Firearms rally scheduled for Chambers...

Firearms rally scheduled for Chambersburg's square

There are 10983 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: Feb 11

Location hidden

#9987 Oct 31, 2013
2ndAmRight wrote:
<quoted text>
So? That's all anyone knew back then.
You do know the majority ended up voting for a Republic which had an elected head of state?

So... again... you are full of cr@p.

If you want to tie your star to our gay founding father, you are going to be reminded of his baggage.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#9988 Oct 31, 2013
2ndAmRight wrote:
What does that have to do with the 2nd Amendment? That's right; NOTHING.
What does Hamilton's opinion of the Second Amendment have to do with it?

That's right.... nothing.

Here's what the current SCOTUS said:

"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not 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.[United States v.] Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons."

Justice Scalia
from the Supreme Court of the United States

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#9989 Oct 31, 2013
PrinceofDarkness wrote:
<quoted text>
just wondering, can you see your pecker when you look down?...bwhahahahahhahahahahh
And why are you so interested in my pecker?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#9990 Oct 31, 2013
2ndAmRight wrote:
<quoted text>
Hardly.
(1846);
'nuff said.

Scalia... today.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#9991 Oct 31, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>Typical behavior from a deluded leftist liberal. YOU have NEVER gotten anything right
I manage to find all the words to the Second Amendment, unlike you, my limp-wristed tea bagged fairy.

And you have yet to refute a single thing I've posted.

So wipe your chin, fruit.

You're leaking DNA again.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#9992 Oct 31, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Then what did Dan mean when he stated "Persons in households without guns are less likely to attempt suicide at all." ???
I've posted a link TWICE, azzhat.

You can't refute it.

And I'm not going to teach you to read after all others have failed.

And people who do have guns who attempt suicide are by far more than others be successful.

What a shame it is you don't get a chance to clean the brains off the ceiling of someone you know- to give your perspective.

Wipe your chin, troll.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#9993 Oct 31, 2013
ObamaGate wrote:
<quoted text> The rights were granted to protect the people from a government that would enslave the people
People were already enslaved, dipsh!t.

You should have tried to PASS that history class.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#9994 Oct 31, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
And people who do have guns who attempt suicide are by far more than others be successful.
And if you would go back and read, I said that very same thing, idiot.

It also has NOTHING to do with what Dan posted.

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#9995 Oct 31, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Where you been, dude? You've been missing out on all the fun.
Gathering a HUGE amount of new ammunition. You should check out the site. Have also been posting articles on the Tea Party Tribune. Have all the evidence we need to shut the anti's down PERMANENTLY.

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#9996 Oct 31, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
I manage to find all the words to the Second Amendment, unlike you, my limp-wristed tea bagged fairy.
And you have yet to refute a single thing I've posted.
So wipe your chin, fruit.
You're leaking DNA again.
United States Constitution, 2nd Article of Amendment, "Restrictive" clause:

"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed."

THAT trumps kongress, the prez-e-dent, and the usurpreme [kangaroo] kourt. To bad for you and your kind, eh?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#9997 Oct 31, 2013
Squach wrote:
The 2nd amendment says NOTHING about restricting the right of the people. Try as you might to re-interpret
Judge Scalia- and he was speaking for the MAJORITY of the SCOTUS.

And you?

You are a DNA-soaked high school dropout, AnalOriface, who has slapped silly every time you stick your head above your boyfriend's belt buckle.

PS: The Second says nothing about the right to sell guns, try as you might to insist you have the right to sell them to felons.

And as far as restrictions: it says nothing about felons not having guns.

Still leaking, dear.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#9999 Oct 31, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
Just becasue
Are we still reminding you that you shouldn't pick on anyone else's spelling, troll?

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#10000 Oct 31, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
What does Hamilton's opinion of the Second Amendment have to do with it?
That's right.... nothing.
Here's what the current SCOTUS said:
"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not 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.[United States v.] Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons."
Justice Scalia
from the Supreme Court of the United States
"The opinion of the Federalist has always been considered as of great authority. It is a complete commentary on our Constitution; and is appealed to by all parties in the questions to which that instrument has given birth. Its intrinsic merit entitles it to this high rank; and the part two of its authors performed in framing the constitution, put it very much in their power to explain the views with which it was framed..."--Chief Justice John Marshall, U.S. Supreme Court, Cohens v. Virginia (1821).

"It is a rule of law that, in order to ascertain the import of a contract, the evident intention of the parties, at the time of forming it, is principally to be regarded. Previous to the formation of this Constitution, there existed certain principles of the law of nature and nations, consecrated by time and experience, in conformity to which the Constitution was formed."-- Mr. Elliot, Debate in U.S. House of Representatives, Oct. 25, 1803 (The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution),[Elliot's Debates, Volume 4]

"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that ORIGINAL RIGHT OF SELF-DEFENSE which is PARAMOUNT to ALL positive forms of government ... The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms..."--Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers No. 28.

"Also, the conditions and circumstances of the period require a finding that while the stated purpose of the right to arms was to secure a well-regulated militia, the right to self-defense was assumed by the Framers."--Chief Justice John Marshall, U.S. Supreme Court.[As quoted in Nunn v. State, 1 Ga. 243, 251 (1846); State v. Dawson, 272 N.C. 535, 159 S.E.2d 1, 9 (1968).]

It must be pathetically sad to be you, huh?

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#10003 Oct 31, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
You do know the majority ended up voting for a Republic which had an elected head of state?
So... again... you are full of cr@p.
If you want to tie your star to our gay founding father, you are going to be reminded of his baggage.
Yep. We have a democratic republic and it is the "republic" part of it that protects our individual rights from the majority rule (mob rule) of pure democracy. Which means our constitutional rights are not subject to public opinion. Those rights cannot be infringed on by popular vote or legislation.

Give yourself a pat on the back Twinkle Toes, you almost got something right.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#10005 Oct 31, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Are we still reminding you that you shouldn't pick on anyone else's spelling, troll?
Oh....you mean when you didn't know the difference between ordnance and ordInance?

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#10006 Oct 31, 2013
And that is a capital I....not an L.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#10008 Oct 31, 2013
PrinceofDarkness wrote:
<quoted text>
yes, they can... and they have, and will continue to be by the supreme court, and congress...and the people ....morons and hillbillys like you need to face reality...
Don't you ever get tired of be a dead wrong communist POS? Have you considered moving to North Korea? You'd love it, BBG does all of the thinking and will "protect" you 24-7. Of course when BBG is ready to bend you over and anally rape you.........there's nothing to protect you from BBG. It’s your kinda' place.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#10009 Oct 31, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
I manage to find all the words to the Second Amendment, unlike you, my limp-wristed tea bagged fairy.
And you have yet to refute a single thing I've posted.
So wipe your chin, fruit.
You're leaking DNA again.
You may have found all of the words but your simple minded ass can't comprehend them. Your self-centered ignorance knows no bounds. Is there pain involved with being as incredibly stupid as you are? Just wondering.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#10010 Oct 31, 2013
PrinceofDarkness wrote:
<quoted text>
your new food stamps arrive tomorrow, 1st of the month? you can stock on candy tonight to last you for a few weeks.. I like your costume
http://imageshack.us/a/img29/6162/oldnaked051...
Why am I not surprised that YOU know when food stamps arrive? Parasite.
Fed Up

Manchester, MI

#10014 Oct 31, 2013
PrinceofDarkness wrote:
<quoted text>
A majority of people favor President Obama’s efforts to IMPOSE stricter gun laws, according to a Gallup survey released late Friday.
Let's see, to impose:

"force (something unwelcome or unfamiliar) to be accepted or put in place"

or perhaps this fits better: "take advantage of someone by demanding their attention or commitment"

or maybe: "to cause (something, such as a tax, fine, rule, or punishment) to affect someone or something by using your authority".
<quoted text>

Obama has sought to RALLY public support...
What they mean here is to force the public to support it, why else bother to rally people if they already support it?
<quoted text>
... and is leveraging his HIGH APPROVEL rating
Seriously??! A high rating? Well, he is king and who are we to dash his delusions?
<quoted text>
... in an effort to pressure Congress to take action.
So sad, having to IMPOSE, to RALLY, and to PRESSURE to get your personal agenda rammed down our throats. This is how the Libtards govern. They have to IMPOSE their idiodic rules and regualtions, then they have to RALLY public support to convince people that they know what's best for them, then when you meet oppositon from the people that you can't RALLY, you PRESSURE them into doing your bidding...

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 Murder suspect Ager Hasan extradited back to Ca... Jan 7 snow on the way f... 1
News Secret Service interviews person over manure se... Dec 27 Retribution 3
News Secret Service apprehends attempted White House... Nov '17 CodeTalker 4
News Prosecutors want Shkreli's bail revoked over Cl... Sep '17 Minnesota Mike 3
News U.S. Military's Space in Trump Tower Costs $130... Aug '17 L I G E R 4
News GW husband, wife face charges in counterfeit case (Jul '17) Jul '17 lch2105 2
News Scene & Heard: VP Mike Pence on Sanibel (Jun '17) Jul '17 Anthony wright 2
More from around the web