Search results

Another brilliant post Lucrum. Yet you still never argued your point except because you say so and the usual cursing and name calling to highlight your inability to argue your opinion. Funny how you think you're smarter than everyone else not just me. At least I'm in good company with the...

Yes that part of your post is accurate I did say that and the Supreme Court can be wrong. That does not change the fact that their rulings are what defines what is and is not constitutional.

I agree with most on this issue that a background check is not an infringement of the 2nd amendment yet you call me names. Ego, vanity, frustrated, unable to communicate, or do you just like to verbally attack when stumped. Have you considered that you may be wrong here that maybe you don't...

Lucrum are you really this dense. The Supreme Court decides what is constitutional not you. If there is a disagreement no one goes to you to make the final decision, not on any subject.

If the Supreme Court could hear your argument just like you did it here I'm sure their opinion would change. Are you sure you're not a constitutional lawyer posing as a nitwit here on ET? Diabolical Lucrum.

Brilliant argument Lucrum.

Just because that is your opinion does not make it fact and by defination background check or permit is not listed as infringements in any dictionary I've seen. You seem think you are a constitutional law expert a criminal law expert a gun expert and on and on. Guess what you're not and yes...

Poor little Lucrum got a little ego problem. You may be the one in a million bad ass couch monkey it doesn't matter I'll take your money any time you grow some balls and save some money to back up your big mouth. But if you are who you pretend to be you'd be busting real balls where you live...

Funny stuff convert.

Fuck off dipshit understand.

Richter tell these rude ugly cunts to go fuck themselves. Don't take their shit.

Poor Lucrum living in a fantasy world. I guess you have to do what it takes to keep that ego of yours intact.

Funny Lucrum you'll never rub my nose in anything metaphorically or otherwise.

Actually it doesn't Lucrum. But it doesn't matter what our interpretation of the constitution is it's how the supreme rules that makes the finally rule on this. In my view a background check doesn't infringe on the 2nd amendment, I can see the argument for permits maybe being an infringement, I...

You didn't read my follow up to jem did you? Do tell.

There you again leap couldn't hold a real conversation more than a post or two before you revert back to being a little cunt.

Sorry about that. I just disagree with your way of picking entertainers. But since it is entertainment you should pick them how you want. And I guess I can see if something about them makes them less entertaining then it makes sense. I hope I don't do that though.

Oh OK I get it, it's common sense [in your opinion] to have to possess and show a government ID to vote. But not common sense [in your opinion] to show the same ID to purchase a gun and it's just common sense [in my opinion] to go ahead an issue the permit too.

No he was pointing out the flawed logic of Jem's statement.

Requiring a background check or a permit doesn't violate the constitution any more than requiring a government issued ID violates constitional voting rights.