JustUsBoys.com gay porn forum

logo

remove these banner ads by becoming a JUB Supporter.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 51 to 76 of 76
  1. #51
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,923

    Code of Conduct
    No it's not straightforward. It's an arbitrary interpretation that draws freely from "what they actually meant" assumptions that have absolutely no ground in the actual words of the law, nor are relevant to present day reality. Like the whole "what a regular soldier would carry" thing that is simply NOT in the amendment. It doesn't talk about common soldiers, it makes no comparisons, it gives no specifications or limitations. YOU made that up, based on something or other, and while you're free to mislabel your personal opinions as "common sense", they most certainly do NOT come from the text of the amendment.

    And good job for ignoring the entire article as "having an agenda". Everything has an agenda but I'll tell you the same thing I told Durango when he also ignored it - give me numbers that contradict these. The women myth especially. You can say whatever you want about who is counted in this "danger", but then you need to explain why the difference between states with strict gun laws and those without.

    Which we both know you can't. Other than offering some more "sheep" insults.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  2. #52
    JUB Addict andysayshi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Available
    Posts
    4,294

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    My explanation of the Second Amendment is straightforward, despite your attempts to misunderstand it.

    What's covered are the common arms of a soldier; the number of weapons is irrelevant. The XM25 is not the common arm of a soldier, because not every soldier carries it.
    The word "common" does not appear in the Second Ammendment.

  3. #53
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    103,503
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Quote Originally Posted by andysayshi View Post
    The word "common" does not appear in the Second Ammendment.
    It doesn't have to, any more than the word "gravity" has to appear in a sentence about things falling.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  4. #54
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    103,503
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Rolyo85 View Post
    No it's not straightforward. It's an arbitrary interpretation that draws freely from "what they actually meant" assumptions that have absolutely no ground in the actual words of the law, nor are relevant to present day reality. Like the whole "what a regular soldier would carry" thing that is simply NOT in the amendment. It doesn't talk about common soldiers, it makes no comparisons, it gives no specifications or limitations. YOU made that up, based on something or other, and while you're free to mislabel your personal opinions as "common sense", they most certainly do NOT come from the text of the amendment.

    And good job for ignoring the entire article as "having an agenda". Everything has an agenda but I'll tell you the same thing I told Durango when he also ignored it - give me numbers that contradict these. The women myth especially. You can say whatever you want about who is counted in this "danger", but then you need to explain why the difference between states with strict gun laws and those without.
    Again you deny that words have meaning other than what you want to impose on them.

    "What a regular soldier would carry" IS in the amendment, because that's what the term "to keep and bear arms" meant -- a meaning that can be traced back to the time of Cromwell.

    As for the women issue, it is intentionally deceptive to argue that carrying firearms is dangerous to women when the issue of women carrying them is deliberately ignored. That's why the article has no credibility -- it purposely engages in deception.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  5. #55
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,923

    Code of Conduct
    No, I am sorry, this simply doesn't address my question at all - why do women who live in states with stricter gun control - which we assume impact them as well - have a far lower mortality rate than in the states with freer gun control? Answer directly please.

    And I am sorry, but "that's what the phrase meant" is laughable when that's not what the phrase says. And even if it did, there's nothing about right to self defense. That's an imagined meaning by the Supreme Court. So basically what the amendment means now has nothing to do with its wording, but what a bunch of conservative white men with power wanted it to mean.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  6. #56
    FEAR THE LIBERAL DETENTE! TX-Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Austin
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Open Relationship
    Posts
    8,550

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    It doesn't have to, any more than the word "gravity" has to appear in a sentence about things falling.
    Oh come on. YOU decided on that "common soldier" crap - and the ownership of firearms isn't a natural phenomenon. No dice.

    If you were being honest at all - you'd apply the second amendment EXACTLY as written in the terms as they were defining them in 1791.

    No women, no blacks, no injuns, no brown, no poor white - NOT A FUCKING THING ABOUT MUGGERS AND RAPISTS. Because if you are allowing that the ancien definition of terms has evolved - so has the interpretation of it - and if we are going to give guns to a whole bunch of people the founding fathers NEVER intended to be armed - the ship has already sailed on you.
    ATTACK OF THE LIBERAL ELITE

  7. #57
    FEAR THE LIBERAL DETENTE! TX-Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Austin
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Open Relationship
    Posts
    8,550

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Frankly I've said it before and I'll say it again - GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, IDIOTS WITH GUNS KILL PEOPLE!

    REGULATE!
    ATTACK OF THE LIBERAL ELITE

  8. #58
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    103,503
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Rolyo85 View Post
    No, I am sorry, this simply doesn't address my question at all - why do women who live in states with stricter gun control - which we assume impact them as well - have a far lower mortality rate than in the states with freer gun control? Answer directly please.

    And I am sorry, but "that's what the phrase meant" is laughable when that's not what the phrase says. And even if it did, there's nothing about right to self defense. That's an imagined meaning by the Supreme Court. So basically what the amendment means now has nothing to do with its wording, but what a bunch of conservative white men with power wanted it to mean.
    The Supreme Court relied heavily on writings from the time -- in other words, they were honest scholars.

    I'll answer your question when you have a proposal that won't turn the women into easier victims -- in other words, when you aren't ready to reduce their access to defense against attackers.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  9. #59
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    103,503
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Quote Originally Posted by TX-Beau View Post
    Oh come on. YOU decided on that "common soldier" crap - and the ownership of firearms isn't a natural phenomenon. No dice.
    No, I learned about it in writings from the time.

    Quote Originally Posted by TX-Beau View Post
    If you were being honest at all - you'd apply the second amendment EXACTLY as written in the terms as they were defining them in 1791.

    No women, no blacks, no injuns, no brown, no poor white - NOT A FUCKING THING ABOUT MUGGERS AND RAPISTS. Because if you are allowing that the ancien definition of terms has evolved - so has the interpretation of it - and if we are going to give guns to a whole bunch of people the founding fathers NEVER intended to be armed - the ship has already sailed on you.
    The definition of "the people" has expanded, as the Founders hoped, to include everyone. At the time, "blacks, injuns, ...brown, ...poor white" all legally owned firearms (as did women and even children), so there's no question I am applying it the way it was meant (there wasn't even a landowner limitation, since tenant farmers and renters in cities were expected to provide their own arms as part of the militia).

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  10. #60
    FEAR THE LIBERAL DETENTE! TX-Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Austin
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Open Relationship
    Posts
    8,550

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    If the definition of "the people" has expanded and the definition of "militia" has expanded and the definition of "security of the state" has expanded than you simply cannot argue from the frame of reference of 1791 - THAT'S DISHONEST - making up things about who the FF intended to arm notwithstanding.
    ATTACK OF THE LIBERAL ELITE

  11. #61
    FEAR THE LIBERAL DETENTE! TX-Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Austin
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Open Relationship
    Posts
    8,550

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Hmmmmmm - something interesting since we are taking the FF at their word literally why is it that they said the security of the STATE

    "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

    Why doesn't it say the "freedoms of the people against murderers and rapists" or some such?

    (I actually know the argument behind this just wondering if y'all do)

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    No, I learned about it in writings from the time.
    No, you didn't.
    ATTACK OF THE LIBERAL ELITE

  12. #62
    FEAR THE LIBERAL DETENTE! TX-Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Austin
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Open Relationship
    Posts
    8,550

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    "That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia,"

    http://www.constitution.org/mil/mil_act_1792.htm

    My aplogies, you just had to have a white penis.

    Nary a mention of pedophiles and muggers and "castle doctrine" to be found in this EXPLICIT definition of Militia and it's function from 1792.

    Very strange don't you think Kuli? WERE THEY NOT CONCERNED THAT LITTLE BILLY NEEDS THAT UZI TO DEFEND HIMSELF!!!!!
    Last edited by TX-Beau; May 3rd, 2013 at 01:37 PM.
    ATTACK OF THE LIBERAL ELITE

  13. #63
    FEAR THE LIBERAL DETENTE! TX-Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Austin
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Open Relationship
    Posts
    8,550

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    http://www.old-yankee.com/rkba/racial_laws.html

    Sucks to be Black and "not really" American in 1791

    No gun for you.
    ATTACK OF THE LIBERAL ELITE

  14. #64
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,923

    Code of Conduct
    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post

    The Supreme Court relied heavily on writings from the time -- in other words, they were honest scholars.

    I'll answer your question when you have a proposal that won't turn the women into easier victims -- in other words, when you aren't ready to reduce their access to defense against attackers.
    No, you'll answer when you have an answer which you now don't. It's stats that have ZERO to do with my opinion, so there's no reason for you to wait for anything from me in order to respond.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  15. #65
    FEAR THE LIBERAL DETENTE! TX-Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Austin
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Open Relationship
    Posts
    8,550

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    DO y'all want to know what the 2cnd amendment really says? If you define the terms like you live in late 18th century Virginia - it's extremely clear.

    They (the FF) intended a "well regulated" militia to be in lieu of a professional standing army that they could neither pay for, or arm, so they conscripted white men and required them to purchase their own arms as a protection FOR THE GOVERNMENT (themselves, that is - and they certainly didn't consider themselves tyrants) not as a check on the government BY the people.

    If it has come to mean something more, so be it, but then we have to give up our arguments that what they intended has any more relevance today.
    Last edited by TX-Beau; May 3rd, 2013 at 01:49 PM.
    ATTACK OF THE LIBERAL ELITE

  16. #66
    FEAR THE LIBERAL DETENTE! TX-Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Austin
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Open Relationship
    Posts
    8,550

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    I suppose people forget that there was a time when the US was too poor to afford a globe spanning military establishment.
    ATTACK OF THE LIBERAL ELITE

  17. #67
    JUB Addict andysayshi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Available
    Posts
    4,294

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    No, I learned about it in writings from the time.

    The definition of "the people" has expanded, as the Founders hoped, to include everyone. At the time, "blacks, injuns, ...brown, ...poor white" all legally owned firearms (as did women and even children), so there's no question I am applying it the way it was meant (there wasn't even a landowner limitation, since tenant farmers and renters in cities were expected to provide their own arms as part of the militia).
    Your convoluted interpretations continue. Some words are interpreted by you as "what the writer's meant at the time", while other are allowed to be "expanded" over time.

    It is beyond laughable. It's like religious zealots who pick and choose whichever lines of their holy book that they choose to believe, whilst dismissing the ones that are no longer "acceptable".

    It's high time the US re-wrote the Second Amendment in language that actually means what it says, not what it might have implied two centuries ago.

  18. #68
    JUB Addict andysayshi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Available
    Posts
    4,294

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    It doesn't have to, any more than the word "gravity" has to appear in a sentence about things falling.
    That doesn't make sense. In a discussion about things falling, gravity is not really important. Sure it's the force behind it, but you don't need to understand gravity to understand that things fall.

    In a discussion about the appropriate weapons that can be held by common citizens, it is essential to define what those weapons can be. Since YOU applied the term that it should match the weaponry of a "common" soldier, why doesn't it say that in the Second Amendment? And since it doesn't, why should it be adhered to?

  19. #69
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    103,503
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Quote Originally Posted by TX-Beau View Post
    "That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia,"

    http://www.constitution.org/mil/mil_act_1792.htm

    My aplogies, you just had to have a white penis.
    Error.

    It required all whites to be enrolled -- it didn't exclude anyone. Blacks, and Natives, served in colonial militias during the War of Independence and following.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  20. #70
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    103,503
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Rolyo85 View Post
    No, you'll answer when you have an answer which you now don't. It's stats that have ZERO to do with my opinion, so there's no reason for you to wait for anything from me in order to respond.
    Your opinion has been relying on twisted data and lack of logic.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  21. #71
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    103,503
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Quote Originally Posted by TX-Beau View Post
    DO y'all want to know what the 2cnd amendment really says? If you define the terms like you live in late 18th century Virginia - it's extremely clear.

    They (the FF) intended a "well regulated" militia to be in lieu of a professional standing army that they could neither pay for, or arm, so they conscripted white men and required them to purchase their own arms as a protection FOR THE GOVERNMENT (themselves, that is - and they certainly didn't consider themselves tyrants) not as a check on the government BY the people.

    If it has come to mean something more, so be it, but then we have to give up our arguments that what they intended has any more relevance today.
    Try reading some history. Your last sentence of the middle paragraph is in direct contradiction of public statements by Founding Fathers and Framers.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  22. #72
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    103,503
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Quote Originally Posted by andysayshi View Post
    In a discussion about the appropriate weapons that can be held by common citizens, it is essential to define what those weapons can be. Since YOU applied the term that it should match the weaponry of a "common" soldier, why doesn't it say that in the Second Amendment? And since it doesn't, why should it be adhered to?
    It does say that in the Second Amendment, because that's what the phrase meant at the time. George Washington, writing to complain to Congress, based complaints about the militia on that very definition, because it was understood: to be an actual militia, they were expected to show up with the arms of a common soldier.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  23. #73
    Thankfully Liberal & Gay
    frankfrank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Illinois (Agent Provocateur and Refujiunderground you can do it)
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    15,463
    Blog Entries
    5

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Kuli, you DO know that Charles Schumer and Company are causing problems just a few hours east of you, right? This time his people have overstepped their bounds, with the banning going well beyond firearms.

    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails idaho.jpg  
    "All legal U. S. residents who are 18 years or older, shall have an unconditional right to vote." - We need a 28th Amendment to the U. S. Constitution which resembles this...NOW!

    VOTING: Just remember: "Be careful of what you DON'T wish for. You might just get it." GET OUT AND VOTE for what you DO wish for.

    "I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires" - Susan B. Anthony

  24. #74
    FEAR THE LIBERAL DETENTE! TX-Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Austin
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Open Relationship
    Posts
    8,550

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Try reading some history. Your last sentence of the middle paragraph is in direct contradiction of public statements by Founding Fathers and Framers.
    Bullshit it's in direct contradiction of what you so desperately want to believe.
    ATTACK OF THE LIBERAL ELITE

  25. #75
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,923

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Your opinion has been relying on twisted data and lack of logic.
    Well, that's 50% more than what yours is based on...
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  26. #76
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    103,503
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Mitch McConnell plans to join filibuster of guns bill

    Quote Originally Posted by frankfrank View Post
    Kuli, you DO know that Charles Schumer and Company are causing problems just a few hours east of you, right? This time his people have overstepped their bounds, with the banning going well beyond firearms.

    What's the best friend of Senator "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in" up to now?

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | About JustUsBoys.com | Site Map | RSS | Webmasters | Advertise | Link to JUB | Report A Bug on this Page

Visit our sister sites: Broke Straight Boys | CollegeDudes.com | CollegeBoyPhysicals.com | RocketTube
All models appearing on JustUsBoys.com were over 18 at the time of photography. The records for sexually explicit images required by U.S. 2257 are kept by the
individual producers of the images. The location of the records is available by clicking the Custodian of Records link at the bottom of each gallery page.
© 2012 JustUsBoys.com. The JustUsBoys.com name and logo are registered trademarks. Labeled with ICRA and RTA. Member of ASACP and The Free Speech Coalition.