someone should create an anti gun policing force that gets rented by cities/states

wow, what a way to prove my point. Don’t quote a scientist, quote a politician......an old out of touch one at that.

 

So far, you’ve proved my point.

 

Everything you've mentioned on implementation is a violation of the 4th, 5th, and 14th amendments. When you get to how you house this mobile million man private army I'm sure you'll decide to house them in people's homes "temporarily".

I do care about kids more than guns, which I why I abhor your proposal: You wish to violate their constitutional rights, their parents constitutional rights, and likely spark a civil war killing many of the same and maiming many more, starving others, Etc. all because you're a hoplophobe

 

So far I've proven you wrong and you've been hilariously pointing out the Court saying "dagosa is wrong" over and over and over again.
But hey man, maintain that fantasy.

 

More woo woo.....nothing backed up. Wrong about what ? You can’t even itemize particulars.

 

All you have to do is say you believe in the consensus science practiced by the universities and relavent research institutions and and all the industrialized nations of the world. If you can’t, it’s you, not me who are suspect on every issue.

 

That you think the individual quoted is "an old out of touch one" shows just how thoroughly and disgustingly offensive to political liberty you truly are.

 

Liberty only comes through complete investigation of the facts from those most qualitfied. In our our system it’s the SC, in the physical world it’s our scientists and relavent institutions..

That you would make such a ridiculous statement on one hand after using your account of the Heller decsion and others to buttress your own faulty view of this world, only shows how out of touch you are with reality. Known facts ? You would know one if you tripped over it.
You either beleive in science as constructed by our relavent institutions and our constitution as decided by those relevant institutions, or you don’t. You can’t pick and chose one conspiracy theory over another. Your laughingly obsurdity is in jumping from one lie to another.

 

Let’s take a poll. Do you beleive in the science practiced consenually by every one of the thousands of universities, relavent institutions and major institutions of science in our own government and free democracies throughout the world ?
Yes or no.

 

I don’t trust you to interpret any quote by anyone. You simply pick and choose isolated phrases and pretend they are truths. I’m used to the criminal Trump, the criminal NRA and the GOP doing that all the time. Go Mitch.

 

No, primarily because they either toe the global warming lie or they are shunned when it comes to grants, so they do what they have to do to stay funded and that is toe the line.

 

Please don’t correct anyone’s grammar while constantly misusing reflexive pronouns all the time....it’s really pathetically obvious you’re not the one to be correcting anyone’s grammar.
Please study the following.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/grammar/when-to-use-myself-and-yourself

 

Another example of a pseudo intellectual grabbing onto one phrase or word while trying to impress his equally uninformed “friends”. Dicta...wow. More woo woo .

 

Dude, see the little arrow? Click it until you get back to our previous conversation a few days ago. I've already quoted you the section in particular. We went round and round about it a few days ago, why should I waste more of my time citing it, AGAIN?

The word "dicta" is a term of art, it is not "woo woo". The fact that you don't understand what it means is telling.

I'm not sure what the "consensus science" you're asking about is. Perhaps you've posted in the wrong thread? Poor dear, so easily confused.

 

And yet such was not actually attempted after the Columbine incident, or any school shooting that followed afterward prior to the Heller and McDonald rulings. Therefore those rulings did not, in any way, facilitate so much as a single firearm-related crime being committed in their aftermath.

Then point out the firearm-related restrictions that have actually been struck down in the wake of the Heller and McDonald rulings, by judges that have been empowered to do such. Go ahead and cite each example.

 

Such as what, precisely? When explaining why so-called "universal" background checks are both unenforceable and useless? Demonstrate precisely what so-called "science" is being denied in this particular matter.

 

Let's see here.... What you think, and your interpretation of the facts, is clearly that of an uneducated mind. Maybe you should try spell-checking yourself. You don't even know how to spell "relavent", much less comprehend whether something is or is not such.

I haven't discussed the Heller "decsion" in any kind of depth, so you don't even have the ability to separate out which conversation you're having; much less know what reality you are trapped by, or "beleive" in.

The Constitution is not "science". It is law; law you piss on and twist and corrupt. You, sir, are the "obsurdity", the one "jumping from lie to another", and YOU are the traitor to the Constitution who is unworthy of further acknowledgment.

In "our our system", when the SC violates its duty to protect the Constitution, then the people themselves - the ARMED people - are the final Check in the system of Checks and Balances to protect Liberty.

 

As opposed to the politically-concocted phrase "assault weapon" that holds absolutely no real world meaning, is overly broad, intentionally vague, and is constantly shouted by those who cannot tell one firearm from another?

 

Such trivialities notwithstanding, the inability on the part of yourself to comprehend the grammatical meaning of the phrase "not absolute" is still not the fault of myself.

 

Still, it’s pretty funny how you try to correct others while being continuously wrong yourself. It makes your cred pretty weak. And, it’s not a triviality in the real world. It’s how people are judged as frauds or not. So, are you trying to sound smart or is the Russian bot translator a little off ?

 

The manner of address utilized on the part of the one behind the account when addressing others was selected for a specific purpose.

Can the same be claimed on the part of yourself with regard to failing to understand the phrase "not absolute" does not grammatically amount to meaning next to nonexistent?

 

English......that is our official language here in the good old U. S. of A. So, please stop correcting me using a glorified form of pig Latin.

 

Typical, everyone is into correcting grammar when called upon to correct their false statements. Let me know if you want to keep playing games, which you're obviously into. Gunaholics have no intent in being factual. If they were, they’d understand that the practice of law is an exercise in the scientific method.

. *The law degree is required for individuals who wish to practice law in the United States. Three types of law degrees prepare individuals for work as a lawyer. These programs include Juris Doctor, Master of Laws and Doctor of Juridical Science.* The highest degree in law, IS A DEGREE IN JUDICIAL SCIENCE. “ There, you’ve learned something new...

 

Don’t be so far off. Even those of us who were in the military, me not you, know that the term “assault weapon” has a particular connotation reserved for a platform that’s designed more for military use then civilian. Unless you’re into shooting a heard of wild attacking pigs, assault weapons have little use in the hands of most civilians except for those with criminal intent or those who want to play soldier without ever exposing themselves to real dangers of being in warfare. That’s the vast majority of Gunaholics who parade around intimidating women and children and like you, think that sacrificing some children in mass shootings is worth it just so we can keep playing with our toys.

 

Do be sure to inform those present of when it is actually understood and acknowledged on the part of yourself that the phrase "not absolute" does not grammatically translate to next to nonexistent.