|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> It's gonna be the longest /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1650596832 Message started by justin_o_guy2 on 04/21/22 at 20:07:12 |
|
Title: It's gonna be the longest Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/21/22 at 20:07:12 I fukkin Told you... EVER https://basedunderground.com/2022/04/21/a-staggering-number-of-athletes-collapsed-this-past-year/ Average age? Mehh,,23.. STORY AT-A-GLANCE More than 769 athletes have collapsed on the field during a game from March 2021 to March 2022 The shocking statistic was revealed by One America News Network (OAN), which also found the average age of the athletes who suffered cardiac arrest is just 23 years old An updated report by Good Sciencing, a team of investigators, news editors, journalists and “truth seekers,” has detailed 890 cardiac arrests and other serious issues among athletes, including 579 deaths, following COVID-19 shots With cases like these becoming impossible to ignore, even a mainstream media sports channel in Australia speculated that the health issues could be linked to COVID-19 shots, and one of the hosts acknowledged that multiple players have suffered from heart issues and Bell’s palsy following COVID-19 booster shots More than 769 athletes have collapsed on the field during a game from March 2021 to March 2022. The shocking statistic was revealed by One America News Network (OAN), which also found the average age of the athletes who suffered cardiac arrest is just 23 years old.1 The unprecedented surge in cardiac arrest and other heart issues among elite athletes coincides with the rollout of COVID-19 jabs. The Miami Open made headlines in early April 2022 after 15 players — all of whom had reportedly received COVID-19 injections2 — dropped out. Among them were favorites Paula Badosa and Jannik Sinner. Badosa left the court in tears after becoming unwell, and Sinner’s opponent said he saw him “bend over” on the court, noting “it was very strange.”3 Even the fans were confused, with one stating, “What is going on?”4 As Pearson Sharp of OAN explained, “These are just two of more than 769 athletes who have collapsed during a game, on the field, over the last year.” He continued:5 Z-Stack 1 “How many 23-year-old athletes were collapsing and suffering heart attacks before this year? Do you know any 23-year-old people who had heart attacks before now? And these are just the ones we know about. How many have gone unreported? Nearly 800 athletes — young, fit people in the prime of life — falling down on the field. In fact, 500% more soccer players in the EU are dropping dead from heart attacks than just one year ago. Coincidence? When the Pfizer vaccine is known to cause heart inflammation? No. In fact, many doctors treating these players list their injuries and deaths as being directly caused by the vaccine … This is not a coincidence.” VAERS May Not Show the Whole Picture As of April 1, 2022, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), which is where adverse events caused by COVID-19 jabs in the U.S. are supposed to be collected, lists 26,693 deaths along with 147,677 hospitalizations in association with the COVID-19 shot.6 There are also 13,677 heart attacks and 38,024 cases of myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) and pericarditis (inflammation of the tissue sac surrounding the heart). Myocarditis and pericarditis cause symptoms such as chest pain, shortness of breath and a fluttering or pounding heart. Cases have occurred most often after mRNA COVID-19 injections (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna), particularly in male adolescents and young adults, according to the CDC. Further, myocarditis occurs more often after the second injection, usually within a week.7 Past investigations have shown only between 1%8 and 10%9 of adverse reactions are ever reported to VAERS, which is a passive, voluntary reporting system, so the actual number could be much higher. Kyle Warner is one athlete who filed a VAERS report about his own health injuries following the COVID-19 jab. It took him 45 minutes to complete — a length of time that many doctors can’t or won’t devote when it comes to reporting adverse vaccine reactions seen among their patients. Warner, who is 29 years old, was at the peak of his career as a professional mountain bike racer when, in June 2021, he got his second dose of Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot. He suffered a reaction so severe that, months later, he was Aaand the C&P failed riiight there |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/23/22 at 20:35:25 It's okay to have been suckered. Every so called Expert was pushing it. https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=245705 I wish nobody I knew had taken this |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Eegore on 04/29/22 at 07:32:21 More information about consistent rise in heart issues in kids: https://health.clevelandclinic.org/why-are-heart-attacks-on-the-rise-in-young-people/ https://www.acc.org/about-acc/press-releases/2019/03/07/08/45/heart-attacks-increasingly-common-in-young-adults https://www.texasheart.org/heart-health/heart-information-center/topics/heart-disease-risk-factors-for-children-and-teenagers/ https://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/news/20190307/heart-attacks-striking-more-young-adults How's that look? |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by justin_o_guy2 on 04/29/22 at 09:50:33 I remember the crap you posted to try to support the covid numbers. You were determined that only CDC numbers were valid. They weren't. My observations were more accurate. You can believe whatever you want. My mind is made up. |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Eegore on 04/29/22 at 10:28:19 "I remember the crap you posted to try to support the covid numbers" That you refuse to look at. "You were determined that only CDC numbers were valid." Incorrect, I said the CDC did not lie when someone else lied about the inaccurate CDC data. The CDC is not the most accurate system, but you ignore I said that and instead pretend I say the CDC is correct because I called a person who lied, a liar. Again you completely ignore my contribution here, and then ask for "discussion". You want discussion, ask why I provided the information I did instead of claiming I said things I did not say and calling information you wont read wrong. "My observations were more accurate." Again: How many kids died where you live? What are your observations on dead kids in TX? Using the numbers you have provided, there should be at a minimum 3 hundred thousand kids dead from heart attacks alone. Have you observed anything that indicates just over 3 hundred thousand kids dying in TX? |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/07/22 at 17:47:59 I did not create the numbers. You know that. You pushed the numbers of Dead FROM covid Wrong.. And the jab has proven to be a horrible idea. I've been Watching since I was a kid. My observations, while almost every time contradictory with the Official explanation have proven to be correct so often that I just Don't listen to people like you. Aaand, I'm still comfortable because I see myself as Vindicated. YMMV And I simply don't care. |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Eegore on 05/07/22 at 22:13:42 "I did not create the numbers. You know that." No you just posted them as fact without even looking at them. Then when people that did look at them inform you that they don't say what the headline of the article says they do, you called "bullsh!t". You pushed the numbers of Dead FROM covid" Except you never looked at my information so how would you know? I never said CDC counts were accurate, I actually said the opposite but since I don't just agree whole-heartedly with the information posted here then I must be pro-vaccine, think the military never lies and the CDC is never wrong. I never said only the CDC numbers are valid, I actually outlined multi-phase reverification methods we used in CO because the CDC method was too inaccurate - but you ignore that - so you can keep falsely claiming I think "only" the CDC info is accurate. Obviously you are correct because you refuse to look at anything that would say otherwise. You still won't acknowledge that multiple Billions of people have received the vaccine and lived without issue. The math You posted, and argued multiple times was correct, and still never looked at, says at least 300,000 kids died in TX from heart issues. Have you observed anything in TX that indicates this to be true? I posted 4 links here you continue to ignore while I look through your information in detail. Do you see anything potentially important about the heart issues I posted about? |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by MnSpring on 05/08/22 at 15:26:49 0121232B3621440 wrote:
I did. I read them. And none of then mentioned anything about a reason being the c-19 vac/boosters., They all mentioned, only, the traditional reasons for a Heart Attack. Wonder why that is ? |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Eegore on 05/09/22 at 20:15:54 "And none of then mentioned anything about a reason being the c-19 vac/boosters., They all mentioned, only, the traditional reasons for a Heart Attack. Wonder why that is ?" Because all of them are before C-19. Myocarditis among other cardiac issues in children in the US have been on the rise, significantly, before C-19 or any vaccines. This is a known issue, but today people want to act like every heart issue is exclusively due to vaccines. This data is excluded in the presented material regarding post-vaccine outcomes. I wonder why that is ? Couldn't be to skew data, only the bad guys do that. This is how we end up with asinine evaluations that claim 1 in 10 die, or that the average age is 23. Of course it is 23 when the age parameters are cut. If I select data only for people ages 10 - 15 the average age would be 13. 13 is even worse! Yes post C-19 vaccine cardiac issues need to be evaluated. But why use lies and skewed data to present that issue? Why is it ok for anti-vaccine to lie about numbers but not ok for pro-vaccine? According to the information presented there should be right at 300,000 dead kids in TX. Has anyone observed anything that supports this? |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by MnSpring on 05/10/22 at 10:28:54 6747454D5047220 wrote:
If a person has/had the, ‘tendency’, to get Myocarditis, and they also contracted a case of a severe Flu/C-19, would they get a full blown case of Myocarditis ? “… Couldn't be to skew data, only the bad guys do that…” If someone/entity, said, continually, over the ‘broadcast’ airways, and print media, that, (to the effect) ‘The Sly Is Falling’, Is that someone/entity, a ‘bad guy’ or a ‘good guy’ ? “… Why is it ok for anti-vaccine to lie about numbers but not ok for pro-vaccine? …” Good question ! You want an answer. I would like a answer to this; ‘Why is it OK for a State to make Laws, allowing a Human Baby to be killed, for simply convenience sake, and at the same time, make Laws, Severely Restricting the Freedom to defend one’s self ? |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Eegore on 05/10/22 at 13:22:52 If a person has/had the, ‘tendency’, to get Myocarditis, and they also contracted a case of a severe Flu/C-19, would they get a full blown case of Myocarditis ? There isn't much evidence to support this. Flu most likely not, and C-19 hasn't been active in high-risk youth long enough to create a metric. "If someone/entity, said, continually, over the ‘broadcast’ airways, and print media, that, (to the effect) ‘The Sly Is Falling’, Is that someone/entity, a ‘bad guy’ or a ‘good guy’ ?" In what timeframe? If someone/entity continually indicated in an online forum that we will lose our rights to a specific Amendment of the US Constitution is that someone/entity a "bad guy" or "good guy"? Let's change "bag guys" to: Humans of opposing or perceived to be opposing viewpoints. Couldn't be to skew data, only Humans of opposing or perceived to be opposing viewpoints do that. "‘Why is it OK for a State to make Laws, allowing a Human Baby to be killed, for simply convenience sake, and at the same time, make Laws, Severely Restricting the Freedom to defend one’s self ?" Good question ! You want an answer. I would like an answer to this; Why is it ok for anti-vaccine to lie about numbers but not ok for pro-vaccine? |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by MnSpring on 05/10/22 at 13:49:15 4C6C6E667B6C090 wrote:
As always a great SPIN., Just forget about the FACT, that is said by many people, as a result of another saying ... ... ... Kinna like some here wanted to completely change the Second Amendment ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Eegore on 05/10/22 at 14:21:47 "Just forget about the FACT, that is said by many people, as a result of another saying" And are "many more people" a good guy" or a "bad guy"? "Kinna like some here wanted to completely change the Second Amendment" Replacing or removing the word "Militia" is not by my standard completely changing the Second Amendment. But as you indicated your stance is that any change of any kind can only be gun control measures. It somehow is impossible to make the 2nd Amendment more legally secure. If legislative restrictions are being placed because the term "Militia" is being challenged then take away that word. Remove the tool people are using to create gun control measures. Somehow that is also gun control? |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by MnSpring on 05/10/22 at 19:41:20 5D7D7F776A7D180 wrote:
Yes it is. It would be exactly the same as changing all the references to the words: ‘Gay, Plunger, Ejaculate, Apology, EGREGIOUS, NAUGHTY, SLY, (and hundreds more)’ in ALL the books/publications, where those words meant something else, then what they mean today. Just because we have, (for several decades now), DUMBED DOWN America. And people do not realize/know/have been taught, what ‘Militia’, and ‘Regulated’, meant in 1776. It is not a reason to bow-down to the absolute, stupidity of people that can not understand. |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Eegore on 05/10/22 at 20:18:47 "Yes it is." No it isn't. It is completely changing it by Your standard. "It would be exactly the same as changing all the references to the words: ‘Gay, Plunger, Ejaculate, Apology, EGREGIOUS, NAUGHTY, SLY, (and hundreds more)’ in ALL the books/publications, where those words meant something else, then what they mean today." I am not recommending anyone change All references, I am recommending One word be removed. Then you don't have to go try to re-educate millions of future voters and change every legal system, every school, etc. to understand a word a different way. You remove a word and remove all that power, as it no longer applies. Taking a stand on this has resulted in more gun control. Either way to you this is somehow a gun control measure because any recommendation to alter the 2nd Amendment can only be anti-gun. This makes no sense. Why is it ok for anti-vaccine to lie about numbers but not ok for pro-vaccine? |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by MnSpring on 05/11/22 at 10:19:04 4666646C7166030 wrote:
Why is it ok for government, media, CDC/WHO/States CDC, some Doctors, and (so called) Experts, lie about numbers, for pro-vaccine? But not ok, for people to point that out, with proof ? |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by MnSpring on 05/11/22 at 10:26:31 18383A322F385D0 wrote:
Remove one word ? That will stop the assault on Freedom by the UL DFI FDS Socialists ? Which word will be the next one. (Which surely will fix any problems) Oh wait, that didn't do it ether. Let's remove/change another, and another, and another, and another. |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Eegore on 05/11/22 at 11:52:43 "Why is it ok for government, media, CDC/WHO/States CDC, some Doctors, and (so called) Experts, lie about numbers, for pro-vaccine? But not ok, for people to point that out, with proof ?" Good question ! You want an answer. I would like an answer to this; Why is it ok for anti-vaccine to lie about numbers but not ok for pro-vaccine? The problem is that, on here, some people "that point that out", with "proof", do not even read their proof and tell people that actually do, that they are wrong. How would they know if they won't read the proof they present or the proof anyone else presents? The answer usually given is "observed reality." Lies come from all sides, not just the side that you don't like. According to "proof" provided here there should be about 300,000 dead kids in TX in 2021. Is there any "proof" or even evidence of this that can be "observed"? Is there any evidence 2000 soldiers per day are diagnosed with neurological disabilities? Is that being "observed" anywhere? |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Eegore on 05/11/22 at 11:56:30 "Remove one word ? That will stop the assault on Freedom by the UL DFI FDS Socialists ?" No. It will stop the most successful strategies. Losing and then complaining society needs to be educated better is still losing. Either way, according to you, this is a gun control measure because any change to the 2nd Amendment can only be gun control. Which makes zero sense. |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by MnSpring on 05/12/22 at 17:42:45 6B4B49415C4B2E0 wrote:
"... It will stop the most successful strategies ..." Nope. It will Not stop any attempts at removing Freedom. Removing a word will not 'stop' a Strategy. (successful or not) |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Eegore on 05/13/22 at 08:04:43 "Nope. It will Not stop any attempts at removing Freedom." I agree I never said attempts will stop. I said the most successful strategies. If "militia" is the term that turns the table on multiple gun law decisions, and "militia" is removed, how will the next attempt use a word that no longer exists in the Amendment? Either way, according to you, attempting to alter the 2nd Amendment in any way can only be a gun-control measure. It is not possible to make any change of any kind to the 2nd Amendment that is pro-gun. This, to me, makes no sense. |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/13/22 at 08:09:18 I agree. The amendment could be rewritten and absolutely eliminate any wiggle room to infringe on our rights. I wonder IF that happened, would it not also reinforce the others? |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/13/22 at 08:12:33 Your position supporting it is encouraging and makes me want to try harder to figure out who you really are. Honestly, I Don't get you,, it just seems like you are so determined to believe and defend what comes out of the government,, and then you keep standing tall on the second.. You confuse me, |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Eegore on 05/13/22 at 09:01:22 "Honestly, I Don't get you,, it just seems like you are so determined to believe and defend what comes out of the government,, and then you keep standing tall on the second.. You confuse me," It's because you ignore when I agree with you, and by my interpretation, over-react when I challenge one section in the numbers you present as proof. You don't even look at your own evidence so how would you know? I literally said multiple times the CDC numbers are wrong and helped build a more accurate double counting system in CO because of this, and you still claim I say CDC numbers are correct. Again I ask: Why did I challenge something I think is correct? When I don't think 300,000 kids died in TX, or that 2000 soldiers per day are disabled that is not equal to saying I think the Military never lies and kids don't die from vaccines. Your sources, in some cases, are also lying, those numbers are way too high to be true. I use the word "also" because I am acknowledging that other sources lie too. Have you observed anything in TX that indicates 300,000 kids died in 2021? |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Serowbot on 05/13/22 at 10:54:38 6E7177706D6A5B6B5B63717D36040 wrote:
JoG,.. I can't believe you haven't figured out yet that Eegore is secretly really Obama.. ;D |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/13/22 at 13:47:42 Bullshit, E is much smarter than Obama |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Eegore on 05/13/22 at 13:55:15 To be fair I left out that my communication can be confusing at times. What I say out loud, or how I hear it in my head doesn't always translate over to a forum post well, so that doesn't help things. |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by MnSpring on 05/13/22 at 18:04:55 19393B332E395C0 wrote:
Very long time ago. I and the family was watching the Ed Sullivan show. People spinning plates, dogs running through hoops, and someone with lipstick on his hand pretending his hand could talk. My older brother handed me a can of peanuts, said; ‘open them, have some’. I did, a ’snake’ jumped out. Everyone had a good laugh, including me. Then I examined the can and spring, ‘snake’, and preceded to stuff it back in. I Couldn’t. I wasn’t strong enough then to get the last bit back in, I need help from my brother. It is the same as the 2nd. Open it up, and you will NEVER get all the important stuff back in. (Now is the time for the SPIN, after all, could be a ‘red’ car around the corner) |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Eegore on 05/13/22 at 19:59:43 "It is the same as the 2nd. Open it up, and you will NEVER get all the important stuff back in." It doesn't matter anyway since according to your assessment any change can only be for gun control. The 2nd Amendment can never have a proposed alteration that is from gun freedom organizations, etc. This, to me, makes no sense. |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by MnSpring on 05/14/22 at 10:45:22 1C3C3E362B3C590 wrote:
Have not heard of any from, REAL, ‘gun freedom organizations’. Lots of FAKE gun organizations, who have a documented record of ,’saying’, something, yet do the complete opposite, are chiming in. Those are the, “… etc …” Those are the organizations that will succeed in putting the words. Can, Could, Possibly, Maybe, etc, etc, etc in. Kinna like the, ‘Liberal Gun Club’ in Calf. They love guns. As long as it is a ‘correct’ gun, has a ‘correct’ stock, for-end, barrel, accessories, installed the ‘correct’ way, with the ‘correct’ number of them. And it is stored, transported, shot, cleaned, the ‘correct’ way. One also needs to use the ‘correct’ ammunition, the ‘correct’ targets, at the ‘correct’ distance. Not forgetting to hold the gun the ‘correct’ way. |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Eegore on 05/14/22 at 10:59:47 "Have not heard of any from, REAL, ‘gun freedom organizations’. Lots of FAKE gun organizations, who have a documented record of ,’saying’, something, yet do the complete opposite, are chiming in. " It doesn't matter since by your assessment nothing can ever be pro-gun if it alters the 2nd Amendment. Only anti-gun changes are possible. Which, to me, makes no sense. "Kinna like the, ‘Liberal Gun Club’ in Calf. They love guns. As long as it is a ‘correct’ gun, has a ‘correct’ stock, for-end, barrel, accessories, installed the ‘correct’ way, with the ‘correct’ number of them. And it is stored, transported, shot, cleaned, the ‘correct’ way. One also needs to use the ‘correct’ ammunition, the ‘correct’ targets, at the ‘correct’ distance. Not forgetting to hold the gun the ‘correct’ way." No gun club on the planet can ever propose a pro-gun alteration to the 2nd Amendment according to your assessment since any possible proposal for any alteration to the 2nd Amendment can only be for gun-control. It is not possible for some reason, for this one Amendment to ever propose a pro-gun alteration. This, to me, makes zero sense. |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by MnSpring on 05/15/22 at 09:50:46 7E5E5C54495E3B0 wrote:
Yep, ya keep saying that. And it still does not change anything ! A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. You say remove one word (Militia) 18383A322F385D0 wrote:
'A well regulated, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed' That wording to me, makes zero sense ! And of course no one will say, 'well regulated', means something else. Not knowing the meaning in 1776, so remove it as well. (That is your reason for removing Militia) 'A, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed' That wording makes even less sense ! 'Being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. That sounds good. HOWEVER, do you actuality believe the UL, DFI, FDS, Socialists, will not say, the whole thing is now obsolete, because their is no need for 'security of a free State' ? 'The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.' That, sounds best. But if you have a scintilla of belief, that would ever be ratified, in this day of fixed elections. Ya better buy the Ocean Front Property in CO. Just leave it the way it is. And when the FDS DFI's do not know what a word meant 250 years ago. Just point out how totally Ignorant they are. |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Eegore on 05/15/22 at 20:08:32 "Just leave it the way it is. And when the FDS DFI's do not know what a word meant 250 years ago. Just point out how totally Ignorant they are." Pointing out ignorance isn't winning legislative battles. When ignorance wins, you still lose. Besides none of this matters because according to you, no amount of alteration of any kind, from any source, using any known words, could ever be for the purpose of gun freedom. Only gun control measures, according to you, can be used when it comes to the 2nd Amendment. No pro- gun freedom lawyer, Congressman or President could ever possibly propose strengthening the 2nd Amendment, only anti-gun can make proposals. This, to me, makes no sense. |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/16/22 at 08:59:50 It looks like his Reasoning is being dismissed. He spelled it out.. He does not trust allowing anyone to touch the constitution because they want to twist or delete it. He is not protecting what is messed up to Keep it messed up, but it's better than allowing the legislative branch to touch the constitution, because of what they have shown us. Need an example? Look at the border. |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Eegore on 05/16/22 at 13:10:08 "It looks like his Reasoning is being dismissed. He spelled it out.. He does not trust allowing anyone to touch the constitution because they want to twist or delete it." That's not what he said. He said any change to the 2nd Amendment can only be for gun control. Not The Constitution as a whole. Since I was recommending combating the successful strategies of gun-control legislation I also am pro-gun control. This, to me, makes no sense. |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/16/22 at 14:13:01 Here Allow me to assist you That sounds good. HOWEVER, do you actuality believe the UL, DFI, FDS, Socialists, will not say, the whole thing is now obsolete, because their is no need for 'security of a free State' ? You might not be the honest person you pretend to be |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by MnSpring on 05/16/22 at 14:26:18 0D2D2F273A2D480 wrote:
Don't remember that, can you point to the post I said those exact words ? or was it, 'paraphrasing' words ? Yep got it figured out, that you say; "... This, to me, makes no sense. ..." When someone says, they want to Protect the 2nd., |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/16/22 at 14:43:48 That sounds good. HOWEVER, do you actuality believe the UL, DFI, FDS, Socialists, will not say, the whole thing is now obsolete, because their is no need for 'security of a free State' ? So, either you are not reading the replies or you're unwilling to admit what he is saying Either way My willingness to accept your opinion is, mehhh,,, zero. |
|
Title: Re: It's gonna be the longest Post by Eegore on 05/16/22 at 18:20:26 Yep got it figured out, that you say; "... This, to me, makes no sense. ..." When someone says, they want to Protect the 2nd., No, I said it makes no sense, to me, when someone says that any changes to the 2nd Amendment can only be for gun control. I think all Amendments can have proposals that strengthen or weaken them. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |