR-15.
From Armed Veteran;
Not true: http://www.thenation.com/blog/176280/did-navy ...#
From the article: "Then Talking Points Memo talked to the same lawyer for the store and now he denied that Alexis tried to buy the AR-15. Mediaite talked to a salesman at the store, who refused to give his name, who also claimed that Alexis did not try to purchase the assault rifle."
Your reply;
Oh, so he tried to buy a handgun, not an AR, first, but the restrictions under the law caused him to change his mind.
IOW - gun regulation limited the weaponry he took in with him, thus limiting the casualties. Gun regulations worked.
BTW - he did get a handgun and used it during his assault so no law prevented him from getting anything.
LOL! Careful there - your desperation is showing.

So rather than admit that you've been WRONG in your obsessive attacks, now you're going to accuse me of lying.

And why? Because another poster pointed out the news reports I read were wrong and I didn't discover it myself.

Sorry friend, but that doesn't make me a liar.

The fact remains that when I learned about it, I acknowledged it. That's what people with integrity do.

But you obviously know nothing about that, now do you?

LOL! No, you most certainly do not.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#7880 Sep 26, 2013
Marauder wrote:
<quoted text>
"I didn't leap to any conclusion. It was reported in the news. When I saw it was inaccurate, I corrected myself."
Liar...I and others challenged you for sources and proof many times. "Reported in the news"...without having proof or a source...is NOT proof.
YOU did not correct yourself...the facts where shoved into your face.
"No, no-character losers such as yourself just blindly attack and attack and attack based on incomplete information - even when they've been corrected."
ROTFLMAO...that's funny.
"If you have even a speck of character, you'd apologize now."
I'm sorry for proving you a liar...again...(wink, wink).
I most certainly did correct myself. And I showed you where. Just because someone else pointed it out doesn't change what I myself posted about the correct information.

Since I've proven that your attacks were FALSE, now you're launching an argument over semantics in a desperate attempt to save face. Sorry friend - the only person you're kidding is yourself.

LOL!

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#7881 Sep 26, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
What was unlawful about it? You seem to forget that the decision to go into Iraq was passed in Congress, and we were only one of about 35 countries to go AFTER Saddam had violated 17 UN resolutions.
<quoted text>
And those who were caught were busted for it. Remember Abu Ghraib?
<quoted text>
Passed by the Patriot Act. Not unlawful.(and no, I did NOT agree with it...any of it)
<quoted text>
Is it the right who is spending billions of dollars on ammo and armored personnel carriers for the DHS? Didn't think so. What does the DHS need all those APCs for anyway if not to use on our own people?
Changing the subject.

What a surprise.

LOL!

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 House votes to overhaul the Secret Service Mon Moliner 1
News First Lady: Secret Service Agents Taught Malia ... May '15 fedupwiththemess 3
News Gyrocopter pilot spoke with Tampa Bay Times bef... Apr '15 CSA 11
News Elder Bush's home alarm-free for 13 months Apr '15 Sterkfontein Swar... 4
News First lady: Secret Service agents taught Malia ... Apr '15 Responsibility 25
News Congress probes Clinton email scandal using new... Apr '15 Righteous 31
News First Lady Michelle Obama reveals that Secret S... Apr '15 fedupwiththemess 1
More from around the web