Pipe Bombs

i actually like the police, just dont agree they should get away with murder. Completely different.

Because you cant use a pipe bomb in self defense? I feel like this one is pretty self explanatory. I do think that civilians should be able to own any weapons that the military has on domestic soil, but that has less to do with me wanting a tank and more to do with me not trusting the government.

What about for hunting? You know, for those really really big deer.

I don't like them. I understand that they are needed, and such. And I respect the ones who actually try to make a good difference.


But I really don't got any love for the law...

You said that a(n) explosive isnt covered under the second amendment.

It's an arm.

A weapon.

To keep a free state secure , the constitutional bill of rights recognizes the paramount importance of not infinging upon that right. Besides , prohibit all ya want, people are still gonna do it if they are determined to do so.

But few have that determination anymore. Previous generations long ago gave up their rights and accepted infringements. Now we trust the state with our personal security. Hell some state of laws even prohibiting self defense.

Take new york for example, im sitting in a chair outside my hotel room, maintenance man gets in my face , saying my sitting there is bothering that lady ( context : two cripled chics were trying to have a criple fight the night prior and one was my friend so i put myself between em, took some whacks to the back and escorted my buddy safely to her room) I tell him to get out of my personal space while he keeps getting closer into my face and raising his voice and you can see where this is going.

He throws the first punch and it was on. We fight. It ends. I call the cops and ambulance to document injuries and press charges. The cop says he couldn't press charges against him without pressimg charges against me too for mutual harassment. Because i fougnt back. Self defense in new york is criminalized.

I got my stiches and left without pressing charge.


So you call that freedom?

Meh. I suppose my own determination could use some sharpening too.

Thank god Flamethrowers are totally legal.

You forgot the radical antifascist anarchists and the Communist liberals.

fair enough

i wont waste my time debating this with you.

Can you explain to me how to use a pipe bomb in self defense? That's what the second amendment is for. I don't know what you would have done with a pipe bomb in that scenario.
Also, not all weapons are protected by the second amendment. The Heller ruling makes that abundantly clear. The Individual-Right theory has limitations, and even Scalia understood that.

i would not waste your time bro, he is the kind of fella who thinks we should all have RPGs and m249s

if i gave you a RPG and a m249 would you suddenly become a radical extremist?

teh whole pipe bomb conversation might make people uncomfortable because they've been browbeaten for so long, but the 2a says what it says. it wasnt until last century that the right to own them was diminished. not by amending the constitution, but by passing federal laws allowing them to ignore the constitution. originally this restriction born in 1934 was done through taxation that was ridiculously high basically instilling a paywall to access a right you should have already had. that law has been "updated" twice since 1934 to get us where we are now.

the guise in which this all happened is the claim that the government has the RIGHT to tax purchases how they see fit. in reality, they knew that the gangland violence was hard to curb if they had arms equal to their enforcement officers. so law abiding citizens with the RIGHT to defend themselves from a tyrannical government was diminished.

why do i bring all this up?

couple reasons. with talk recently like "fully semi automatic weapons" (dont laugh, it isnt as funny as you think) people are beginning to buy into what you have bought into already just at a more extreme level. also, they are currently and actively attempting to silence the president of the united states. i support private companies being able to do what they want with their property so dont get confused, but the fact that a blanket silence is being imposed cant be ignored.

so while i understand and respect your opinion conversations like these should always be had. its the lack of conversations that led us to "mostly peaceful protests" this summer and "storming the capitol" last week. its led to the difference in reporting violent acts, and its led us to the overall division of the country. lack of conversations lead us to ignorance, intolerance, which ultimately lead us to violence.

im 1 of those folks who love my guns, but i also understand the balance needed. I would not become a idiot...okay i would do stupid shit with a RPG...but i would not go and try to kill folks.

You and i could argue til the cows come home over the extent the right to bear arms should go. But i know neither of us would change our minds. If you honestly believe folks should be able to buy whatever it is they want...i can not and will not support that stance.

changing your mind wasnt the point.

if the only reason you have conversations is to change someones mind thats a problem.

He is also very very wrong. And surprisingly knowing what is actually true, does matter!

2a specifially has an section for dicta. This specifially means you cant own any weapon ever.

The section even includes a section 'dangerous and unusual weapons'

So beyond peoples opinions on whether 2a allows bombs, is moot. it does not. But i also agree with you, even if the text was looser, owning or building pipe bombs is not self defense. And in all states, even have extra restrictions around laying traps.

what use is a conversation if nothing will come out of it, either the person im talking to can learn or i can learn....if neither of us learn anything we just wasted however much time spent.

ive never considered listening to the opinions of others, especially those with different opinions, a waste of time. otherwise what is the point of coming to P&L?

and you always learn something. you learn how others think, how they draw their conclusions, their biases, their missteps, sometimes even your own. something that cant happen without a conversation in the first place. sometimes things come out that werent even considered to begin with unintentionally by other parties.

just look at the depiction of how partisanship has grown since Nixon. a timeline we can all follow now while discussing events now. that was unintentional yet happened. impossible without the conversation despite Bezee and myself almost predetermined to disagree.

sorry bro, but this one statement stands out to me...

"ive never considered listening to the opinions of others"


says a bunch about you personally.

im sure you can follow a sentence to its conclusion. try again.