By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Man carries assault rifle to Obama protest -- and it's legal

that's cold man, Im glad you have no role what so ever in legislation that governs the United States.



“When we make some new announcement and if there is no positive initial reaction from the market, I try to think of it as a good sign because that can be interpreted as people reacting to something groundbreaking. ...if the employees were always minding themselves to do whatever the market is requiring at any moment, and if they were always focusing on something we can sell right now for the short term, it would be very limiting. We are trying to think outside the box.” - Satoru Iwata - This is why corporate multinationals will never truly understand, or risk doing, what Nintendo does.

Around the Network
Rath said:

Also if I'm not hugely mistaken the original reason for the right to bear arms was to protect not against the government but against the British. If I'm right about that then the second amendment is hugely outdated as the Brits aren't that likely to invade anymore.

the right was because our founding fathers knew the US government would need to be overthrown one day. If they were to be brought back from the dead, they would be shocked that we didn't do it 100 years ago.

Today, they would start another revolution, and for it, be called terrorists.



megaman79 said:
that's cold man, Im glad you have no role what so ever in legislation that governs the United States.

???

What's cold? The fact that I am happy 1.5 million more Americans now have health insurance, or that I have not figured out how to live forever?



TheRealMafoo said:
Rath said:

Also if I'm not hugely mistaken the original reason for the right to bear arms was to protect not against the government but against the British. If I'm right about that then the second amendment is hugely outdated as the Brits aren't that likely to invade anymore.

the right was because our founding fathers knew the US government would need to be overthrown one day. If they were to be brought back from the dead, they would be shocked that we didn't do it 100 years ago.

Today, they would start another revolution, and for it, be called terrorists.

Well nice job speaking for people who are several hundred years dead - I'm sure you somehow talk to them and ask them what they would do?



You got stats on the number of under insured people? You got stats on those 1.5 million since they were fired last year? Of course you don't.



“When we make some new announcement and if there is no positive initial reaction from the market, I try to think of it as a good sign because that can be interpreted as people reacting to something groundbreaking. ...if the employees were always minding themselves to do whatever the market is requiring at any moment, and if they were always focusing on something we can sell right now for the short term, it would be very limiting. We are trying to think outside the box.” - Satoru Iwata - This is why corporate multinationals will never truly understand, or risk doing, what Nintendo does.

Around the Network
Rath said:
TheRealMafoo said:
Rath said:

Also if I'm not hugely mistaken the original reason for the right to bear arms was to protect not against the government but against the British. If I'm right about that then the second amendment is hugely outdated as the Brits aren't that likely to invade anymore.

the right was because our founding fathers knew the US government would need to be overthrown one day. If they were to be brought back from the dead, they would be shocked that we didn't do it 100 years ago.

Today, they would start another revolution, and for it, be called terrorists.

Well nice job speaking for people who are several hundred years dead - I'm sure you somehow talk to them and ask them what they would do?

Forgive me for thinking they would do what they did do. how rude of me.



megaman79 said:
You got stats on the number of under insured people? You got stats on those 1.5 million since they were fired last year? Of course you don't.

You're like arguing with a child. how old are you?



TheRealMafoo said:
Rath said:

Well nice job speaking for people who are several hundred years dead - I'm sure you somehow talk to them and ask them what they would do?

Forgive me for thinking they would do what they did do. how rude of me.

What they did do several hundred years ago in a situation and time very different to now. Of course you can predict exactly what their reactions would be.

This reminds me of the South Park episode where both sides argue that the founding fathers would have supported them.

 

This is now, they lived back then. Invoking what you think the founding fathers would do doesn't make your argument any more convincing.



TheRealMafoo said:
megaman79 said:
You got stats on the number of under insured people? You got stats on those 1.5 million since they were fired last year? Of course you don't.

You're like arguing with a child. how old are you?

Keep it up mate, now its personal attacks. You gonna bring a gun next time?



“When we make some new announcement and if there is no positive initial reaction from the market, I try to think of it as a good sign because that can be interpreted as people reacting to something groundbreaking. ...if the employees were always minding themselves to do whatever the market is requiring at any moment, and if they were always focusing on something we can sell right now for the short term, it would be very limiting. We are trying to think outside the box.” - Satoru Iwata - This is why corporate multinationals will never truly understand, or risk doing, what Nintendo does.

Rath said:
TheRealMafoo said:
Rath said:

Well nice job speaking for people who are several hundred years dead - I'm sure you somehow talk to them and ask them what they would do?

Forgive me for thinking they would do what they did do. how rude of me.

What they did do several hundred years ago in a situation and time very different to now. Of course you can predict exactly what their reactions would be.

This reminds me of the South Park episode where both sides argue that the founding fathers would have supported them.

 

This is now, they lived back then. Invoking what you think the founding fathers would do doesn't make your argument any more convincing.

That was "I'm A Litte Bit Country", the 100th episode, and does this argument have a point?



Kimi wa ne tashika ni ano toki watashi no soba ni ita

Itsudatte itsudatte itsudatte

Sugu yoko de waratteita

Nakushitemo torimodosu kimi wo

I will never leave you