50 replies to this topic

[Bird76Mojo]

And once again, freedom of speech is thrown around where it has no applicability.  The First Amendment and a person's Freedom of Speech has nothing to do with private websites.  The First Amendment only relates to whether the government can prohibit speech.  I sometimes wonder when someone throws around the free speech argument here whether they accurately undertand any of the Amendments if they can't get that one right. 

I don't enjoy the fact that my freedom of speech can be censored ANYWHERE. I"m glad to hear that you're happy about it though.

Did you also root for the "freedom of speech zones" when they were deemed to be legal?

You'll make a good little boot licker when the time comes.

[Molly B.]

 

And once again, freedom of speech is thrown around where it has no applicability.  The First Amendment and a person's Freedom of Speech has nothing to do with private websites.  The First Amendment only relates to whether the government can prohibit speech.  I sometimes wonder when someone throws around the free speech argument here whether they accurately undertand any of the Amendments if they can't get that one right. 

I don't enjoy the fact that my freedom of speech can be censored ANYWHERE. I"m glad to hear that you're happy about it though.

Did you also root for the "freedom of speech zones" when they were deemed to be legal?

You'll make a good little boot licker when the time comes.

 

 

Bird,

 

Please take a moment to review our code of conduct at this link:

http://illinoiscarry...showtopic=18164

 

Violations of the code of conduct are not acceptable. If you will not abide by the code of conduct, there are other forums and internet groups for you to 'express' yourself and we will wish you well.

[TriumphRider]

 

And once again, freedom of speech is thrown around where it has no applicability.  The First Amendment and a person's Freedom of Speech has nothing to do with private websites.  The First Amendment only relates to whether the government can prohibit speech.  I sometimes wonder when someone throws around the free speech argument here whether they accurately undertand any of the Amendments if they can't get that one right. 

I don't enjoy the fact that my freedom of speech can be censored ANYWHERE. I"m glad to hear that you're happy about it though.

Did you also root for the "freedom of speech zones" when they were deemed to be legal?

You'll make a good little boot licker when the time comes.

 

Bird,

 

  You seem to forget that this IS a privately-owned web forum.  THEIR house, THEY set the rules.

 

NOONE here is a fan of censorship, but the OWNERS have set their standards for participation on this site.  We can either abide by those rules, or we are free to take ourselves somewhere else.

Your attitude is akin to someone coming to your house, and demanding you allow them to comport themselves in a manner which you have deemed unacceptable.

 

  Molly and Mauser have been pretty easy on you up until now, and you have a choice - Either follow the published rules of engagement or go elsewhere. 

 

Have a Nice Day.

 

Mike

[soundguy]

The Second Amendment must not be retarded by confining it to a conservative point of view.

It must be liberated, and available to all of the people.

[chicagoresident]

And once again, freedom of speech is thrown around where it has no applicability.  The First Amendment and a person's Freedom of Speech has nothing to do with private websites.  The First Amendment only relates to whether the government can prohibit speech.  I sometimes wonder when someone throws around the free speech argument here whether they accurately undertand any of the Amendments if they can't get that one right.

I don't enjoy the fact that my freedom of speech can be censored ANYWHERE. I"m glad to hear that you're happy about it though.
Did you also root for the "freedom of speech zones" when they were deemed to be legal?
You'll make a good little boot licker when the time comes.

Bird,
 
  You seem to forget that this IS a privately-owned web forum.  THEIR house, THEY set the rules.
 
NOONE here is a fan of censorship, but the OWNERS have set their standards for participation on this site.  We can either abide by those rules, or we are free to take ourselves somewhere else.
Your attitude is akin to someone coming to your house, and demanding you allow them to comport themselves in a manner which you have deemed unacceptable.
 
  Molly and Mauser have been pretty easy on you up until now, and you have a choice - Either follow the published rules of engagement or go elsewhere. 
 
Have a Nice Day.
 
Mike

LOL, gotta love RWR's. The Government is plotting communism, IE seizing control of private entities. Also RWR's the government must seize control of private entities to protect "mah free speech" cuz of my weak understanding of the 1st ammendment.

The government forcing a private platform owner with their own curated editorial voice to allow subscribers to *post whatever they want is by definition of the 1st ammendment a violation of free speech.

A moderator is the same as an editor of a newspaper or a host on a talkshow. No private entity has to publish your letter to the editor or put you on as a guest.

Edited by chicagoresident, 24 May 2019 - 07:10 AM.

[steveTA84]

The Second Amendment must not be retarded by confining it to a conservative point of view.
It must be liberated, and available to all of the people.

Totally agree. Thats why members of both clown shows (political parties) need to hold there representatives accountable and not put up with anti-2A people from either party.

Edited by steveTA84, 24 May 2019 - 08:01 AM.

[GeekDad]

The Second Amendment must not be retarded by confining it to a conservative point of view.

It must be liberated, and available to all of the people.

 

Yep! Nicely put.

[jim123]

 

The Second Amendment must not be retarded by confining it to a conservative point of view.

It must be liberated, and available to all of the people.

 

Yep! Nicely put.

 

Don't be retarded. Remember this?

 

or this?

[HeavyDuty]

The Second Amendment must not be retarded by confining it to a conservative point of view.
It must be liberated, and available to all of the people.

 
Yep! Nicely put.

Don't be retarded. Remember this?
https://www.youtube....h?v=ffI-tWh37UY
 
or this?
https://www.youtube....h?v=PoSYUYfi0NU

What’s your point?

[modeler1945]

 

 

Don't be retarded. Remember this?

 
or this?

What’s your point?

 

That he's willfully ignorant in more ways than one?

Edited by modeler1945, 24 May 2019 - 03:38 PM.

[Molly B.]

That there really are elected officials who do actually want to take guns away from law abiding citizens?

[RandyP]

I am mostly politically apathetic, but I guess if I need to hang a label around my neck it would be Independent?

 

During my slow and careful reading just now of the entire 2nd Amendment -thankfully it is brief and doesn't use 'big' words - I was unable to locate where it mentions political party affilliations or general left/right - liberal/conservative leanings being a starting or defining point? 

 

 

Merely this geezer's opinion = that which divides us makes us weaker.

[Mr. Fife]

Didn't Obama say he bowls like a retard while looking at Russia from his porch? Something like that I recall.

[Euler]

Didn't Obama say he bowls like a retard while looking at Russia from his porch? Something like that I recall.

Obama said he bowls like a Special Olympics participant (although he later apologized). He didn't use the word "retarded," which is still a valid word (meaning slowed or delayed, the opposite of expedited) outside of the context in which it's a slur.

Tina Fey (portraying Sarah Palin on SNL) said that her foreign policy credentials included the ability to see Russia from her front porch.

I'm not sure how either reference adds to a discussion of the Liberal Gun Club being pro-2A.

[GT1]

The best way to get these guys with you on the issue is to use slurs when referencing them.

Like butter.

Anyway, they aren't yahoo based.

https://theliberalgunclub.com/

[TriumphRider]

Please pardon my ignorance , but what is an "RWR"?

[Euler]

Right-wing radical

[Mr. Fife]

Didn't Obama say he bowls like a retard while looking at Russia from his porch? Something like that I recall.Obama said he bowls like a Special Olympics participant (although he later apologized). He didn't use the word "retarded," which is still a valid word (meaning slowed or delayed, the opposite of expedited) outside of the context in which it's a slur.Tina Fey (portraying Sarah Palin on SNL) said that her foreign policy credentials included the ability to see Russia from her front porch.I'm not sure how either reference adds to a discussion of the Liberal Gun Club being pro-2A.

Now I remember Tina Fey portraying Palin. Who was it portraying Obama saying retard?

[steveTA84]

^^^^^
I got to be one of those at the range the other day (RWR) , although Im not a radical



Trigger warning: it has German marching music in it (GASP!) because its German WW2 weapons



Someone PLEASE take the bait and call that a Nazi song.....

Edited by steveTA84, 25 May 2019 - 08:37 AM.

[chicagoresident]

Please pardon my ignorance , but what is an "RWR"?

I made it up for the thread, opposite of Lib*

[soundguy]

 

Didn't Obama say he bowls like a retard while looking at Russia from his porch? Something like that I recall.Obama said he bowls like a Special Olympics participant (although he later apologized). He didn't use the word "retarded," which is still a valid word (meaning slowed or delayed, the opposite of expedited) outside of the context in which it's a slur.Tina Fey (portraying Sarah Palin on SNL) said that her foreign policy credentials included the ability to see Russia from her front porch.I'm not sure how either reference adds to a discussion of the Liberal Gun Club being pro-2A.

Now I remember Tina Fey portraying Palin. Who was it portraying Obama saying retard?

 

 

Fred Armison?