doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com 2.14 mile shot.

Old Colonel,

Thank you for re-posting that response to the anti-gunner Ed Good.

The anti-gun rhetoric posted here by Trolls like King Brown and Ed Good needs to be highlighted often so that FUDDS understand that there is a very real and constant threat to our rights from anti-gunners who act as if they are on our side.

They aren't!

I'd much rather discuss our double rifles and double shotguns, but if we allow anti-gunners to erode and eventually take away our gun rights... then discussion will be all we have... assuming of course, that the Liberal Left Socialist anti-gunners do not then go after our free speech rights.

History suggest they absolutely will. See how they worked to prevent Conservatives like Anne Coulter, Ben Shapiro, and others from speaking on college campuses. Note how frenzied they are about Trump and his Tweeting the truth about the dishonest Liberals and the Media. If he was really making a fool of himself, as they say, they should be happy to let him self-destruct... just as I am happy to see King Brown self-destruct by showing everyone his anti-2nd Amendment sentiment and his dishonest denials of the same.

http://redalertpolitics.com/2016/12/22/hated-8-8-conservatives-liberals-tried-ban-campus-2016/

C'mon, Jack. Life so grim you hate and impatiently wait for my death? For reminding you of what you don't want to believe about the Second from former Chief Justice and legal analysts? Seems irrational and unAmerican to me.

Afraid of death? Not at all. Be a great relief. I wouldn't have to talk with you. Katherine Hepburn


_________________________
Thought I was dead and gone to Hell once. Then I sobered up and realized I was just in Nova Scotia. Lonny Rhodes

I'm just sick and tired of having a lying, dog abusing, foreign Socialist piece of crap coming here and attempting to undermine our Constitutional Rights by posting anti-gun propaganda and verifiable falsehoods. There is no joy and no challenge in debating one such as you, who is so totally dishonest as to be in denial of their own unedited words.

There is nothing either irrational or un-American about wishing to preserve our freedoms or confronting abject dishonesty, King. It would be irrational to ignore it, and un-American to permit it to stand.

You have gone far beyond reminding us what a Liberal Left former Supreme Court Justice and Liberal left legal analysts have said while also perverting the clear language and clear intent of the Framers, pertaining to the 2nd Amendment. I have already proven that by putting your own opinions and sentiments which agree with the anti-gunners in BOLD TYPE.

Stop pretending that you are merely reporting what you see from other anti-gunners. You support their positions and you post their lies and nonsense to support your own anti-gun positions. You have been at this for years. Here is some of your anti-2nd Amendment crap from a thread you started in 2007:

http://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=38521&page=1


You still refuse to answer the simple questions I posed. You would still rather evade the truth at all costs. Since all we have to look forward to from you is more of your dishonesty, evasiveness, and anti-2nd Amendment dogma, we'd all be better off if you'd just croak and go to hell, or wherever Godless atheist liars like you go. I note that one of your fellow Canadians has also suggested recently that he would be happy to see you croak:








Satan would probably kick you out of hell for making him look like a goody-two-shoes King. I've known some seriously dishonest people, but you beat them all.

But, Jack, all your comment is coming from an NRA Benefactor. Think of it. A benefactor is one who gives friendly aid. Comments as yours only lessen your authority and diminish the NRA. There's no beneficence in pushing Groucho's famous line. You've had your say as I have mine. To stop sliding further to the margins, consider giving it a rest.

Sounds like the "rainbow" lucky shot Hemingway made with his G&H 30-06 Springfield, hitting a moving lion at great distance in the spine with a 220 grain solid- detailed in his novel "True At First Light"-- Mary Hemingway, not an experienced shot on dangerous game in Africa, had "pricked" the lion with her 6.5mm--

PWH and friend on that 1953 event, Dennis Zapiro, had his double express rifle-- great for incoming angry animals, not so accurate on those running at over 100 yards, so I am told. Glad our Canuck brothers-in-arms are "dinging" the towel-head terrorists at great distances-- a dead terrorist is the best kind, no matter the nationality of the shooter.

Not a chance King.

I am not your Benefactor. I am not here to permit your anti-gun sentiments to fade from peoples' memories, as you have benefited from so often in the past. I am not here to make silly excuses for you, dismissing you as a senile old man as so many here do.

I am an NRA Benefactor... that is true. As such, I do not think that merely paying some dues, making frequent donations, and wearing a hat or lapel pin is enough when there are people like you who work tirelessly to undermine our rights and freedoms. NRA membership is more than a lousy tag line for me King. These are my Constitutional rights you are threatening with your lies and anti-gun rhetoric.

I will give this a rest after I post as much of your anti-2nd Amendment crap as I can as a permanent memorial to you in Silent Doubles. It will be a glorious tribute to you King... I've saved all of your anti-gun quotes including those from the long running thread "Is Kingsley Brown an Anti-Gunner?" You've added some more proof of your sentiments right here in this thread.

Please hurry King. Give us all a rest from your dishonesty and your anti-gun sentiments.

NRA benefactors don't give the NRA a bad name, Jack. Putting a curse on a person---I hate you and hope you die soon, assigning another to destruction---is anathema to common decency, even uncommon among children. No one here is threatening your constitutional rights. Nuff said.

King, you are trying to stir things up when you post on the American right to bear arms.

I really wish you would stick to the politics of your own country. You have a tendency to bring out the worst in some posters. They are easily baited by you.

I support the Heller decision that held it an individual right. It is now and will remain so as long as the illiberal left does not get a chance to pack the court.

I agree with George on it's permanence and add that reality requires work to sustain that and our other rights.

It is not possible to have a civil rational argument about the nuances of the 2nd Amendment and how its understanding has evolved over time on this board. Rational discussion on the subject will always devolve into nastiness and vitriol.

There are unfortunately members on this board who turn to hate in partially reasoned response and to personal insult. I imagine, bad manners, fear, immaturity, an over extremity of belief, or some other fault explains this, but it really does not matter.

I sometimes think various posters here deliberately stir up conflict.

King, you may be technically correct on some points and the dynamic nature of how rights have been interpreted over time, but Keith is correct in that there has always been a belief by many in the individual right to arms. Though that belief has not been always been clearly recognized in the Supreme Court.

While Eldridge Gerry at the Constitutional Convention was more concerned about the collective right of the milita within the state and protecting the states from the federal government; both Jefferson and Richard Lee, neither of whom attended the convention and initially argued against the adoption of the Constitution, were both vehement in the adoption of the bill of rights to protect both individuals and the states against the potential despotism of the Federal Government. They ensured the individual right was in the already adopted Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia.

That being said between the adoption of the Bill of Rights through to Heller, through several previous Supreme Court cases no where has the individual nature of that right been upheld in as clear terms as it is now. Descent into how the various rights evolved in understanding through the centuries, is not a value here today.

The use of the modern Supreme Court to achieve what could or should not be done legislatively is here to stay (thank FDR) Just as voting to keep those who would use it against the things I believe is here to stay.

King, I ask you to give up feeding the animals with bait and stick to doubleguns

He would make a lovely corpse. Charles Dickens

Not that uncommon, King.


__________________________
Hell ain't a bad place to be...if you happen to live in Nova Scotia.