Subject:
|
The Gun Debate Ad Nauseum
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 22 Oct 2003 21:13:17 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1283 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
| |
Selective interpretation at it’s finest!
Now look who’s disregarding the founders, framers, fathers.
|
What can you mean?! You’re starting to be quite the jerk about this subject.
I write a long explanation and you hit me with some vague argument without
explanation. I won’t waste my time on you again like this...
It was my understanding that one of your previous objections was my reliance on
archaic word usage, passages revealing legislative intent, etc. Here I tried an
ordinary dictionary definition version of the 2nd Amendment and you’re still not
satisfied?!
Frankly, don’t bother responding -- you lose. I think everyone that could
possibly be reading this sees that fact.
-- Hop-Frog
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: The Gun Debate Ad Nauseum
|
| (...) Well, I decided to pull a "Richard" and delete the entire post and put in its place a trite answer. Seems to work well for you, so I thought it'd work equally as well for me. Dave K (21 years ago, 23-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
220 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
