Should the 2nd Amendment be repealed?

[slapshot]

Home Secretary Theresa May sets out plans to monitor internet use in the UK


Details of internet use in the UK will have to be stored for a year to allow police and intelligence services to access it, under government plans.

Records will include people's activity on social network sites, webmail, internet phone calls and online gaming.

.

And your point?

We already do that here...

[demopublican]

79% Say No

[slapshot]

I'm sure they'd never have dreamt of the total emasculation of the 10th amendment. Funny how liberals cheer on that particular "perversion".

Try to focus.

We're talking about the 2nd.

But thanks for playing....

[Eastside Terp]

Such stupidity.

you're such a one trick pony .......

clueless as usual ........

but please oh great one, tell us how all you brilliant statists would redo the founding father's works .......

[Contumacious]

And you, of course, don't think that your post above and others are stored by, and available to, US govenment agencies?

I doubt it.

But my position is that we no longer have 1st Amendments rights in the US.

.

[slapshot]

you're such a one trick pony .......

clueless as usual ........

but please oh great one, tell us how all you brilliant statists would redo the founding father's works .......

And you have jack (and wrong), as usual.

[veritas]

Try to focus.

We're talking about the 2nd.

But thanks for playing....

It's always humorous when the masters of diversion in these threads scold somebody for bringing in a tangential but related subject.

Speaking of "playing", where's your answer to post #17 in the NY Mass Shooting thread? You've had four days to come up with one.

[WKDWZD]

Ah, the Americans do it against those that aren't born American defense! Whatta crunt, no wonder they say you have no balls Mr Subject.

Can a Catholic lite (Episcopalian) born in the USA that was a turncoat and became a Brit SUBJECT be PM or the silly sissy King? I kinda doubt it.

Sting that much, eh? There, there.

[WKDWZD]

I doubt it.

But my position is that we no longer have 1st Amendments rights in the US.

.

They most certainly are available to whoever wants to see them, even if you or the TA delete them.

[BlandFood]

Sting that much, eh? There, there.

Bwak bwak, I kinda figured you would have NO REPLY. Kinda like Ft. McHenry all over again. Tail, legs, run like hell.

[WKDWZD]

Bwak bwak, I kinda figured you would have NO REPLY. Kinda like Ft. McHenry all over again. Tail, legs, run like hell.

It must really piss you off that it was the "Cheese eating surrender monkeys" that saved your sorry rag-tag arses back then, eh?

[BlandFood]

It must really piss you off that it was the "Cheese eating surrender monkeys" that saved your sorry rag-tag arses back then, eh?

Not at all, good for you Adolph or Vlad isn't your #1 name eh. Besides, I kinda liked slurping snails while drinking my Kronenrborg!

[WKDWZD]

Not at all, good for you Adolph or Vlad isn't your #1 name eh. Besides, I kinda liked slurping snails while drinking my Kronenrborg!

And you're still conversing in English I see. (the red white and blue thingy works for me too... oh, and for your 'cheese eating surrender monkey' saviors as well.

Anyone who has read 'WW2 for Dummies' would know that,

A; It started in 1939 (not 1942) and...

B; The Brits saved themselves in a little known battle called The battle of Britain in 1940, before the US even entered the shindig.

[BlandFood]

And you're still conversing in English I see. (the red white and blue thingy works for me too... oh, and for your 'cheese eating surrender monkey' saviors as well.

Anyone who has read 'WW2 for Dummies' would know that,

A; It started in 1939 (not 1942) and...

B; The Brits saved themselves in a little know battle called The battle of Britain in 1940, before the US even entered the shindig.

Yes, the BOB with American supplies..... and it's WE that perfected the American language.

[WKDWZD]

Yes, the BOB with American supplies.....

Yes, the Lend lease that Britain and Russia had to fight the war for you was cheaper than military lives, and a 'nice little earner' to boot.

and it's WE that perfected the American language.

Bastardised it you mean, however, what you do with it over there is of little concern to me, I'm just surprised that you never got around to renaming it.

[bmore_ken]

So I take it world peace is not an option

[BlandFood]

Yes, the Lend lease that Britain and Russia had to fight the war for you was cheaper than military lives, and a 'nice little earner' to boot.



Bastardised it you mean, however, what you do with it over there is of little concern to me, I'm just surprised that you never got around to renaming it.

Meanwhile EVERYTHING I claimed was correct and you refuse to accept it.

http://www.examiner.com/article/no-c...een-of-england

According to the English Act of Settlement Roman Catholics, and those who marry a Roman Catholic, are forever barred from ascending to the throne of England.

That act became English law in 1701. It was intended to prevent the return of rule by Stuart Catholics.

300 years plus years later the fiance of Princess Anne's son still had to convert from Catholicism so his marriage wouldn't cost him his place in line.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/28/world/...-qa/index.html

The Act of Settlement decreed that no Roman Catholic or anyone married to a Catholic could hold the English crown. This is now to be amended so that an heir to the throne can still be monarch even if they marry a Catholic.


What isn't changing?

The British sovereign is also head of the Church of England -- part of the Anglican church -- and retains the title Defender of the Faith. David Cameron said at the 2011 meeting that "the monarch must be in communion with the Church of England because he or she is the head of that church." This would currently bar a Catholic holding the crown.

[Grindelwald]

No. There is no reason to repeal it. A better move would be to get rid of the NRA. There is no reason why legal citizens shouldn't be allowed a handgun as long as they go through a background check. And banning assault weapons is not an attack on the 2nd amendment.

[Rael]

No. There is no reason to repeal it. A better move would be to get rid of the NRA. There is no reason why legal citizens shouldn't be allowed a handgun as long as they go through a background check. And banning assault weapons is not an attack on the 2nd amendment.

How do you propose to "get rid of the NRA"? Are you suggesting we should outlaw groups when we don't like their ideas?

[Grindelwald]

How do you propose to "get rid of the NRA"? Are you suggesting we should outlaw groups when we don't like their ideas?

The NRA would rather blame autistic kids rather than face reality. Only time will really eradicate them unfortunately.