WOW! Pic from the march.....This is so powerful. Well done young man.

[kpete]

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10216310426018457&set=gm.1591408790980725&type=3&theater


I think this is the same guy...

Link to tweet

[Scurrilous]

1. K&R

[Freedomofspeech]

2. How about the look on that boy's face?

Too bad they guy next to him was born without a penis.

[Cracklin Charlie]

7. Face of bravery.

With just a soupçon of disgust.

Perfect!

[dalton99a]

32. Priceless.

[lame54]

3. How is gun control racist?

[Wounded Bear]

4. Obviously about how those poor white guys are oppressed...

In favor of all those blacks and latinos who have ALL the priveleges now.

[underpants]

5. The sarcasm is not strong with these people

They can’t even get that the 3rd Amendment adds all the context that you need to understand the 2nd Amendment. Try asking one of them in which Article the Army is established.

[Hangingon]

14. What does the 3rd amendment add?

[Blue_true]

18. The Third.

Deals with the housing of soldiers on private property. It is the least challenged amendment in the Constitution. Don't know how it applies to the discussion. But if a person relies exclusively on rights the Second supposedly gives, then there would be many things today that are inconstitutional, for example, the professional military, cars, airplanes, computers, tanks, rocket launchers, howrizers.

The Founders made the Constitution amendable for a reason, amendments allow the Constitution to be relevant to the times that it was applied. I doubt the Founders anticipated the type of guns that exist today, BUT, they put in place the means to get laws that made policy that was relevant to the times.

[underpants]

19. They feared an established Army

Armies, at the time, were the dregs of society. They were used by the Crown to influence civilian leadership and in the colonies they ran roughshod through areas. They took houses for officers and enlisted to live in. The 3rd was a frank measure to stop that from happening. The lack of an established Army (the Navy is established in Article 1 section 8) and Congress’s ability to defund it every two years was a further control. That’s why we have the 2nd - to have some sort of land force in case it was needed. Militias were democratic organization that elected their leader and stored guns and ammo in a separate safe location. Most people couldn’t afford the heavy rifles needed for war - typically they owned smaller rifles which were used to hunt rabbits and birds for food. The heavy guns were few and usually bought collectively or in installments.

[Blue_true]

22. Interesting.

It would be amazing to travel back through time and listen to the discussions that the Founders were having when they were crafting the Constitution. My belief is that the rationale for the Second would be far different from what the NRA claims.

[Farmer-Rick]

27. They left numerous letters and documents behind

Describing their thoughts and theories. They pretty much describe the purpose of the amendments.

But the Supremes and courts don't seem to pay any attention to them much anymore. The RepubliCON majority on the court are supposedly originalists but they rarely if ever refer back to these documents. Probably because most of what the writers of the Constitution had to say conflicts with RepubliCON wishes.

[Blue_true]

28. That is an interesting addition. Didn't know that explanatory letters existed. nt

[underpants]

50. Michael Waldman

See post 48 below. Yes their intent was clear

[underpants]

48. Michael Waldmans The Second Amendment: A Biography

My post was based on that book. Highly highly recommend it.


Video here with some ads stuck in

https://www.brennancenter.org/video/michael-waldman-cnn-second-amendment

[lindysalsagal]

60. Too many sentences. You lost the gunners on dregs.

Besides, facts are irrelevant. They want their toys, and they don't care who dies.

[Hangingon]

21. I know what the 3rd is.

I don’t see how it confirms the 2nd. Pro gun people argue that the second, allowing citizens to have arms, is an additional deterant to housing a soldier. That seem a stretch.

[Blue_true]

26. The way I read them.

The two are unrelated mostly. The Second mainly dealt with raising a malitia for communal defense, including defense of the elected government. The main worry appears to have been the British, who we had just broken away from. The Third seems to have a response to the British taking over private property to house officers and troops during the revolutionary war, I guess the concept was that if the British tried that again, citizens could resist, or if militias tried to take over private property, the owners had a right to resist. Like a lot of things, the documents left a lot of "what ifs" unanswered, that is why a Supreme Court exists, IMO.

[Hangingon]

29. I think you read them correctly.

[Blue_true]

30. Maybe, it is all so interpretive. Maybe that is why we have a Supreme Court? nt

[underpants]

54. I read the Bill of Rights (changes to the Constitution) as a reiteration of the Declaration

The Constitution basically sets up the government but the first ten amendments (demanded by the Virginia delegation - George Mason) basically echoes the points Jefferson made in the Declaration of Independence. It prohibits the abuses suffered under the crown. #’s 9 and 10 are equivalent to “and other duties as assigned” on a job description. If you all figure anything else out, have at it.

[Blue_true]

56. My sense.

Is that the Founders made a document for Their times and realities. They made it changeable so that others down the line could change it, that is what strict constructionists fail to see, IMO.

[underpants]

58. I agree n/t

[underpants]

20. See post 19

[Hangingon]

23. Doesnt inform me.

I guess I agree that the citizenry are the militia.

[lindysalsagal]

43. Oh that's hilarious!!!

[underpants]

53. Ralph never disappoints

😁😆

[Cha]

16. That puzzled me too.. It's sensible gun laws like

these..

He just as stupid as all the rest of the gun nuts. How the f*ck does asking for background checks, age restrictions, and waiting periods for gun purchases suddenly mean that the government is coming to take all your guns away and if you are law abiding citizens and only concerned about safety, why are you scared of having checks and balances in the system?

MOre..
https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/killer-mike-tap-dancing-for-the-nra.1502895/

[LakeArenal]

39. Ya still trying to make sense of these guys?

You have more fortitude than I.

Like chipping away at concrete.

💪 👩🏻‍💼

[forgotmylogin]

62. They want to do all that for voting rights...

How is having a voter registration card more dangerous than owning a firearm?

Oh...

[Coventina]

31. One of the talking points of gun humpers is that most "gun control" laws

were passed by southern states during Jim Crow to prevent African Americans from defending themselves.

I have never bothered to see if there is any truth in those claims. My opinion is that it's just a smoke screen to try and turn the left on itself. I know this because racists I know personally use that argument, and I know for a fact that they are A-OK with racism.

[Marcuse]

52. One could argue the 2nd A was passed to prevent African Americans from defending themselves.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State...

[Coventina]

59. Agree!

The bottom line is that gun-humpers will use any bogus argument to defend their precious, precious guns.

[LakeArenal]

35. Yeah exactly.

[OneGrassRoot]

45. I don't know the term for it, but it's a certain kind of f*ckery...

I obviously could be wrong, but I think he thinks he's using reverse psychology.

He's probably a typical Fox News type who immediately thinks of Chicago when the topic of guns comes along, thinking every young man of color has a gun. "So, hey you stupid libruls who love THOSE people, you wanting to take guns away is racist!!!"

Gun control actually HAS been racist; the NRA supported gun control measures as soon as images of armed Black Panthers were seen on TV screens.

[mnhtnbb]

6. I wish someone would teach people to ask these guys

why they would want to advertise they have a dick the size of a peanut? Don't they know they're just making us laugh?

I would lay odds that 95% of these white males strutting around carrying all kinds of weapons have serious cases of masculine
insecurity.

[smirkymonkey]

8. I would love to ask them "What are you so afraid of?"

They are all such cowards. Most of us don't need guns to get us through the day.

[mnhtnbb]

9. That, too.

[leftyladyfrommo]

10. I know that is true if a lot of the meanest looking bikers. nt

[crazycatlady]

34. I often wonder that when I see a big pickup truck

[yellowdogintexas]

40. depends on where you are. If you are in the city, & the truck is spit shined

and gleaming, it's a toy. If it has mud, a few dings, big tool box in the back, etc. it is a working vehicle, either in the oil field, a farm, a nursery, plumber, etc. The farmer's 'town truck' unless he has just picked it up at the dealership, will be neat and orderly but it won't look like a city kid's truck.

Farmers of my memory had the beat up truck for running around the fields and the newer truck for going in to town. When the farm truck could not be resuscitated any further, the town truck became the farm truck (or the newly licensed driver's truck) and the farmer got a new truck. I've seen some 40 year old pickups roaming around the fields where I grew up. Lots of kids I knew learned to drive in those things, out in the field where they could learn to drive a manual without hitting anything.

[crazycatlady]

46. Oh I can tell a working vehicle or not

But if I see one that looks like it just came off the lot that looks like the guy spent upwards of 50K on it.

Add the confederate flags, don't tread on me, Trump stickers, and Truck Nutz and you know.

[Honeycombe8]

57. They have little hands.

[tblue37]

11. Yes, same guy. Excellent move by the child. nt

[Phoenix61]

12. I got into a ridiculous argument last night

with a gun freak. It ended with him getting really angry and telling me he needed his guns to protect him from the government. WTF?!? Talk about irrational fear and a less than firm grip on reality. I hate to break it to him but if the "government" wanted to really screw him they would do what the IRS does, freeze all his assets. What's he going to do then, use one of his guns to rob a bank?

[Blue_true]

17. People who think like him has no clue.

Maybe he would have a case if he had bombers, tanks, rocket launchers, howrizers, poison gas delivery systems stored in his back yard, because if the government he so distrusts fall, all of that shit is coming after him.

[A HERETIC I AM]

33. "You're bringing a gun to a drone fight"

- Jim Jeffries

[Phoenix61]

36. +1

Thanks! I can remember that.

[C_U_L8R]

13. This !!

This is why the NRA will lose.

[Blue_true]

15. Amazing.

That clown appeared to have been there to intimidate. The supply bags that he had on his belt could honestly be viewed by an observer to mean he had plenty of bullets with him. Good for the kid, the clown did not intimidate him.

[Hoyt]

24. Now, that's your typical gun fanatic in America -- an ignorant white wing racist.

[GoCubsGo]

25. What a fucking clown.

The one wearing the hat, not the kid.

[flibbitygiblets]

37. The kid looks brave. The gun nut looks slightly ashamed.

Well played, kid.

[pangaia]

38. He has an undeveloped brain.

I mean that seriously, not hyperbole.

[Fritz Walter]

41. I see determination on the face of the child.

I see desperation all over the ammosexual.

[lindysalsagal]

42. I wish I could cheer him!

[yellowdogintexas]

44. Love that Kid! We had a right to life dude at our march

in Fort Worth. No gun folks that we knew of. This guy had a megaphone with a booster speaker on it and he would not shut up for the entire pre march period. He even shouted over the moment of silence. We had excellent security but they could not eject him because a permit was in place (ours) so they had the right to be there. Not to mention the FWPD did not want to piss him off too much as there was no way of knowing what he and the folks with him might have in their backpacks. After all the only heat we want packed at a demonstration is the FWPD! Also regarding the megaphone, had he intended to join the march itself and spew his bile all the way down to the Convention Center and back, he had to have a separate permit. As long as he was on the Courthouse grounds, he could yell at us to his heart's content. He had a couple or three women with him, all dressed in black and looking pretty rough and a couple of ugly signs I have some great shots of his sign sticking up in the air, with the marchers' signs surrounding his little group. FWPD and TCSD and Sundance Security folks sort of herded them into an area near a tree, then circled them with their backs to them and facing out toward us, with their bicycles as part of their barricade. It is their standard procedure at protests/counterprotests, etc. SO in my picture, you can see his sign, the security all around him and the great signs around that. It was cool. But the guy was still obnoxious, rude and not there for anything related to the march. When our Democratic Woman's CLub folks walked by in our Tshirts, he would yell out stuff like "Loony Lesbians" and teachers were called communists. Total case of crazy.

[world wide wally]

47. The big guy is thinking, "Go ahead, kid. Make my day... I am Superbad"

[blake2012]

49. Stupid sick gun humping fucks

[lame54]

51. Ironically the peace sign looks like a sight

[hunter]

55. I'm glad I live in a place where open carry bullshit isn't tolerated.

Gun fetishes are disgusting.

[Heartstrings]

61. A psychological paradox:

That those without guns
do not live in fear,
while those with guns do.

[kentuck]

63. His statement is:

one of fear and intimidation. He wants people to be fearful. In doing so, he steals their freedom.