[FoRK] Fwd: Rand Paul: Obama Just Banned 1 Million Firearms

geege schuman geege4 at gmail.com
Mon Aug 6 13:56:51 PDT 2012

See, if your words were bullets, there'd be no retracting ....

On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Damien Morton <dmorton at bitfurnace.com> wrote:
> Is there some way we can talk about your position that only members of
> the armed forces should be citizens and vote?
> Obviously some will agree and some will disagree, but surely any
> discussion will involve having questions asked of you?
> I mean, you put the opinion out there on a public mailing list, whose
> purpose is discussion, so your position can hardly be considered
> private.This list can be a bit roughhouse sometimes, and I have been
> on the receiving end of flames myself.
> In our our first exchange, I was drunk and belligerent, and that
> surely got us off on the wrong foot. I regret that my first writing
> might be preventing us having further discussion.
> I hope you will reconsider you willingness to debate these issues.
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 12:38 PM,  <mdw at martinwills.com> wrote:
>> Does asking stupid questions make you feel less stupid?  How about a
>> stupid question that is worded so it makes the other person think that you
>> are less stupid?  How about comments from others commenting on the
>> stupidness of your question.. Does it make you feel more or less stupid?
>> Quit playing word games and think. That is what supposedly makes you
>> different from the other organisms on this planet.
>> --Martin--
>>> The <timeless and inerrant> constitution, "Dont f_ck with it", does
>>> that include the amendments?
>>> Does amending the constitution constitute "f_cking with it"?
>>> Isn't swearing allegiance pretty much the same as swearing to uphold?
>>> If not, can anyone swear to uphold the constitution, or does it have
>>> to be within the context of some government sponsored lethal force
>>> organisation? Is being a member of a government sponsored lethal force
>>> organisation the only way to uphold the constitution?
>>> Why does a willingness to kill and be killed (in harms way), make
>>> someone a more worthy citizen? What if you were in the armed services,
>>> but never left, e.g. the Pentagon - does that mean you were in harm's
>>> way?
>>> What if you were willing to be in harm's way, but there wasn't an
>>> opportune war to go to, does that count?
>>> What about your military/paramilitary sisters, do they count?
>>> Can you talk a little more about how, in your service, you have
>>> personally contributed to upholding the constitution? Like, were there
>>> any specific actions you took that resulted in the constitution being
>>> more upheld, versus less upheld if you hadn't taken that action?
>>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 11:52 AM,  <mdw at martinwills.com> wrote:
>>>> A little broader...  Those SWORN to uphold the US Constitution including
>>>> all law enforcement and reserves (active and retired).  I happen to have
>>>> had US Navy, PD, and currently Air Force commitments upholding the
>>>> constitution.  As my past and present brothers would say "Don't F**K
>>>> with
>>>> it!".
>>>> Martin
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 11:07 AM,  <mdw at martinwills.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Only those people
>>>>>> who have put themselves in harms way to protect the Constitution
>>>>>> should
>>>>>> be
>>>>>> allowed to change it (enough said on my view).
>>>>> And remember: "Service guarantees citizenship"
>>>>> Does this mean the US needs to be committed to an enduring series of
>>>>> wars to ensure the size of its pool of citizen/veterans?
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> FoRK mailing list
>>>>> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FoRK mailing list
>>>> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
>> _______________________________________________
>> FoRK mailing list
>> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
> _______________________________________________
> FoRK mailing list
> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

More information about the FoRK mailing list