mark hartless

mark hartless 4 hours, 50 minutes ago on Joe Meglen: Militia purpose of law

What "things are true"??? What a huge stack of bullshit.

If it is reasonable to exclude people from toting guns due to their ignorance, inability to produce identification, mental instability, etc; then it is ABSOLUTELY EQUALLY reasonable to exclude people from voting and from entering our country on the same grounds.

The only differentiation is due to your hypocricy... period.

"The law hath said" ...???? Really??? The same law hath previously said that a black man was 3/5ths of you, Chris. Is THAT law a "law hath said" kind of law?????

The simple truth is you jackwagons want to kill certain rights and leave doors wide open elsewhere. And you can't base the two on the same logic, because you have no logic, only rhetoric...

0

mark hartless 7 hours, 43 minutes ago on Joe Meglen: Militia purpose of law

I still haven't heard any progressives explain why we can't write up language restricting gun ownership on the basis of intellect, education, mental stability, ability to produce identification, etc and then apply that word-for-word to voting and immigration restrictions...

Hypocr....

0

mark hartless 7 hours, 56 minutes ago on Joe Meglen: Militia purpose of law

Perhaps the most abused phrase in human history... and arguably progressives favorite...

If it really meant "all that which is not prohibited", then the 10th amendment would have never been written.

0

mark hartless 10 hours, 50 minutes ago on Joe Meglen: Militia purpose of law

Of that 369, how many desperately needed killing?? Jails are full, there's not much "affordable housing" in Steamboat. What's a cop to do, right??

And during that same 115 years, Britain has gone from "The sun never sets on British soil", to... well...

0

mark hartless 11 hours ago on Paul Bonnifield: Iran deal criticized

Come to think of it, I recall hearing about some statements such as "This planet needs a super-bug" to wipe humans out", and other similar statements. An almost LONGING for a human-ending catastrophe.

You don't suppose those same people or others in leadership roles view Iran as such an opportunity, do you????

0

mark hartless 11 hours, 9 minutes ago on Paul Bonnifield: Iran deal criticized

World war 2 cost the lives of over 60 million people. That was before nuclear weapons. Waiting for the next "Pearl Harbor" before acting somehow seems a little... well... stupid.

Perhaps we should apply that same logic to the global warming argument. Let's just take a "wait and see" attitude toward that, too...

At least with nukes, ww3 won't last so long. If it only kills 3% of the earth's population, like ww2 did, then it won't be so bad, right??... that's only 210,000,000 people... Need to get some of this "f*g humanity" off this planet anyway, right???

0

Prev