Home
I haven't seen this posted.



Just another angry homo who can't understand the Ammendments to the American Constitution,
Maybe edit thread title.
Sounds like the yammering of our Green party pollies.
He’s going to be a great lawyer!
Why do these people always look so angry and unhappy?
Why do these people always look so angry and unhappy? It has been long decided by SCOTUS that the controversial clause Hogg thinks he's playing Gotcha! with is precatory and not conditional to the rest of the words in the 2A. He going to be a senior at Harvard already? Good little Bolshevik!
Originally Posted by DBT
Sounds like the yammering of our Green party pollies.


I have met a couple of those and they are seriously weird and angry people...and I do mean seriously!
and I thought he looked pathetic as a high school kid...

I hope he gets ass raped by some big dick black ho mo, in the State Penn.

Couldn't happen to a better candidate.

bet he's "real woke" tho....
Originally Posted by bluefish
Why do these people always look so angry and unhappy?

Because they are.
Originally Posted by bluefish
Why do these people always look so angry and unhappy?

BUT... with perfect hair.
Originally Posted by Sako76
He’s going to be a great lawyer!

Harvard law degree, this boy has no interest in practicing law. This boy has major political aspirations.
Originally Posted by bluefish
Why do these people always look so angry and unhappy?

Every time, right?
i think it has something to do with their being angry and unhappy.
David Hogg has no right to say that.
That would put the Second Amendment in the strange position of being the only thing in the Bill of Rights doesn't protect individual liberty.
Originally Posted by ironbender
Maybe edit thread title.

Even if he'd gotten it right I still wouldn't have watched it, who wants to hear anything that brat says...
A common argument by liberals is that the 2A only applies to the National Guard. It says 'the right of the people'. Therefore, they're also saying that only the NG has the right to freely assemble (1A), freedom from searches without a warrant (4A), and possessing any rights not specified in the constitution (10A). Individual rights appear in other amendments but in different wording.
He's a punk and needs to be shut-up
Originally Posted by CashisKing
Originally Posted by bluefish
Why do these people always look so angry and unhappy?

BUT... with perfect hair.

🤣🤣
Anti right of self defense - Check.
Pro abortion - Check.
Homosexual - Check.

Basically, Hogg hates life.
Originally Posted by Riverc
He's a punk and needs to be shut-up

Preferably by being spit-roasted between John Holmes and Ron Jeremy?
A Right, by definition, does not need permission to exercise it.
He is FBI, groomed by his father since childhood.
I seriously hope I never meet up with David Hogg. I'd end up in jail for sure for punching him in the mouth. Anyway, the following is something I wrote during the donnybrook about Jim Zumbo's rant on AR15s. It deals with the Second Amendment.

OK, lets discuss the 2nd Amendment. Good idea. It is my carefully considered opinion that the KEY WORD is MILITIA.

1. The Militia Act of 1792. One year after the Second Amendment was added to the Constitution, Congress passed a law defining the militia. The Militia Act of 1792 declared that all free male citizens between the ages of 18 and 44 were to be members of the militia. Furthermore, every citizen was to be armed. The act stated:
"Every citizen...[shall] provide himself with a good musket, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints...."

The Militia Act of 1792 made no provision for any type of select militia such as the National Guard.

U.S. Senate Subcommittee Report (1982) "In the Militia Act of 1792, the second Congress defined 'militia of the United States' to include almost every free adult male in the United States. These persons were obligated BY LAW (emphasis mine) to possess a [military style] firearm and a minimum supply of ammunition and military equipmemnt....There can be little doubt from this that when the Congress and the people spoke of the a 'militia,' they had reference to the traditional concept of the entire populace capable of bearing arms, and not to any formal group such as what is today called the national Guard."

Current Federal Law: 10 U.S.C. Sec. 311. "The militia of the Untied States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and...under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States.....

Supreme Court: U.S. v. Miller 1939 In this case, the Court stated that, "The Militia comprised of all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense...[and that] when called for service, these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves AND OF THE KIND IN COMMON USE AT THE TIME. (emphasis mine)
(BTW, Miller lost in court because he did not show up. It was never taken into account that his no show was because he had passed away.)*

More on Title 10 of the U.S. Code

UNITED STATES CODE
TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
Subtitle A - General Military Law
PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA

Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes

(a)The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 302, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are -

(1) the organized militia which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia;
and

(2) The unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or of the Naval Militia.

Now it took me all of about ten minutes to find all that information. Just go to the Gun Owners of America's website and look for their firearms fact sheet. There's 24 pages of good information there.

I plan on making copies of the above and sending each of my representatives their own personal copy. Feel free to do the same. Maybe, if they get flooded with as many letters with the above as Zumbo's sponsers did on his major foot in mouth problem, the idiots just might get a message. Leave our guns alone.
Paul B.

*I have since learned that Miller's death was later considered a homocide. Was dot gov involved????
PJ
Originally Posted by ironbender
Maybe edit thread title.


just maybe...
When David Hogg was a baby before he could talk he spit sh*t out of his mouth, with normal babies it comes out there anus. He is 20 something now and is still spitting sh*t out of his mouth if this happened to you, you would be an angry young male too. He needs to shut up and force the sh*t out of the other end like normal people. Seems simple enough to me.
Originally Posted by bluefish
Why do these people always look so angry and unhappy?

Psychopathy and narcissism. They are mentally ill.


https://nypost.com/2023/05/25/left-wing-extremism-linked-to-psychopathy-narcissism-study/
Who is he and who cares what he/she/it thinks?
Why would anyone GAF who he is or what he thinks?
Reposting this garbage gives him credibility.

Don't.

He is literally a nothing, a nobody, and frankly I don't care what he has to say.

Let this thread die and stop reposting this garbage.

Start one on taking your kids hunting or fishing or something positive.
Ask BuzzH. Why he supports this anti gun doooosch bag
He has a funny shaped noggin.
Originally Posted by Jim_Conrad
He has a funny shaped noggin.

With a little effort it could get funnier.
Originally Posted by Jim_Conrad
He has a funny shaped noggin.

Must be from the prolonged constriction of his anal cavity.
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Anti right of self defense - Check.
Pro abortion - Check.
Homosexual - Check.

Basically, Hogg hates life.
Well then he should consider doing something to end his pain.
When they ratified the Bill of Rights the accepted definition of the militia was every able bodied male above the age of 16 and every able bodied female that had been affiliated with one of the colonial militias. The definition of well regulated when they ratified the Bill of Rights was to be well trained in something. Ergo the 2nd amendment actually requires all eleigible member for the militia to be allowed to own weapons so they can become proficient in the use of those weapons.

I for one would love to punch that punk in the throat.
Originally Posted by Crockettnj
Originally Posted by bluefish
Why do these people always look so angry and unhappy?

Every time, right?
i think it has something to do with their being angry and unhappy.


I think that deep down, everyone wants to be normal and they know that a homosexual lifestyle is not normal.
Sorry for the title screw up.

Too late to edit.
Scalia in Heller said this quote from the Georgia Supreme Court perfectly summarized the operative clause of the 2nd Amendment:
“The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is, that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right, originally belonging to our forefathers…District of Columbia et al. v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 612-13 (2008)
Originally Posted by bluefish
Why do these people always look so angry and unhappy?

It pays
I can’t stomach that smarmy, egotistical little azzhole.
I can’t imagine anybody wanting to listen to his crap.
7mm
Little punk was not even present when the shoot out occurred. He was at home pulling his pud when someone called him. Then he went to the scene to act traumatized. I bet a 80 grain Berger would pop that melon head like a punkin.
© 24hourcampfire