Firearms rally scheduled for Chambers...

Firearms rally scheduled for Chambersburg's square

There are 10984 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.

Marauder

Anchorage, AK

#8818 Oct 9, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
You are quite simply wrong. You may believe that, but in the real world, all the evidence points the other direction.
Where there is strict gun regulation, gun deaths are a fraction of the US.
Guns are not regulated as much as they can be. There's no basis in reality to make that claim.
You have chosen to prioritize your ideological beliefs over objective reality. That's your choice. Just don't expect those of us living in the reality based universe to agree or go along with your extremist agenda.
Now see...?...there you go again. Why can't you read what I wrote...NOT what you think or wish I wrote....?

"Guns are not regulated as much as they can be. There's no basis in reality to make that claim."

I didn't make that claim as you say...did I...?

"Where there is strict gun regulation, gun deaths are a fraction of the US."

Do "they" have a Constitution that protects their rights...? Do "they" have an individual right to keep and bear arms...?...How about within the US...? Tell me how those strict gun regulations are working against the criminal elements.

"You have chosen to prioritize your ideological beliefs over objective reality."

I have chosen to continue to abide by my oath...even long after my retirement...to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. So is your reference to “ideological beliefs” in reference to the military oath…?…more of your elitism coming thru..?

“Just don't expect those of us living in the reality based universe to agree or go along with your extremist agenda.”

I don’t expect you to agree and don’t care if you do or not…that is your prerogative…just as it is mine to disagree with your extremist agenda (even if you haven’t thought about it yet…but we both know you have)…HOWEVER…when legislation gets passed in the State or Federal level…or the Supreme Court says “ya, you do have an individual right”…then you just might have to “go along”…or not, by breaking the law. We all get choices to make.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#8819 Oct 9, 2013
Tray wrote:
<quoted text>Look who's talking. That quote was a personal opinion by only one of the members. NOT a ruling.
"There seems to us no doubt, on the basis of both text and history, that the Second Amendment conferred an individual right to keep and bear arms. Of course the right was not unlimited, just as the First Amendment ’s right of free speech was not, see, e.g., United States v. Williams, 553 U. S.___(2008). Thus, we do not read the Second Amendment to protect the right of citizens to carry arms for any sort of confrontation, just as we do not read the First Amendment to protect the right of citizens to speak for any purpose. Before turning to limitations upon the individual right, however, we must determine whether the prefatory clause of the Second Amendment comports with our interpretation of the operative clause."

Wipe your chin, dear.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#8820 Oct 9, 2013
Tray wrote:
Gosh next time you should study law and court rulings before placing that nasty foot in your mouth.
Gosh, you should be more concerned with the things you have in your mouth- with AIDS running rampant in your community.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#8821 Oct 9, 2013
Marauder wrote:
<quoted text>
Now see...?...there you go again. Why can't you read what I wrote...NOT what you think or wish I wrote....?
So whines the queen of the paraphrase.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#8822 Oct 9, 2013
Marauder wrote:
I have chosen to continue to abide by my oath...even long after my retirement...to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Just as long as they agree with you, eh, Mooch.

Before the Second Amendment- which you have demonstrated a woeful lack of comprehension- comes the first.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#8823 Oct 9, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>No, you didn't. So your white flag of surrender is graciously accepted and we can relegate your rediculous comment to the realm of pure subjective conjecture. Thank you.
LOL! Keep dreaming. Because that's the only place where this fantasy is true.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#8824 Oct 9, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>If we were doing all of those things properly and effectively there would be no need for anything IN ADDITION. The only way to stop/reduce the intentional killing of innocent people is the elimination/control of those with the intent.
I'm not throwing up every roadblock I can think of to making America safer and reducing the number of innocent Americans who are killed. I have done no such thing. Please try to be honest. I'm throwing up roadblocks to prevent the erosion of American freedom and individual rights while pointing directly at the real problem and making valid suggestions of how we can reduce the violence without infringing on the rights of law abiding honest citizens. Just because you don't like the fact that I see right through the firearms straw man argument doesn't indicate that I support doing nothing. It just means that I do not support doing the wrong thing, like you do.
Still dreaming I see.

Come back when you wake up.

LOL!

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#8825 Oct 9, 2013
Marauder wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would you think a logical conclusion based on your expressed position and previous posts would be "illogical"...?
Oh wait, I know the answer to this one...because you don't have any idea what your agenda is...right..?
You don't have a clue as to what you want to recommend in regards to guns, gun ownership or gun use.
Only that if a gun wasn't available...gun crime wouldn't exist...right..?
So basically, when you make the same comments in regards to guns...you aren't
I'm crystal clear on my agenda. It's you who don't have any idea what it is. You've fabricated an agenda for me out of whole cloth and continue to argue with it rather than with what I've actually proposed.

And I can't help you with your thought disorder. I've plainly explained what I meant. Your decision to ignore it in favor of your imagined meaning is just another symptom of your disorder.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#8826 Oct 9, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
And you would be wrong.....again. Deny it all you want. It still won't change the fact that the moral code (and most of it) HAS been codified into current laws.
Okay, prove it.

I supported my claim. Now you do the same.

Can you?

Will you even try?

LOL!

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#8827 Oct 9, 2013
Marauder wrote:
<quoted text>
Now see...?...there you go again. Why can't you read what I wrote...NOT what you think or wish I wrote....?
"Guns are not regulated as much as they can be. There's no basis in reality to make that claim."
I didn't make that claim as you say...did I...?
Of course you did.
Marauder wrote:
Gun use is already controlled as much as it can be.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#8828 Oct 9, 2013
Marauder wrote:
<
"Where there is strict gun regulation, gun deaths are a fraction of the US."
Do "they" have a Constitution that protects their rights...? Do "they" have an individual right to keep and bear arms...?...How about within the US...? Tell me how those strict gun regulations are working against the criminal elements.
It was smart to not even try to refute the facts. Diversion was definitely your best move.

LOL!

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#8829 Oct 9, 2013
Marauder wrote:
"You have chosen to prioritize your ideological beliefs over objective reality."
I have chosen to continue to abide by my oath...even long after my retirement...to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. So is your reference to “ideological beliefs” in reference to the military oath…?…more of your elitism coming thru..?
LOL! More of your vivid imagination at work - thinking I was somehow disparaging military service.

As long as you continue to draw conclusions about me based on your imagination rather than what I've actually said, you're going to continue to say stupid shit like this. I recommend you try listening to what I actually say for a change.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#8830 Oct 9, 2013
Marauder wrote:
“Just don't expect those of us living in the reality based universe to agree or go along with your extremist agenda.”
I don’t expect you to agree and don’t care if you do or not…that is your prerogative…just as it is mine to disagree with your extremist agenda (even if you haven’t thought about it yet…but we both know you have)…HOWEVER…when legislation gets passed in the State or Federal level…or the Supreme Court says “ya, you do have an individual right”…then you just might have to “go along”…or not, by breaking the law. We all get choices to make.
My agenda is moderate and centrist. You're so far right that Genghist Khan looks liberal to you. LOL!

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#8831 Oct 9, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, prove it.
I supported my claim. Now you do the same.
Can you?
Will you even try?
LOL!
You didn't support a damn thing. In fact, I refuted what you claimed with specific examples.

You are definitely a legend on your own mind.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#8832 Oct 9, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
My agenda is moderate and centrist. You're so far right that Genghist Khan looks liberal to you. LOL!
LMAO!!! Not when it comes to gun control, you are not.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#8833 Oct 9, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
You didn't support a damn thing. In fact, I refuted what you claimed with specific examples.
You are definitely a legend on your own mind.
No, you claimed that the moral issues I identified COULD LEAD to behavior that is against the law, not that those things themselves are against the law.

Because they aren't.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#8834 Oct 9, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
LMAO!!! Not when it comes to gun control, you are not.
I absolutely am. I am right in the center of American public opinion on the issue.
MC Hammer

Chambersburg, PA

#8835 Oct 9, 2013
satanlives wrote:
<quoted text>
really tard.... show where they went away...I can see where they added severe restrictions to all concealed weapons, no where did I see them go away...except on your fantasy world...
Idiot...How about you Google Chicago is to allow conceal carry. Also look at PA adding the Castle Doctrine within the past 3 yrs. Also look at Colorado repeal over 2nd Amendment fight. Have you been living in a cave?

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#8836 Oct 9, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you claimed that the moral issues I identified COULD LEAD to behavior that is against the law, not that those things themselves are against the law.
Because they aren't.
Lying.....against the law (gave 2 specific example).
Murder....against the law (goes without saying).
Neglect....against the law.(gave specific example).
Greed/Selfishness....against the law (gave specific example).
Hatred/Discrimination....again st the law (gave general example).

Try again, Danny Boy.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#8837 Oct 9, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
I absolutely am. I am right in the center of American public opinion on the issue.
BS. You parrot the same mantra as every other uber-left, Socialist gun grabber out there....with enthusiam.

Centrist? LMAO!!!!!!!!

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 Secret Service investigating effigy of Presiden... (Jan '10) Jun 21 Trumpenstein bank... 44
News Secret Service relaxes marijuana policy in bid ... Jun 2 RushFan666 6
News Men wanted for allegedly taking over $30K from ... May '17 Belinda 1
US Secret Service Clothes (Sep '06) May '17 nikonnicky 28
News Russian hacker faces decades in prison Apr '17 USA Today 3
News Secret Service: Man planned to kidnap first dog (Jan '16) Apr '17 alina 7
News Oklahoma state senator plans to resign followin... Mar '17 Dakoter 44
More from around the web