[ARCHIVED THREAD] - 2nd Amendment Absolutist (Page 1 of 3)
Posted: 6/14/2017 1:42:40 AM EDT
|
Where did this phrase come from?
I'm reading this both here and on other boards. It seems like a way to make true 2A defenders seem like fringe kooks. And what's worse, it's coming from supposed gun owners! I know Fudds have been around forever. Is this a term they use? |
|
the guys that dont want NY or CA bans are absolutists,
if the ar15 is banned why not just use a different gun? whats the big deal? Fudds are communist pricks, i had one at the range tell me his Mini14 can out shoot my AR. and that he dont need no hi capacity clip. he was 40 or 50 and obese with a beard. i said "okay" and walked away. |
|
Quoted:
the guys that dont want NY or CA bans are absolutists, if the ar15 is banned why not just use a different gun? whats the big deal? Fudds are communist pricks, i had one at the range tell me his Mini14 can out shoot my AR. and that he dont need no hi capacity clip. he was 40 or 50 and obese with a beard. i said "okay" and walked away. |
|
Quoted:
the guys that dont want NY or CA bans are absolutists, if the ar15 is banned why not just use a different gun? whats the big deal? Fudds are communist pricks, i had one at the range tell me his Mini14 can out shoot my AR. he was 40 or 50 and obese with a beard. i walked away. The ones who will stab the 2A in the back to protect the value of their investments. And the one's I call Tactical Fudds. The brand snobs, who don't shoot for fun. A guy on TOS said that AR pistols are "illegitimate weapons" which only "attracts retards" to guns. I don't go on that board much anymore. 
|
|
The ones spewing "absolutist" in a derogatory manner are those who would be happy to "compromise" with the grabbers in the hopes that THEIR type of guns will be the last to be banned.
And they'll continue with that mindset until they're assisting their former friends into the gas chambers while telling them it's just a shower.... |
|
The first time I saw reference to it was in a comment from Condoleezza Rice:
"In a pleasantly meandering conversation over lunch in San Francisco last summer, Condoleezza Rice, then still provost of Stanford but already unofficially what she now is officially, George W. Bush's senior foreign policy adviser, was asked her thoughts about gun control. 'I am,' she answered crisply, 'a Second Amendment absolutist.' Growing up in Birmingham, Ala., in the early 1960s, when racial tensions rose, there were, she said, occasions when the black community had to exercise its right to bear arms in self-defense, becoming, if you will, a well-regulated militia." – George Will, "The GOP of Powell and Rice" by George Will, Jewish World Review, August 7, 2000 http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/will080700.asp Quoted:
The ones spewing "absolutist" in a derogatory manner are those who would be happy to "compromise" with the grabbers in the hopes that THEIR type of guns will be the last to be banned. If someone called me that, I'd take it as a compliment. |
|
Quoted:
The ones spewing "absolutist" in a derogatory manner are those who would be happy to "compromise" with the grabbers in the hopes that THEIR type of guns will be the last to be banned. And they'll continue with that mindset until they're assisting their former friends into the gas chambers while telling them it's just a shower.... |
|
Quoted:
Yep, wear it like a badge of pride. Quoted:
Quoted:
Show some how much I know...I read the title and came in here fully expecting this to be a thread about a complimentary term. Never imagined that "absolutely" supporting any fundamental right was fringe nor extreme 
|
|
Quoted:
"Shall not be infringed." It's really not a hard fucking concept. Those tools "are" 2nd amendment abolitionists. You either support the second, or you want to dismantle it. Fuck abolitionists. |
|
Quoted:
The ones spewing "absolutist" in a derogatory manner are those who would be happy to "compromise" with the grabbers in the hopes that THEIR type of guns will be the last to be banned. And they'll continue with that mindset until they're assisting their former friends into the gas chambers while telling them it's just a shower.... They would sell their children and grandchildren into slavery, before taking a stand. |
|
Quoted:
Compromise has only gotten things taken away from us. Anyone that doesn't see this is retarded, has not been paying attention and fails to understand the 2nd amendment. Compromise? Cram it up your cram-hole, Lafleur. Fuck your compromise. Those who do seek compromise are complicit in the "other sides" success in the "long game" |
|
Quoted:
Where did this phrase come from? I'm reading this both here and on other boards. It seems like a way to make true 2A defenders seem like fringe kooks. And what's worse, it's coming from supposed gun owners! I know Fudds have been around forever. Is this a term they use? It was a slur that the ideas threw at us when we did not give up our 2nd/4th/8th/10th Amendment rights. |
|
Quoted:
Where did this phrase come from? I'm reading this both here and on other boards. It seems like a way to make true 2A defenders seem like fringe kooks. And what's worse, it's coming from supposed gun owners! I know Fudds have been around forever. Is this a term they use? Absolutist nutballers are those who thing the 2A covers nukes/chemical/biological weapons too. |
|
Quoted:
Show some how much I know...I read the title and came in here fully expecting this to be a thread about a complimentary term. Never imagined that "absolutely" supporting any fundamental right was fringe nor extreme Just like the term 'common sense gun control', if you don't agree with it you obviously have no common sense' just like the phrase 'we need to have a conversation' implies if you don't want to negotiate it then you are being unreasonable just like the term loophole, falsely implying there is an unintentional way around the law that needs to be fixed, They are all ways to marginalize people in the minds of morans and convince idiots to give up freedom and rip freedom away with the use of force on people that will not willing give up their freedom. |
|
Quoted:
.......... It seems like a way to make true 2A defenders seem like fringe kooks. .......... Well, Democrats believe gun free zones should be even gun free-er to stop shootings are not exactly rational human beings. I would certainly say that they are fringe kooks. |
|
Quoted:
Yep, wear it like a badge of pride. Quoted:
Quoted:
Show some how much I know...I read the title and came in here fully expecting this to be a thread about a complimentary term. Never imagined that "absolutely" supporting any fundamental right was fringe nor extreme |
|
Quoted:
It is just an attempt to marginalize gun owners in the media, like all the other ways they have tried and used before. Just like the term 'common sense gun control', if you don't agree with it you obviously have no common sense' just like the phrase 'we need to have a conversation' implies if you don't want to negotiate it then you are being unreasonable just like the term loophole, falsely implying there is an unintentional way around the law that needs to be fixed, They are all ways to marginalize people in the minds of morans and convince idiots to give up freedom and rip freedom away with the use of force on people that will not willing give up their freedom. Trying to control the narrative. |
|
Quoted:
the guys that dont want NY or CA bans are absolutists, if the ar15 is banned why not just use a different gun? whats the big deal? Fudds are communist pricks, i had one at the range tell me his Mini14 can out shoot my AR. and that he dont need no hi capacity clip. he was 40 or 50 and obese with a beard. i said "okay" and walked away. That's the guy who clogs up every fucking aisle in the gun show. |
|
Quoted:
the guys that dont want NY or CA bans are absolutists, if the ar15 is banned why not just use a different gun? whats the big deal? Fudds are communist pricks, i had one at the range tell me his Mini14 can out shoot my AR. and that he dont need no hi capacity clip. he was 40 or 50 and obese with a beard. i said "okay" and walked away. |
|
Change the discussion from the second amendment to the first.
How many people demanding more gun laws would support requiring registration and background checks to attend church, and only churches approved by the government? How about those same requirements for printing or reading a newspaper, or posting online? Should we require registration and background checks and to participate in peaceful rallies and marches? The Bill of Rights are freedoms that we have because we are human beings, they are not granted by government. As has been posted previously, we should be able to own any firearms we desire. The only law necessary is making their use illegal in the commission of a crime |