Jump to content

Horn Dog

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    3674
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Horn Dog

  1. 1 minute ago, wood said:

    Was at the game and missed the bad spot. Where did they put it?

    They put it at the 8yrd line, where the black line is on the picture 

    • Rage+1 1
  2. 1 hour ago, BrickHorn said:

    For the life of me, I will never understand why y’all give Ana the benefit of the doubt.

    He knows none of us give a shit if Hunter is prosecuted. He is arguing in bad faith, like he always does, to create a bothsides straw man.

    His act is transparent and tired. Just ignore it.

    Image of How about a nice game of chess?

  3. 17 hours ago, Anastasis said:

    Why enforce the law when it comes to lying on a 4473? Is this real life?

     

    g. Are you a unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?  Warning:  The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.

     

     

    14 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

    If you are going to make an argument about originalism, perhaps you should acquaint yourself with the text of the actual law. 

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922

    (d)It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person, including as a juvenile—
    ...
    (3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));

    Just so I got this right.. I quote your previous post stating the actual text of the federal law, point out how the extensive use of "OR" in the actual text of this law, by a  strict interpretation of the written words can be used to reach a ridiculous conclusion, and your response is that I should familiarize myself with the actual written law?  Is that correct? 

    And yes coffee is not a controlled substance,  but you are aware what 'OR' means.  Right?

    • Hook 'Em 4
  4. 9 hours ago, Anastasis said:

    See how dumb this gets. We can’t prosecute crack heads like Hunter Biden for federal firearm law violations because coffee. 

    Yea you’re right.  Originalism is dumb and leads to ridiculous conclusions.  It's almost like laws should be interpreted with some type of context, "reasonability standard", and consistency with how it's been applied in the past.

    And by the way I agreed with you.  Convict Hunter Biden tor Federal firearms law violation if he is guilty.  Throw the book at him even.  Now convict and apply the same standards to everyone else that did the same thing.  Both sides!

    • Hook 'Em 4
    • Drool 1
  5. g. Are you an unlawful user of, OR addicted to, marijuana OR any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, OR any other controlled substance?  

     

    I am an originist that believes this law must be interpreted strictly as written.  Therfore habitatal coffee drinking gun owners who falsely filled out this form, regardless of their last names, should also be locked up and the key should be thrown away!   Lock them all up!!

    • Hook 'Em 5
    • Haha 2
    • Drool 1
  6. 1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

    Extremely few. Only a few hundred a year. Which I hope we can all agree we should be enforcing more consistently. If you fuck around on a 4473, you should get the book thrown at you. 

    Agree.  Throw the book at him.  Then lets get a “gun formtask force” together of thousands of agents to comb through every single gun owners forms, their criminal records, and their socia media and if they have ever used drugs before, and lied on that form, LOCK THEM UP!!

    • Hook 'Em 7
  7. 1 hour ago, Js1 said:

    Gotta get Manchin or Sinema on board. Good luck with that 

    She sucks and he’s reluctant to fuck with Senate rules 

    Or get a moderate pub that supports the military to support this change with regards to military appointments.  The point being that have a much better chance of getting Manchin or a pub to jump ship in support of the military than getting Tubby to change his mind.  Regardless, proposing rules change to this idiotic archaic rule, and making each and every senator vote to either support the military or Tubby is good politics and use the power of majority leader.   It's either that or we sit on our hands and try to thoughts/prayers our way out.   The rules have changed.  Dems can't be the only participant playing by old rules of decorum and mutual respect while the other party smears shit on the walls.

  8. 1 hour ago, sidis said:

    looks like the "tits" part of this thread has finally started pulling its weight.

    wondering if we haven't heard much from her lately because she's been recovering.

    Screenshot2023-09-13091442.png.50842b022febd10d2889726a1a9b0e55.png

     

    1 hour ago, Red Five said:

    still would 

     

    1 hour ago, Porterhouse said:

    First time I’ve ever looked at her and been attracted. That is some good work. 

    It is a very intricate multistep process, and I have never successfully pulled it off, but I think I could fuck some of the crazy out of her if given the chance.

    • Haha 2
    • Fuck Around and Find Out 2
  9. 1 hour ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

    Mitch (or his successor) will wait for Schumer to do it, and the next time R's are in power they will do it for something much more onerous and claim Dems were the ones who changed the rules. 

    Yea  so what.  Mitch is gonna do that regardless of what Schumer does or doesn't do anyway if he deems it important enough to grab power.  No one senator should be able to hold up the routine business of the senate regardless of party.

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...