-
There were many reasons for the change of the site software, the biggest was security. The age of the old software also meant no server updates for certain programs. There are many benefits to the new software, one of the biggest is the mobile functionality. Ill fix up some stuff in the coming days, we'll also try to get some of the old addons back or the data imported back into the site like the garage. To create a thread or to reply with a post is basically the same as it was in the prior software. The default style of the site is light colored, but i temporarily added a darker colored style, to change you can find a link at the bottom of the site.
Interesting history of the NRA
- Thread starter UtahPete
- Start date
- Status
Holly
New member
SPECTACUALR SPIDERMAN
New member
holly, you forgot to mention all that were killed by god during noah's ark. i don't think guns would have helped much.
Holly
New member
So if someone pointed a gun at Noah's head, do you really think he would have said no to them getting on the boat ??????? :roflblack::roflblack:
Bob Denman
New member
The story is quite a bit more complex than that...
wyliec
New member
Holly/Randy,
I think I was giving you too much credit; I now found where you copied from:
https://albany.craigslist.org/rnr/d/mass-murder/6507240486.html
I know that you can be original. Give it another shot.
Holly
New member
Last edited:
wyliec
New member
Now that is funny.:roflblack::roflblack::roflblack::roflblack::roflblack::roflblack::roflblack::roflblack::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::bowdown::bowdown::bowdown::bowdown::bowdown::bowdown::bowdown:
In the 21st century it would be a well-armed but unorganized populace going against the most powerful military the world has ever seen. When the White House becomes a dictatorship and turns the military's weapons against its own people, we can take another look at this argument. Until then, it is moot.
Bob Denman
New member
Soo what do you do?
Do you throw in the towel; whenever you figure that you can't win?
:shocked: That's worse than sad: it's sad AND it's pitiful! nojoke
Without getting into a discussion of tactics: Do you honestly think that every Officer is going to obey an order that has them firing upon American Citizens?
What about the forward troops? :dontknow:
SPECTACUALR SPIDERMAN
New member
bob you are right, i can't see all soldiers or police shooting at the public but i also don't think the weapons you legally
own will truly be able to fight our military or police tactical units?
Bob Denman
New member
Sometimes you just have to fight the fight that's been thrown at you... :dontknow:
I'll let the Pussies worry about the consequences. nojokenojoke
I'll let the Pussies worry about the consequences. nojokenojoke
Thanks Bob. You are reinforcing the point I was making about the irrelevance of the 2nd amendment in 21st century America.
Last edited:
Bob Denman
New member
Weren't you originally a British Subject?
Over here: we're citizens! :thumbup:
Over here: we're citizens! :thumbup:
No Bob, I was and still am a British citizen.
Holly
New member
In other news..................
It seems the beloved little Parkland students are not very happy about change anymore. A few weeks ago they were happy to be exploited and bused to Washington to protest demanding change, and now these little angels got just what they wanted.
You see, now they are required to carry clear backpacks and now are stating their rights are being taking away. Hey snowflake, you don't like rights being taken away when it effects you, do you ?????
This just made my day !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :roflblack::roflblack::roflblack:
It seems the beloved little Parkland students are not very happy about change anymore. A few weeks ago they were happy to be exploited and bused to Washington to protest demanding change, and now these little angels got just what they wanted.
You see, now they are required to carry clear backpacks and now are stating their rights are being taking away. Hey snowflake, you don't like rights being taken away when it effects you, do you ?????
This just made my day !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :roflblack::roflblack::roflblack:
Last edited:
Bob Denman
New member
Since you're still a British Subject, and don't seem to want to assimilate: why are you here?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_subject
Last edited:
By your own reference, I am NOT a 'British Subject' but rather a British citizen, so why do you insist on using that label?
Currently the term 'British subject' refers, in British nationality law, to a limited class of different people defined by Part IV of the British Nationality Act 1981. Under that Act, two groups of people became "British subjects"; the first were people from the Republic of Ireland born before 1949 who already claimed subject status, and the second covered a number of people who had previously been considered "British subjects without citizenship", and were not considered citizens of any other country.
What makes you say I don't seem to want to assimilate? That's the more interesting assumption I'd like to challenge.
Thirdly, even if I were a British Subject, and if I didn't want to assimilate (whatever that means), what does that have to do with where I choose to live?
Last edited:
Bob Denman
New member
From that same source:
"Formerly 'British subject' was used to denote de facto citizenship of the United Kingdom and the British Empire, and until 1949 was used to refer generally to any person born or naturalised in the United Kingdom or the British Empire, including the independent dominions such as Canada and Australia (but not including protectorates, e.g., the Princely states, who had their own separate citizenship status). The term had a more complex interpretation between 1949 and 1983 and the move to independence of many of the colonies, with subject status existing alongside citizenship of an individual country or colony.
"Formerly 'British subject' was used to denote de facto citizenship of the United Kingdom and the British Empire, and until 1949 was used to refer generally to any person born or naturalised in the United Kingdom or the British Empire, including the independent dominions such as Canada and Australia (but not including protectorates, e.g., the Princely states, who had their own separate citizenship status). The term had a more complex interpretation between 1949 and 1983 and the move to independence of many of the colonies, with subject status existing alongside citizenship of an individual country or colony.
The term 'subject' is used rather than 'citizen' because in a monarchy the monarch is the source of authority in whose name all legal power in civil and military law is exercised. The people of a monarchy in former times were regarded as the monarch's subjects who were under certain obligations such as owing allegiance to, and thereby entitled to the protection of, the Crown."
When you try to judge our American Society by your British standards, and impose them upon us: it smells like a very dismissive attitude concerning our values...
When you try to judge our American Society by your British standards, and impose them upon us: it smells like a very dismissive attitude concerning our values...
- Status
