22 Dec

The Truth About The Right To Keep And Bear Arms

                                       

“I don’t think legitimate sportsmen are going to say, ‘I need an assault weapon to go hunting,’” Cuomo said, according to the New York Times. “There is a balance here — I understand the rights of gun owners; I understand the rights of hunters.”

Cuomo indicated the state will likely force some kind of permit process on owners of semi-automatic “assault weapons.” In addition to generating revenue and expanding the size and reach of government, the effort will allow the state to confiscate the weapons of citizens who do not comply.

Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun but permit it,” the governor said.

constitutionThis is the governor of one of the largest states (population-wise) in the country! We have devolved to a point in the gun rights argument that we’re reverting back to the very thing from which e sought independence. The Declaration of Independence lists several grievances that led to the Revolutionary War.

King George was an oppressive ruler. He quartered troops in private homes to keep the citizens in check. He forced sailors to take up arms against fellow contrymen. He taxed them into oblivion without any representation. He made up laws on the fly to deal with trouble makers and denied them due process.

In Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England (1803), St. George Tucker, a lawyer, Revolutionary War militia offcer, legal scholar, and later a U.S. District Court judge (appointed by James Madison in 1813), wrote of the 2nd Amendment that, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, and this without any qualification as to their condition or degree, as is the case in the British government.”

Yes, I’m a nerd. I read and RESEARCH the meanings of the Constitution, especially the most fundamental and important of our rights. Delving into the Appendix, Tucker explains further the meaning of the 2nd Amendment (emphasis is mine).

This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty …. The right of self defence is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction. In England, the people have been disarmed, generally, under the specious pretext of preserving the game: a never failing lure to bring over the landed aristocracy to support any measure, under that mask, though calculated for very different purposes. True it is, their bill of rights seems at first view to counteract this policy: but the right of bearing arms is confined to protestants, and the words suitable to their condition and degree, have been interpreted to authorise the prohibition of keeping a gun or other engine for the destruction of game, to any farmer, or inferior tradesman, or other person not qualified to kill game. So that not one man in five hundred can keep a gun in his house without being subject to a penalty.

secondamendmentSound familiar? Today’s progressive movement has sought to turn the 2nd Amendment’s meaning into something it isn’t. Our lofty politicians – protected with their throngs of security guards, armored vehicles, and other protections – and their lapdog media have succeeded at convincing the “low information voters,” as Rush Limbaugh likes to say, that this right is meant to apply to hunters only. Or in your home only.

In addition, they have tried to tell us that even if we were hunters, we “don’t need those kinds of weapons for hunting.” Nearly every argument I have with a progressive gun grabber usually incorporates the statements that there is no use for any type of magazine that can carry more than 10 rounds or to own a weapon that looks black and evil. Personally, I think that’s racist that they are trying to ban so-called “black rifles.”

Another constitutional scholar to our Founders, William Rawle, wrote a book in 1829 called, “A View of the Constitution of the United States of America.” In this book, he talks about the reach and authority of the 2nd Amendment while also discussing the limitations on those that would attempt to circumvent it. He, rightly so, points out that the 27 words that make up the 2nd Amendment are composed of two, separate clauses; not one run-on sentence. Of the first clause (a well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free state), he writes:

Although in actual war, the services of regular troops are confessedly more valuable; yet, while peace prevails, and in the commencement of a war before a regular force can be raised, the militia form the palladium of the country. They are ready to repel invasion, to suppress insurrection, and preserve the good order and peace of government. That they should be well regulated, is judiciously added. A disorderly militia is disgraceful to itself, and dangerous not to the enemy, but to its own country. The duty of the state government is, to adopt such regulations as will tend to make good soldiers with the least interruptions of the ordinary and useful occupations of civil life. In this all the Union has a strong and visible interest.

Some would point to the National Guard and say that this is what constitutes the “well regulated Militia” of the 2nd Amendment. However, such is not the case. The National Guard is frequently called upon to take on standing military operations. Our politicians and government have done a stellar job at preventing “the people” from forming their own “well regulated Militias” by labeling such groups as extremist, hate, or seditious collections. Can anyone honestly say that if our government became so corrupt as to turn on its own people that the National Guard would be in place to oppose the regular military forces? We all know that the Guard’s troops are equipped with mostly secondhand equipment and arms. If – and this is a very long shot – the country was ordered into martial law either the National Guard would be called up to augment the active forces or would be defeated without support if it stood up for the people.

This is why militias comprised of “the people” are included in the Constitution. Imagine if the people were allowed to form these militias in Los Angeles before the LA riots. Neighborhoods of people could defend their homes and businesses. Heck, one only needs to look at this picture from the riots of what property owners were doing to defend and protect their property. These citizens were protecting Korea town.

Korean-men-defending-Koreatown-during-the-1992-LA-riot

There are videos online of the LA Riots of literal gun battles between looters and armed merchants protecting their assets. There were no police officers anywhere nearby and it was left to the citizen to protect himself and his belongings.

But, Rawle pointed out the distinctions in his book between the two clauses in the 2nd Amendment and there are two. Of the second clause – the right of the people to keep and bear arms – he said the following:

The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious (ie: criminal – CJ) attempt could only be made under some general pretence by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.

Rawle also understood that such rights are encumbered with certain responsibilities. Just because you have a right to “keep and bear arms” doesn’t mean you have a right to be an ass. Obviously, there is a certain etiquette to exercising all of our rights. For example, you can’t shout “FIRE” or “BOMB” in any crowded environment so as to induce panic. Rawle identified the limitation to exercising your 2nd Amendment rights this way:

This right ought not, however, in any government, to be abused to the disturbance of the public peace.

An assemblage of persons with arms, for an unlawful purpose, is an indictable offence, and even the carrying of arms abroad by a single, individual, attended with circumstances giving just reason to fear that he purposes to make an unlawful use of them, would be sufficient cause to require him to give surety of the peace. If he refused he would be liable to imprisonments.

In other words, ordering a Big Mac with fries and a Diet Dr. Pepper with a pistol in your hand would probably be defined as a “disturbance of the public peace.” Walking around the mall with an AK strapped to your back would probably also qualify as “an indictable offence.”

Rawle makes it quite clear that “the People” refers to individuals and not the military, or Militia. This isn’t someone over 200 years after the amendment was written trying to opine as to the true meaning of its words. This is of a man who was present during the debates and knew what the Founders meant when it was written.

onenationundersocialism

Another founding contemporary was Justice Story, a Supreme Court Associate Justice appointed by James Madison in 1811. He wrote a book called “Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States” in 1833. Again, this is a man that was present for the ensuing discussion and explanatory speeches by the Founders and writers of our Constitution. He obviously never imagined that we would have such Constitution-hating liberals filling offices to which they were sworn to protect and defend the very thing they hate.

The modern-day Democrat party talks more about the need to change the Constitution – and specifically the need to change the 2nd Amendment – than they talk about defending and supporting it. Without studying the words of those actually present during the 1880s to 1890s, they deign to just make up stuff and simply define that sacred document as “living” and “breathing.” Mayor Bloomingturd and Governor Cuckuomo obviously never “duly reflected upon the subject” of the meaning of the 2nd Amendment.

The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.

In his essay “Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution,” which was published in the Federal Gazette on June 18, 1789 Tench Coxe wrote that it is the responsibility of the people (again, speaking as individuals) to be the final check on government. He writes:

As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow-citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.

I could go on and on. There is simply no factual basis behind the 2nd Amendment referring specifically to hunting or even that it was intended to restrict certain arms simply because of their physical appearance. Today’s liberal elite and their zombie-like followers won’t “carry [them]selves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed” as Thomas Jefferson wrote to William Johnson in 1823 (please read the great book, “The Complete Jefferson” to find other nuggets of intellectual knowledge on the founding of this country). Instead, they assign new and evolving meaning that suits their collective agendas.

“The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” — Thomas Jefferson

Perhaps, this is really why the rulers in Washington are so intent on taking away our weapons. Let there be no doubt now as we engage our intellectual inferiors on this subject about the true meaning and intent of our Founders when they debated and passed the Bill of Rights and specifically the 2nd Amendment. It’s time to put gun control to bed once and for all.

And as for the belief that “if we just ban high capacity magazines, the shooter won’t kill as many people” I offer you the following video on just how long it takes a trained or practiced shooter to change the magazine on these so-called “assault rifles.”

YouTube Preview Image
This entry was posted in 2nd Amendment, Constitution, Mass Murders. Bookmark the permalink. Saturday, December 22nd, 2012 at 10:02 pm
| 2,490 views

339 Responses to The Truth About The Right To Keep And Bear Arms

  1. Tom says: 201

    @CJ:

    You continue to make assertions that are untrue. Where did I state I spoke to anyone off the record about this and have inside information? Where? Can you supply a post number?

    In 98 you questioned two settled issues: the shooter and the gun. By claiming these aren’t settled issues you are calling the veracity of the CT Police into question. And you have not backed off on that. Either you are wrong and they told the truth, or they lied.

    Jeez, CJ. Where did I say growing up in CT makes me an “expert”? As i just clarified, again, I offered it as context to my emotional response.

    ReplyReply
  2. Richard Wheeler says: 202

    Tom I agree with CJ. that you show true character.
    C.J Do you believe the AR-15 was used in the slaughter of these 26? Was it used to kill his mother?

    ReplyReply
  3. Redteam says: 203

    Has anyone noticed that we are over 200 comments?

    ReplyReply
  4. Richard Wheeler says: 204

    Redteam No big deal.We’ve done 6 or 7 hundred. Right Bees?
    But let’s not start on Tim Tebow again.

    Go Irish

    ReplyReply
  5. CJ says: 205

    @Tom: I’m done playing silly word games with you.

    ReplyReply
  6. Redteam
    yes nice of you to say it ,I’M JUST COMING AND HAVE NOT NOTICE IT,
    and I check it up , C J YOU HIT THE 200, THAT IS WORTH A CHAMPAGNE BOTTLE,
    A CYBER ONE, WON’T MAKE YOU DRUNK.
    so Richard no 700 comments on this one from you?
    remember it was at this time last year,
    well we’ll see how far we can go on this one,
    I’M WILLING TO DO MY PART.
    THE TEBOW 700 IS THE ONE WHICH GOT CURT TO DIVIDE THE LONG POSTS IN PARTS OF 50 COMMENTS, AND IT’S BETTER, BECAUSE I remember having a slow computer every time
    I wanted to get in. especialy at the end, the click would roll all the way to hundreds of comments so to reach the last space to answer,

    ReplyReply
  7. CJ says: 207

    @Richard Wheeler: “C.J Do you believe the AR-15 was used in the slaughter of these 26?” No, not yet. Too many inconsistencies in what has been released so far. Until the autopsies are done and read the nallistics reports, all i know is Lanza killed them, not the weapob used. “Was it used to kill his mother?” No one knows.

    ReplyReply
  8. C J
    my news paper write SPENGLER THE KILLER OF TWO FIRE FIGHTERS AND WOUNDED TWO MORE
    ON CHRISTMAS EVE, NOT ALLOW GUN, IT’S NOT KNOWN HOW HE GOT THE GUNS
    3 GUNS, A MILITARY STYLE BUSHMASTER .223 CALBRE SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLE,
    ANOTHER 12 GAUGE SHOT GUN, AND A 38 CALIBRE REVOLVER,
    THE RIFLE WHICH HAD ACOMBAT STYLE SUPPRESSOR IS THE SAME MAKE AND CALBRE AS ONE
    USED BY A GUNMAN TO MASSACRE 20 CHILDREN AND 6 WOMEN, AT A NEWTOWN, CONN. ELEMENTERY SCHOOL EARLIER THIS MONTH,
    FEDERAL AUTHORITIES CONFIRM YESTERDAY THEY HAD TRACE THE SALE OF THE WEAPONS,
    DID NOT RELEASE DETAILS THEY SAID HE USE THE RIFLE TO ATTACK THE FIREFIGHTERS
    BECAUSE OF THE DISTANCE INVOLED,
    BYE

    ReplyReply
  9. Redteam says: 209

    The Constitution was written to make it mandatory that the government could not make a law infringing on your right to own and use a firearm to prevent the government from intruding on your property, person or possessions. Make NO LAW means just that.

    ReplyReply
  10. C J
    hi,
    I found another clip to tell about guns,
    in the case of the RUGER MINI 14, KNOWN AS THE POOR MAN’S ASSAULT RIFLE BY OPPONENTS,
    LEPINE A MASS KILLER OF STUDENTS IN A UNIVERSITY, HE USED 30 ROUND MAGAZINES
    THAT ARE NOW BANNED IN CANADA, TODAY THE LARGEST MAGAZINE ALLOWED HOLD 5 ROUNDS,
    THE RUGER MINI-14 was one of the weapon legaly obtained and used by ANDERS BREIVIK
    TO KILL 77 PEOPLE IN NORWAY LAST YEAR,
    THE CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF POLICE BOARDS PASS A RESOLUTION EARLYER THIS YEAR TO RECLASSIFY CERTAIN FIREARMS INCLUDING THE MINI14 RUGER AS RESTRICTED,
    THE BERETTA CX4 STORM USED IN THE DAWSON SHOOTING [CANADA UNIVERSITY] IS A LESS
    POWERFUL WEAPON CALLED A SEMI AUTOMATIC CARBINE WITH A TRIGGER ressemble one
    on a pistol, it is more compact than the RUGER, AND THE CARTRIDGE RELOAD BEHIND THE TRIGGER.
    CANADA DID NOT FOLLOW UP IN DEMANDS TO RESTRICT GUNS ANY ONE,
    EVEN THE BUSHMASTER AR-15 RESTRICTED IN CANADA TO GUN CLUB ENTHUSIASTS
    with tight licensing requirements only look more menacing than other weapons that are unrestricted,
    the ability to do a lot of damage with a firearm exist even with something
    as archaic as the OLD WEST DOUBLE BARREL SHOTGUN WHICH IS LIMITED TO TWO SHOTS,
    SAID ONE OF THE ANTIGUN OPPONENT, IT’S ABSOLUTLY UNBELIEVABLE HOW FAST A SKILLED
    OPERATOR CAN SHOOT AND LOAD SOMETHING LIKE THAT, AND THE NUMBER OF SHOTS
    THEY CAN FIRE IN A LIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME
    THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT AND A SEMI AUTOMATIC FOR THE PURPOSE OF MASS MURDER
    IS INCONSEQUENTIAL.
    I though it would interest you to know,
    HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL THE BRAVES FIGHTING FOR FREEDOM AS YOU SIR,
    I cut the story shorter, for you.

    ReplyReply
  11. CJ says: 211

    @ilovebeeswarzone: And therein lies the fallacy of the gun control movement. History has proven that gun control only works in favor of two groups: criminals and government. Okay, those are both sects of the same group, but you get it. Before so-called assault weapons there were mass killings, so it isnt the weapon.

    What i take most insulting is this idea that keeps getting spread that I “have no business” owning one of these weapons. If I’m not using these weapons to break any laws, what does it matter what kind or how many I have?

    ReplyReply
  12. C J
    yes sir, did you read the criminal who shot the FIREFIGHTERS,
    HE HAD AN ILLEGAL WEAPON AND THEY FOUND THE WOMAN WHO GOT THE WEAPON
    AND ILLEGALLY ALSO,
    I guess money can buy an illegal gun too,
    how about the GOVERNMENT CONCENTRATE ON THEIR JOBS OF CLOSING THE BORDERS, BEFORE PICKING ON THE GOOD GUN OWNERS

    ReplyReply
  13. Richard Wheeler
    slowly but surely we are heading for another 700 comments here
    HAPPY NEW YEAR TO YOU AND YOU’RE LOVED ONES,
    wishing you turn CONSERVATIVE IN 2013

    ReplyReply
  14. HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL HERE,
    HOPE YOU HAVE A GOOD ONE FOR YOU AND YOUR LOVED ONES

    ReplyReply
  15. Richard Wheeler says: 215

    Bees Thanks and good wishes to you and yours.
    As mentioned, the Conservatives on here who most influenced me, are long gone.
    Best recent news is one trick pony and ultimate Obamaphobe Hannity has lost approx. 30% of his rabid audience since Nov.
    Aqua Noles looked great.
    J.G. and Larry Tough,hard fought loss for Wolves.

    Go Irish Epic battle for National ChaMpionship 1/7/2013 8pm EST

    ReplyReply
  16. Richard Wheeler
    you force me to BABLE CONSTANTLY. JUST TO SAY,
    DON’T WORRY ABOUT HANNITY, HE IS RESTING AFTER HE HAS DONE EXCEPTIONALY
    PROGRAMS TO GET THE TRUTH OUT WHICH THEY TRY SO HARD TO CONCEAL IN THE WHITE HOUSE
    THEY DID SUCH A BIG EFFORT BEFORE THE ELECTION IT WAS SO OBVIOUS TO US ,
    BUT REGRETABLY MANY LIKE YOU HAVE THOSE LEATHER THING LIKE HORSES
    ON A RACE TO WIN POWER, WITHOUT SEEING THE EACH SIDE OF THE FAILURES OF LEADERSHIP,
    THE HORSE RUN AND RUN ON ONE STRAIGT LINE, AND DUNNO NOTHING ELSE ALL THEIR LIVES.
    HAPPY NEW YEAR

    ReplyReply
  17. Richard Wheeler says: 217

    Ms Bees That ” horse running in one straight line ” sounds like a self description. lol Try being a little more open and flexible.
    As I learned from folks like Aye and Mata you may learn from people like Larry,Tom and Greg.
    On Fox I feel O’Reilly fair and balanced. Keep an open mind.There is much to be learned.

    Semper Fi and Happy New Year

    ReplyReply
  18. Richard Wheeler
    I happen to be the most open mind you ever encounter in your life,
    and I know it,
    SO IF YOU HEAR ME SAY SOMETHING, YOU BETTER KNOW IT COME WITH AN OPEN MIND.
    I cannot say the same for you,
    how about 23millions not working beside those who gave up,
    because there are no jobs, because of the intitlements choking the companies what ever how small or big they are,
    if you are so cozy with OBAMA, TELL HIM TO GET OF THE AMERICAN’S BACK, TELL HIM THIS IS NOT HIS INDONEZIA,
    HEY TELL OBAMA TO PROTECT THE YEMEN AMBASSADOR
    BEFORE HE GET KILL AND ALSO THE MILITARY,
    BEFORE MONITERING THE DANGER. RECALL THEM,
    BECAUSE HE HAS SHOWN TO BE TOO SLOW IN MONITERING SITUATIONS

    ReplyReply
  19. Redteam says: 219

    @ilovebeeswarzone: Bees, Obama is absolutely the worst politician ever occupying the White House. About Hannity or O’Reilly losing audience since November, that’s normal, the side they were predominantly supporting lost, so the folks watching them are tuning out politics because they don’t want to have to watch the celebrating by the Democrats. That’ll soon be over and it’ll be back to normal

    ReplyReply
  20. Redteam
    yes you make a lot of sense, that is it,
    there was a push, a tremendous effort to educate the people on the truth accompany with facts,
    no bulshit at all from HANNITY, HE IS A PASSIONATE LOVER OF AMERICA, THE AMERICA HE KNOW
    THE RIGHT AMERICA,
    HE WORK SO HARD AT IT, HE GAVE IT ALL NO RESTRAINT,
    OF COURSE HE SLOW DOWN AFTER SAME AS THE ONES FOLLOWING HIM,
    HE HAD CAPTURE ALL OF US BECAUSE HE WAS GIVING SO MUCH,
    AND YOU SAID THE OTHER PART, IT WILL
    AS A REGULAR PROGRAM HE WILL EXPOSE THE FAILURES AGAIN AND HE IS GOOD AT IT.
    BYE
    HOPE YOUR NEW YEAR BRING YOU THE BEST

    ReplyReply
  21. CJ says: 221

    Anyone that knows anything about guns would know that the weapon in the trunk of the vehicle in the first video is NOT an AR. The only “assault rifle” if could possible be would be an AK based on the way the officer is trying to clear the weapon. However, what ejects is not a 7.62x39mm round. It looks like a shotgun shell, which leads me to believe that the weapon is a Saiga semi-automatic shotgun or something similar. When you look at the preponderance of the stories from this, one can see that the story has been deliberately changed to suit an agenda.

    http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/340113

    ReplyReply
  22. johngalt says: 222

    @CJ:

    Thanks for the posting, CJ. It helps immensely with a point I was making to someone on another topic.

    ReplyReply
  23. CJ says: 223

    I also recommend subscribing to Senator Feinstein’s updates on her gun control legislation:

    http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons

    ReplyReply
  24. C J
    SO IN YOUR 207 YOU HESITATE TO BELIEVE, THE BUSHMASTER,HAD BEEN USED,
    YOU EVEN MENTION OF THE KILLER MIGHT HAVE GONE BACK IN THE CAR,
    SO YOU WHERE RIGHT ALL ALONG TO DOUBT THAT WEAPON

    ReplyReply
  25. CJ says: 225

    @ilovebeeswarzone: I bet that after this issue dies down a bit over the next year, they release information that blows the lid off their scam in the hopes no one notices.

    ReplyReply
  26. C J
    YES THAT’S WHO THEY ARE,
    HIDING BILLS UNDER THE PILE FOR REPUBLICANS TO PASS BLINDLY,
    BUT THEY HAVE REACH THEIR SPENDING LIMITS
    and no matter how they want to slip away from their mistakes,
    they are now being caught, their hands in the bag,
    bye

    ReplyReply
  27. C J
    I should have also said you’re 165 comment along the other
    207 on my first previous comment on 224 saying how right on the case you where from the beginning as it seems they where trying to confuse the people on the BUSHMASTER, BEING IN THE CAR, NOT BEING IN THE CAR, BEING IN THE CAR,AND SO ON.
    I did blame you to be so meticulous on details,
    and you did figure their mess,
    BYE

    ReplyReply
  28. Redteam says: 228

    yes, this is very interesting and fits with what we were discussing earlier, that he only used 2 handguns in the school. So if the students were shot with 90 bushmaster type cartridge bullets, who did the shooting. Obviously Lanza did not. Was the report of 90 223 casings found true? who is lying in all this?

    ReplyReply
  29. Skookum says: 229

    It is the truth that eludes the government and its state directed media; actually, it doesn’t elude them, they have no use for the truth. Everything thrown to the public is programed toward promoting an agenda. They are liars and whores all of them.

    ReplyReply
  30. TOM
    hope you are still in the MISSISSIPI, because there is no flue in there,
    only one of 3 states without flue and this flue is a killer.
    take care

    ReplyReply
  31. C J
    one thing after the mother who went hiding with her two twins, when a guy broke in.
    he went to ramsack the house and end up in her hideway crawling space
    where he broke in with his crowbar, last week only, she had just learned from her husband to use the gun ,
    a 38, she had her husband on the phone, and he told her to shoot, and she empty her barrel on him,
    still alive begging her to stop, he didn’t know she was empty, the 911 was on the way, the guy ran away
    with those bulletin his face and neck. they found him down on the ground further down asking for help,
    he had previously tried to rob another place but was confronted by the owner,
    imagine he was really out to any crimes he could do, and the woman with her 38 did not kill him
    with all those bullets, so I really don’t have any confidence at a 38 after this,
    bye

    ReplyReply
  32. Redteam says: 232

    @ilovebeeswarzone:
    Well, Mississippi does have flu, it’s just not quite as widespread as other states. It will be within a few days though. Don’t breathe in those germs and you won’t get it. I had flu shot, so I shouldn’t get it.

    ReplyReply
  33. Redteam
    thank you,
    I heard on FOX ABOUT IT being spare,
    maybe it’s now started to grow,
    oops IT occur to me just now, it might be because of TOM WHO LEFT THE VIRUS THERE,
    WHEN HE WENT ON VACATION,
    SOME PEOPLE DON’T CARE ABOUT OTHER, THEY CANNOT KEEP THEIR VIRUS TO THEMSELVES,
    YOU CAN BE ASSURE THAT if I meet with one virus, I sure won’t breathe, even if it choke me,
    but where I am, the virus are frosen and buried under 5 feet of snow now
    bye

    ReplyReply
  34. Redteam says: 234

    @ilovebeeswarzone: Yes, Tom should be prohibited from going back to Mississippi if he left his flu there. (unless he’s going there just to catch it)

    ReplyReply
  35. Redteam
    do you mean to say HE WANT TO CATCH HIS FLUE BACK?
    he want and excuse to stay in vacation and call sick,
    what a lazy character, does he think we will supply his expanses,
    YOU NEVER KNOW SOMEONE UNTIL YOU SEE THAT, WHAT A BUM TOM

    ReplyReply
  36. Redteam says: 236

    @ilovebeeswarzone: No, I don’t think he’d want to catch it back.

    ReplyReply
  37. Redteam
    what make you so sure, do you pretend to know him that well,

    ReplyReply
  38. Reteam
    HI’
    yesterday I saw on tv a small zoo, had two old orangotans,
    they where together for many years, and one die one day of old age,
    the other is showing so much sadness, the owners couldn’t believe it from an animal,
    they decide to give him a baby cat,
    it took a while to distract the old red orangoutan,
    but it happen and he got attach to the small cat and came back to his previous self,
    liking the cat and bonding with to protect it,
    that was very beautiful to follow the story.
    bye

    ReplyReply
  39. CJ says: 239

    Wow, we’re still going strong on this one. I did write a new one to continue the discussion. Thank goodness for Friday.

    ReplyReply
  40. C J
    hi, we still have 562 to make 700,
    stay awake , you never know what will come from the free that’s us
    bye

    ReplyReply
  41. CJ says: 241

    Well, then. Let me just add one more comment. ;)

    ReplyReply
  42. Redteam says: 242

    @ilovebeeswarzone: No, I don’t know him at all. You said he left the flu in Mississippi. I guessed he wouldn’t want it back.

    ReplyReply
  43. Redteam says: 243

    @Redteam: and that gets us one more comment closer.

    ReplyReply
  44. CJ says: 244

    @Redteam: I read that Chuck Norris almost caught the flu, but the flu caught Chuck Norris instead.

    ReplyReply
  45. C J
    NO NOT CHUCK, I am sadden by the news

    ReplyReply
  46. Redteam
    455 to go, we are speeding now,
    let’s find something to say

    ReplyReply
  47. C J
    do you mean to say that the FLUE is faster than CHUCK NORRIS

    ReplyReply
  48. MY FLUE IS A FEMALE THAT’S WHY SHE HAS A E AT THE END

    ReplyReply
  49. I was watching a golden eagle, spectacular flight coming down on his dinner, at night
    THE EYE IS EXTRAORDINARY MADE ESPECIALLY FOR HIS LIFE NEEDS,
    I wonder if one day there will be transplant of eyes of EAGLE AND WING ON HUMAN, which make the eagle superior than human in that particular gift of nature,
    and what would we benefit from it.
    JUST SAYING

    ReplyReply
  50. that remind me of a few years pass and I saw 3 eagles eating a young deer, and then
    after a while, there came 5 coyotes to claim it and the EAGLES CHASE THEM AWAY,
    AND THEY ATE AND LEFT AFTER AND THE COYOTES CAME BACK AND ATE FROM IT AND ONE OF THEM BIGGER IN SIZE LOOK LIKE THE CHIEF, PICK UP ONE WHOLE LEG AND LEFT WITH THE OTHER FOLLOWING HIM THEY HAD FAR TO GO TO REACH THE WOOD, HE NEVER STOP AND KEPT
    THE LEG IN HIS MOUTH FOR QUITE A GOOD 10 ACRES IN WINTER,
    QUITE AN EXPERIENCE TO SEE ALSO, ONE ONLY IN LIFE,

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>