awww, kitties!

exactly.

Can't seem to fathom the idea of random posts with no meaning? Cool.

No, Just sometimes I just can't tell if people here are trying to be funny or are just fucking retarded... and sometimes it's both.

sorry... as valid as your entire arguement is, i still cannot take you seriously because your broken english is too damn funny sounding

speak english or be fired

On gun control: http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55288

can i get a gun in korea? no.
i can't even get a cell phone plan in korea.

i'm sorry, i like korea, but its a lot more racist and nationalistic than america. and very difficult for foreigners.

think about that one for a minute.

how many people do you know that have jobs off the books?



common courtsey, the benefit of the doubt that they are a good person, and the fact that they are still a human.

if theres rights were restricted what would keep me from writing a monthly 'ese' and rounding up all the illegals i can find to give them a tattoo of the word spik on their foreheads?

Common courtesy?!
Then why do many other nations have restrictions on the rights of non-citizens as well? Guess they don't want to be courteous to others? I believe that certain inalienable rights should most certainly be guaranteed to all.
But the right to such things as voting, holding office, and owning dangerous weapons should be restricted to law-abiding and competent citizens.

omg. i can't even believe people are FOR giving non-citizens rights fresh off the boat!? um, is that a joke?

um, i agree 100% with aaron and zach.

You are missing the point completely.

But first, let me point out the flaw in your false dilemna. What you described above is commonly referred to as assault. Assaulting/murdering/etc. someone is illegal in almost every country, regardless of the citizenship status of the victim. This is precisely why the Minutemen don't go around mowing down Mexicans who illegally enter the United States.

Back to you missing the point... No one is advocating that non-citizens should be stripped of all of the rights that they currently enjoy (free speech, freedom of religion, etc.) or the services that are available to them (education, healthcare, law enforcement, etc.). Some of you guys are acting like we're advocating that the government ration their food, air and water supply.

The fact is that the United States recognizes that human beings ar entitled to "certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness." Sound familiar? Somehow, I don't think Thomas Jefferson struggled with whether or not to include "buy a Glock" as one of those rights.

here, fucking, here Aaron.

jefferson stole from locke, smith and johnson, but more importantly than quoting all that:
the undefinability of "the pursuit of happiness" leads to (as with many things in the constitution) an overly open interpretation.


well, don't you know happiness is a warm gun, mama?


tee hee, silly beatles



and as for relating this to the late 18th century, i would think that if the foreigners (whatever that would mean at the time) could afford guns, then they would be getting off of the boat with them. so, i do not think it is particularly relevant to question jefferson's intent in this matter, as it would be unforeseen.

This post has been edited by TetraGrammaton Cleric: Apr 23 2007, 02:51 AM

handymen, lawnworkers, field workers, car wash attendants, SOME maid services. anything inside a flea market. golf caddies, and all club security


that's only a few, and if you don't think that adds up to much, you're mistaken