pure bullshit. The Second is obsolete, not so the First,although I'm quite sure no one considered that one to apply to corporations, any more than they considered the 2nd functional when you have a Standing Army.
Pudfark wrote: Mon May 29, 2017 11:15 am
I live in Texas....you live in America.
lotsa verbiage, saying exactly nothing. Still haven't shown any need for the Second to preserve Free Speech. That is a cartoonish bit of propaganda spread by your handlers in the NRA. Also missing would seem to be any explanation of how Clinton's proposals would negate Constitutional provisions at all.
Pudfark wrote: Mon May 29, 2017 11:15 am
I live in Texas....you live in America.
still no proof to your assertion, whatsoever. In fact, the fact that you and I are having this exchange with ZERO threat of firearms being used, is proof of MY assertion. THIS is the First Amendment in action. No guns required, thanks.
Pudfark wrote: Mon May 29, 2017 11:15 am
I live in Texas....you live in America.
callmeslick wrote:Still haven't shown any need for the Second to preserve Free Speech
callmeslick wrote:still no proof to your assertion, whatsoever. In fact, the fact that you and I are having this exchange with ZERO threat of firearms being used, is proof of MY assertion. THIS is the First Amendment in action. No guns required, thanks.
There are 90 countries on this planet that have free speech.
89 of them don't need a 2nd Amendment to have it.