he carries a big stick

I'd reply but this post seems to have been censored with the approval of the Australian government.

I think there's also an issue with how you view freedom: That is to say, is freedom merely "freedom to" do/have things, or is it also "freedom from" certain things? Like, to me, the freedom to own an assault weapon does not outrank the freedom to not have to worry about being killed by one.

I dunno, what about the guys who praise him to troll America, like Putin and Kim Jong-Un?

Wonders never cease.

Gary Johnson was polling at 10% not long ago, so I suspect it'll be slightly higher than your guess. I think what the Republicans actually do matters a lot: His numbers will go down if they dump Trump and pick one of those Purity of Serious Conservatism doorknobs that run the party now.

As I understand it, that impression of Grant is largely the product of Southern propaganda.

but ...

It's a country of paradoxes. Every Brit we think of is cucky, but they slammed their big dick into anything that moved, for centuries

Maybe 0.04% of cuckolds just become cuckolds once they're bored with literally every kind of rapey domination

Lol at Shane saying Google is putting Trump's emails in spam on purpose to censor him

Trump supporters are a paranoid bunch.

But what? I'm not going to guess your counterargument or make it for you.
Hey, if the Netflix customer service guy can read our thoughts, anything is possible.

That's way down the list of things to lol @him for the past few months

Like when he says "false song" that isn't a typical phrase or am I crazy. Like with no quarrel about the idea, I'm just interested in the word choice here

He and Sando have been using some vocab lately that almost has me curious enough to Google and see who they've been reading these days

Nath,

Freedom from death will eventually be an Amendment, but the science just isn't there yet.

What do we think the next amendment will be, and o/u time length till it happens

Or will there be no more amendments before the Constitution is moot

3 things off the top of my head:

1) It's pie in the sky. It's a fait accompli that there will be some guns around. Meaning there will be some of basically every kind of gun. So there is always going to be a non-zero chance of you being killed by it.

Ergo, you will never have the freedom you want.

You don't currently have the freedom to not worry about a plane falling on you.

2) Because of that, it's the other side of the same coin you're talking about. A different tact. They have paranoia of things happening to them and so they want theirs.

3) Even if you acknowledge that it's not readily pragmatic but can envision a day after you're gone or you're best days are far behind you. I mean guns aren't going away anytime soon (remember you're countering me talking about overall gun ownership - not exclusively assault rifles) so you'd be mainly worried about mankind in general. The future. The collective.

False song of globalism is one of the many high water marks of recent Trump speeches.

Definitely don't watch that one.

Also don't look up (assualt murder automatic machine weapon) rifle homicide stats.

They're triggering.

I stopped reading his speeches because it's too easy to debunk them line by line

But maybe I should start again; globalism is at least a concept capable of being nebulous enough that he could say things you can't prove or disprove

I'm not sure which way they're supposed to be triggering, to be honest

Not sure what I've said about gun control, and definitely know I've never said triggering with a straight face, so I'm going to have to guess you're addressing the thread

Even still, I'm not sure what we are supposed to conclude: are you talking about things people would (mistakenly! And you couldn't possibly capture their meaning when writing a law) call assault rifles, or are you thinking people don't understand how overwhelming it is that rifles (in the most general possible sense of the word rifle) are used for display, then far below that hunting, before anything else?

Marriage to service animals

Dammit Thayer you gotta put a trigger warning at the top of that poast

seems like assault weapons aren't really the problem - just an easy target because you need one to really commit a massacre (super rare overall and drop in the ocean of gun deaths relatively). doesn't seem like banning them will make much of a dent in the overall issue of gun-related homicides?

Probably getting rid of the second amendment or term limits. Can't think of anything actually close.

Rifles are used in an amazingly low number of homicides. Generously, 300 to 500 per year.

Hammers/clubs are more frequently used in murders than rifles. Bare hands are used about twice as often as rifles.

Yet there are millions of AR-15s in circulation.

"Gun deaths" are mostly suicides. Then most of the rest are ghetto drug/gang handgun violence. Then there's the thin slices of the pie chart.

Well, you used to could cause a massacre with explosives, but there's no National TNT Association and for whatever reason you can't just get explosives by breaking the law

I mean, I know that and have intimated as such in this thread unless I'm crazy

I think most people itt know and understand well everything in your poast here

I have no arguments against Twitter suppressing tags, Facebook manipulating feeds, or Google tweaking autocomplete but LOL conspiracy theory.

I'm sure nobody at Google noticed that 60% of Trump email was going to spam. Google definitely has shown that political impartiality is the hallmark of "Don't Be Evil."