Billy Blaggs
Flacco of the Blaggs tribe
Unless you mean about me and Dwazza and Florida Man.
Dwazza has guns. Florida Man probably does.
I'm good with a knife
Dwazza has guns. Florida Man probably does.
I'm good with a knife
There are no words that fit together in a coherent sentence that would explain the clusterfeckery you pair would cause if let loose together.Like they'd take me
Me and @Florida Man live in the same city
Imagine me and @Dwazza Gunnar Solskjær
There are no words that fit together in a coherent sentence that would explain the clusterfeckery you pair would cause if let loose together.
I shouldn't laugh, but then having said thatIs it just me or is there a very good line of sight in that hallway?
But they have bullet proof things sticking out of the wallsI shouldn't laugh, but then having said that
Hire me to be his personal teacher. Job done.Is a sad fact that I am thinking about home school for my boy.
I could have before my dad took me for everything I hadHire me to be his personal teacher. Job done.
Being real here: you should be able to do online virtual school through the state and it’s taxpayer funded.I could have before my dad took me for everything I had
But then he does't get the school experienceBeing real here: you should be able to do online virtual school through the state and it’s taxpayer funded.
Not enough with the money or balls to go against the most powerful lobby group in America - essentially you are asking them to change the consitution and sadly nobody there is willing to consider that.It's horrible that parents have to feel like that in the USA. Surely there are enough sane people to have gun control?
Is that necessarily a bad thing?But then he does't get the school experience
I still can't get my head around how much influence an organization has on the running of a country and determining its policies. It's crazy.Not enough with the money or balls to go against the most powerful lobby group in America - essentially you are asking them to change the consitution and sadly nobody there is willing to consider that.
We're rightly cynical when we read in books like The Godfather how a mafia boss 'has senators and judges in his pocket'; now where do we thnk those bosses got that idea from?I still can't get my head around how much influence an organization has on the running of a country and determining its policies. It's crazy.
It's from the scarf and snood industry. Those bastards are brutal.We're rightly cynical when we read in books like The Godfather how a mafia boss 'has senators and judges in his pocket'; now where do we thnk those bosses got that idea from?
Not in this day and age in this countryIs that necessarily a bad thing?
It's horrible that parents have to feel like that in the USA. Surely there are enough sane people to have gun control?
They pray to the alter of violence. The voice of reason is muted.Not enough with the money or balls to go against the most powerful lobby group in America - essentially you are asking them to change the consitution and sadly nobody there is willing to consider that.
you bastard!There are no words that fit together in a coherent sentence that would explain the clusterfeckery you pair would cause if let loose together.
I mean, sure, the US, and Florida especially, are crazy but Canada has winters and no tropical beaches.I don't know.. Canada?
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20190830/nascar-takes-a-hard-leftFairfax, Va.— The National Rifle Association released the following statement today regarding Walmart's decision to change its firearms and ammunition policies:
"The strongest defense of freedom has always been our free-market economy. It is shameful to see Walmart succumb to the pressure of the anti-gun elites. Lines at Walmart will soon be replaced by lines at other retailers who are more supportive of America’s fundamental freedoms. The truth is Walmart’s actions today will not make us any safer. Rather than place the blame on the criminal, Walmart has chosen to victimize law-abiding Americans. Our leaders must be willing to approach the problems of crime, violence and mental health with sincerity and honesty."
fecking frightening pal.Did you see the texts I got the other day?
And yet they don't get itfecking frightening pal.
Good question and which countries in Europe have soldiers patrolling civilian areas?What other country has cops at schools. Serious question
The thing is, the interpretation of the 2nd amendment has slowly been changed, starting in the 1970's I believe, and culminating in 2008 or 2009. The original framing of the 2nd amendment, made the right to bear arms, part and parcel with participation in a well regulated militia. This is because, virtually every able bodied man, at that time, was legally obligated to be part of the militia. AKA, the entire citizenry was formally part of the militia, and since the militia was the first line of defense against foreign or domestic threat, they had to be armed, hence, the right to bear arms cannot be infringed for the safety of the nation. This was required, because Washington was distrustful of a standing army (the founding fathers in general were), however, they also understood the importance of a real army when it came to fighting a real war. The militia were nothing more than cannon fodder to be thrown at an enemy until such a time that a real army could be raised, trained and armed.I still can't get my head around how much influence an organization has on the running of a country and determining its policies. It's crazy.
Everybody knows the 2nd Amendment is no longer fit for purpose and is purely used as an excuse to maintain the status quo. The Alabama High School shooting didn't even cause a ripple and the Texas shooting is old news now.
Nothing will ever change over there.
The police have already shot somebody they thought was the shooter because of his gun.Has anyone considered what will happen when there is an active shooter, and two or more "good guys with guns" start shooting at each other after mistaking each other for the shooter?
Do they seriously still believe that they could be invaded or go through some full scale civil war?? We don't live in those times anymore. The 2nd Amendment just needs to be scrapped...period! As I've said before so long as they keep that shit over there, let them carry on shooting themselves to pieces.The thing is, the interpretation of the 2nd amendment has slowly been changed, starting in the 1970's I believe, and culminating in 2008 or 2009. The original framing of the 2nd amendment, made the right to bear arms, part and parcel with participation in a well regulated militia. This is because, virtually every able bodied man, at that time, was legally obligated to be part of the militia. AKA, the entire citizenry was formally part of the militia, and since the militia was the first line of defense against foreign or domestic threat, they had to be armed, hence, the right to bear arms cannot be infringed for the safety of the nation. This was required, because Washington was distrustful of a standing army (the founding fathers in general were), however, they also understood the importance of a real army when it came to fighting a real war. The militia were nothing more than cannon fodder to be thrown at an enemy until such a time that a real army could be raised, trained and armed.
However, over the last 4 or 5 decades, this original interpretation of the 2nd amendment was changed and challenged by the supreme court, culminating in 2008 I believe, where the whole requisite bit about "well regulated" militias has become its own separate thing. All thanks to big money NRA lobbying. I'm just not sure how you can rationalize this change of interpretation, since it's one single fecking clause. There is no period. It's one single sentence ascribing the right to bear arms, with participation in a well regulated militia (some degree of formal training, and the responsibility that goes along with it).
Why even bother thinking that far ahead?Has anyone considered what will happen when there is an active shooter, and two or more "good guys with guns" start shooting at each other after mistaking each other for the shooter?
Scalia always called himself an originalist too, didn't he?The thing is, the interpretation of the 2nd amendment has slowly been changed, starting in the 1970's I believe, and culminating in 2008 or 2009.....
They don't think that way. They think that owning a machine gun makes you safeDo they seriously still believe that they could be invaded or go through some full scale civil war?? We don't live in those times anymore. The 2nd Amendment just needs to be scrapped...period! As I've said before so long as they keep that shit over there, let them carry on shooting themselves to pieces.
How does owning a gun make you safe? Just curious? If somebody rocks up at your place of work with an AK-47, how does having a gun make you safe? By the time he's probably been taken down, he's most likely taken out 20-30 people. Just sayin'...They don't think that way. They think that owning a machine gun makes you safe
Owning a hand gun is safe
I've seen a shootout. Noone hit anyone but it did go through the house.