• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should private explosive device ownership be constitutionally protected?[343]

Are explosives covered by the Second Amendment?

  • Yes. The right to bear arms is not limited to type of weapon.

    Votes: 11 23.4%

  • No. There is no constitutional right to own bombs.

    Votes: 26 55.3%

  • Technically, yes. The constitution should be amended to prohibit bombs.

    Votes: 1 2.1%

  • Yes. The Supreme Court should use jurisprudence and make them illegal.

    Votes: 1 2.1%

  • other

    Votes: 8 17.0%
  • Total voters
    47
Re: Should private explosive device ownership be constitutionally protected?

thenotorious said:
I'm not the one requesting a select few individuals run the state through private donations.
Click to expand...

no idea what on earth you are talking about. Do you???
 
Re: Should private explosive device ownership be constitutionally protected?

thenotorious said:
No, I'm advocating for a teacher with student loans so astronomically high thanks to 'free market capitalism' .
Click to expand...

1) loans are high because govt involvement has grown, the opposite of free market capitalism. Do you understand??
 
Re: Should private explosive device ownership be constitutionally protected?

thenotorious said:
Funny, considering he thinks the same way I do.
Click to expand...

total BS. He put all his money in a foundation so he can spend as he sees fit and so the govt won't get it to waste it when he dies. Buffett the same way. THey talk liberal so the won't be vilified by MSM and they know liberals are stupid so they won't be called out on it but they keep their money from liberal govt in every possible way
 
Re: Should private explosive device ownership be constitutionally protected?

James972 said:
nearly 100 % insane or brainwashed. If a company makes too much profit with, say, too high prices then a competitor drives them into bankruptcy. High profits create new competition. Now do you understand?
Click to expand...

:lol: How simple minded and ignorant of you to think prices are the only factor in competition. If that was the case, we'd all be wearing 2 dollar shoes and buying great value fruit loops. Not to mention patents, which essentially make price competition largely devoid of any real impact. The difference between Costco and Sam's Club shows the example of a company running my model and company largely running yours. I say that, because you probably would prefer no regulation at all and those employees would even be more mistreated there.
 
Re: Should private explosive device ownership be constitutionally protected?

James972 said:
1) loans are high because govt involvement has grown, the opposite of free market capitalism. Do you understand??
Click to expand...

Hahaha..jesus christ dude, read a book before you talk. Goverment involvement has largely decreased, especially since Reaganomics. Student loans are also not 'high' because government' involvement, they are high because institutions can charge whatever they want and since it's an education and since it's required or recommended for just about every job out there, we take out the loans and pay it or can't. It's the same reason pharmacists charge what they want for their 'miracle drugs' and theirs nothing people can do but to pay it or not have it.
 
Re: Should private explosive device ownership be constitutionally protected?

James972 said:
no idea what on earth you are talking about. Do you???
Click to expand...

Yeah, the people that run the elections, aka the wealthy.
 
Re: Should private explosive device ownership be constitutionally protected?

thenotorious said:
Yeah, the people that run the elections, aka the wealthy.
Click to expand...

what about the wealthy?????
 
Re: Should private explosive device ownership be constitutionally protected?

James972 said:
total BS. He put all his money in a foundation so he can spend as he sees fit and so the govt won't get it to waste it when he dies. Buffett the same way. THey talk liberal so the won't be vilified by MSM and they know liberals are stupid so they won't be called out on it but they keep their money from liberal govt in every possible way
Click to expand...

Wow, just wow. I'm truly amazed at the denial. That big liberal government is spending a large part of that money on conservative defense. Perhaps if your statement was true, that is the reasoning.
 
Re: Should private explosive device ownership be constitutionally protected?

thenotorious said:
Wow, just wow. I'm truly amazed at the denial..
Click to expand...

denial of what exactly???????? you forgot to say??
 
Re: Should private explosive device ownership be constitutionally protected?

thenotorious said:
That big liberal government is spending a large part of that money on conservative defense..
Click to expand...

no idea what you mean??????????????
 
Re: Should private explosive device ownership be constitutionally protected?

James972 said:
denial of what exactly???????? you forgot to say??
Click to expand...

Bill Gates not believing the way you do.
 
Re: Should private explosive device ownership be constitutionally protected?

thenotorious said:
Bill Gates not believing the way you do.
Click to expand...

what does Bill Gates have to say about the second amendment and explosives?
 
Re: Should private explosive device ownership be constitutionally protected?

TurtleDude said:
what does Bill Gates have to say about the second amendment and explosives?
Click to expand...

Considering he has donated millions to institute gun control, I'd say not entirely a fan. At least as much as you are.
 
Re: Should private explosive device ownership be constitutionally protected?

thenotorious said:
Considering he has donated millions to institute gun control, I'd say not entirely a fan. At least as much as you are.
Click to expand...

Then He's a control freak? the uber rich don't like the little people having guns. French Knights would kill a peasant caught with a crossbow. It was a tool the poor could use to even things up with the high and mighty. So is Bill Gates a Banoid? I know the scumbag Soros is. I will have to check upon on that.
 
Re: Should private explosive device ownership be constitutionally protected?

TurtleDude said:
Then He's a control freak? the uber rich don't like the little people having guns. French Knights would kill a peasant caught with a crossbow. It was a tool the poor could use to even things up with the high and mighty. So is Bill Gates a Banoid? I know the scumbag Soros is. I will have to check upon on that.
Click to expand...

So you don't like the uber rich now? Funny.
 
Re: Should private explosive device ownership be constitutionally protected?

thenotorious said:
So you don't like the uber rich now? Funny.
Click to expand...

I don't base it on that-some of the uber rich are good people. some are power hungry scum bags. those who support the constitution are fine by me. turds like Soros-not so much

those who want to ban guns-are turds
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom