B-Man Posted February 14, 2018 Posted February 14, 2018 Shooter was ex-student, may have been flagged as threat... President Prays For Victims: No Child Should Feel Unsafe... ,
The_Dude Posted February 14, 2018 Posted February 14, 2018 8 minutes ago, B-Man said: Shooter was ex-student, may have been flagged as threat... President Prays For Victims: No Child Should Feel Unsafe... , Thank god he’s praying. It should be all ok very soon. 1
B-Man Posted February 14, 2018 Posted February 14, 2018 Update: The Miami Herald has a name but apparently based on only one police source. Exercise caution until it’s formally confirmed. The 19-year-old ex-student, who has been detained by Broward police, has not been publicly identified as a suspect. But a law-enforcement source identified him as Nicolas Cruz. “We were told last year that he wasn’t allowed on campus with a backpack on him,” said math teacher Jim Gard, who said Cruz had been in his class last year. “There were problems with him last year threatening students, and I guess he was asked to leave campus.” Note his age. Being 18 or older, he’s eligible for the death penalty. ,
Tiberius Posted February 14, 2018 Posted February 14, 2018 26 minutes ago, B-Man said: Update: The Miami Herald has a name but apparently based on only one police source. Exercise caution until it’s formally confirmed. The 19-year-old ex-student, who has been detained by Broward police, has not been publicly identified as a suspect. But a law-enforcement source identified him as Nicolas Cruz. “We were told last year that he wasn’t allowed on campus with a backpack on him,” said math teacher Jim Gard, who said Cruz had been in his class last year. “There were problems with him last year threatening students, and I guess he was asked to leave campus.” Note his age. Being 18 or older, he’s eligible for the death penalty. , Cruz? You know the President is done praying for dead and he Kelly and Miller are praying he is a Dreamer. They will be jerking off together if he was
boyst Posted February 14, 2018 Posted February 14, 2018 @SoTier hey chicken ****. This is where you can sound off with your bull ****
Teddy KGB Posted February 14, 2018 Posted February 14, 2018 11 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Cruz? You know the President is done praying for dead and he Kelly and Miller are praying he is a Dreamer. They will be jerking off together if he was Do you ever shut up ?
B-Man Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 5 minutes ago, Teddy KGB said: Do you ever shut up ? Ignore him................he never fully reads what he is (supposedly) responding to either, Update: The Miami Herald has a name but apparently based on only one police source. Exercise caution until it’s formally confirmed.
Tiberius Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 14 minutes ago, Teddy KGB said: Do you ever shut up ? You know I'm right
DC Tom Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 1 hour ago, The_Dude said: 1776. Learn to math. Was COLONIAL America. It was 13 years removed from the United States. Quote And read the whole damn thing. I did. You're going off a single sentence in a half-assed Wikipedia article without citation or backing, that you misinterpreted anyway. I mean how !@#$ing stupid do you have to be to think "Prior to the American Revolution there was neither budget nor manpower nor government desire to maintain a full-time army" makes any sense whatsoever? Prior to the American Revolution, there was no government desire to maintain a full-time army BECAUSE THERE WAS NO GOVERNMENT TO MAINTAIN A FULL-TIME ARMY. How the hell can you read that and think it makes any sense? Can you read? At all? Do you understand English? Are you even sentient? Are you an aardvark? It would explain things - aardvark's gonna aardvark, after all, and aardvarking doesn't include understanding the limitations of half-assed wikipedia articles. So tell me, please, that you're an aardvark...I'll buy that. Quote And was colonial America not America? I mean I consider it so but for legalities we cannot start till succession. And then some argue that we can’t even argue until the ratification of the constitution. Learn some history, aardvark. Colonial days, up to and past the French and Indian Wars, since there was no full-time army, settlements were defended by "militia" comprised of the able-bodied armed men of the settlement, not by an sort of standing military force. With the exception of the Massachusetts Bay Colonial Militia, no settlement had a legal requirement that able-bodied male settlers be armed - and the Massachusetts Bay requirement was repealed in the early 1640s. And there were no state or federal requirements, because militias were organized at the town level, and there were no state or federal ANYTHING. This persisted to and through the Revolutionary War, which itself was fought largely by local militia that was - importantly - not centrally administered and not well-regulated, and generally not self-armed except in as much as some colonists still possessed British Brown Bess provided to the Colonial Militias by the British in the French and Indian War...and why would the British even need to do that, if the Colonial Militias were required to maintain their own arms? Which is why the "well-regulated militia" qualification is in the Second Amendment - because the local, unregulated militias were causing such problems as Shays' Rebellion, where private armies fought to overthrow the Massachusetts government - and notably, were armed by the theft of weapons from the federal Springfield Armory BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T CARRY WEAPONS OF THEIR OWN. "A well-regulated militia..." doesn't fall out of some ivory-tower musings in The Federalist Papers - it was a direct reference to the immediate problem that prompted the replacement of the Articles of Confederation to begin with, and had precisely ****-all to do with some fictitious gun ownership mandate. 1
FreddieJizzle22 Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 Isn't today "Thoughts and Prayers" Day? Why are we arguing!!!!!
Coach Tuesday Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 You know what? Law-abiding gun owners ARE the problem. They damn well are. 1
Cinga Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 2 hours ago, The_Dude said: And clearly the SCOTUS is essential in trying to answer complex questions about our common law. This part at least is correct.... THE LAW! Not the Constitution.... This probably won't be popular, but we are supposed to have 3 equal branches of government right? Legislative = makes law Executive = Executes the law Judicial = presides over, and interprets the law Nothing in the Constitution gives any branch oversight of itself, the Constitution. THAT was left to the ones who ratifies it, We the People Marbury vs Madison however tipped the scales when the court took the Constitution to themselves, and claimed to be the arbiter of it. Since then, we have a branch with authority over the other 2 because they can simply over rule them both. This was never the intent of the framers, and certainly isn't an enumerated power under the Constitution.
boyst Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 21 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said: You know what? Law-abiding gun owners ARE the problem. They damn well are. This could be epic when someone bites on this, but I think there are too many here worn down by Tiberius to do so
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 2 minutes ago, Boyst62 said: This could be epic when someone bites on this, but I think there are too many here worn down by Tiberius to do so I'm not so sure. It's an opinion that is so blatantly stupid that it doesn't even require a response.
GG Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 33 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said: You know what? Law-abiding gun owners ARE the problem. They damn well are. How many guns were used here?
ALF Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 Almost all these mass shootings are done by males not females. Maybe DC Tom has a theory on this.
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 30 minutes ago, ALF said: Almost all these mass shootings are done by males not females. Maybe DC Tom has a theory on this. Because men and women are different. We have different brain chemistries, and as a result different pathologies.
boyst Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 1 hour ago, TakeYouToTasker said: I'm not so sure. It's an opinion that is so blatantly stupid that it doesn't even require a response. Dude, you've been posting here long enough to know coach Tuesday and what he does... 33 minutes ago, ALF said: Almost all these mass shootings are done by males not females. Maybe DC Tom has a theory on this. You're a racist, dude, not cool
DC Tom Posted February 15, 2018 Posted February 15, 2018 1 hour ago, Coach Tuesday said: You know what? Law-abiding gun owners ARE the problem. They damn well are. Of course. And teetotalers are responsible for DWIs, personal trainers cause obesity, and condom users are the primary vector for STDs. You !@#$ing idiot.
Recommended Posts