Jump to content

Welcome to SECTalk.com

Welcome to SECTalk.com -- The Home of 6 Straight National Titles!

You are currently accessing our site as a guest which means you can't access all of our features such as social groups, sports betting, and many more. By joining our free community you will have access to all of these great features as well as to participating in our forums, contacting other members, and much more. Registration only takes a minute and SECTalk.com is absolutely free, so please join today!

If you have any problems registering or signing in, please contact us.


Canada stops producing its one cent coin. Should we as well?

- - - - -

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
50 replies to this topic

#46
Large Marge

Large Marge

    Ask me about Loom

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • Posts:
    2,693
  • Joined:
    Sep 2012
  • Cash:
    0
  • High Fives:
    2,181

View Postthe Paradox, on 09 February 2013 - 09:46 PM, said:

\

You tip with pennies? What a cheap piece of crap


RTR

I was kidding, broseph.
Posted Image

#47
the Paradox

the Paradox

    Supergenius

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Posts:
    10,957
  • Joined:
    Jan 2005
  • Cash:
    0
  • High Fives:
    1,498

View PostLarge Marge, on 10 February 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

I was kidding, broseph.

Yeah, I get that now. May or may not have been sipping Scotch the other night.


RTR
Posted Image

#48
jusfishin

jusfishin

    Luke 8: 22-25

  • Members
  • Pip
  • Posts:
    399
  • Joined:
    May 2011
  • Cash:
    0
  • High Fives:
    74

View PostThe Doctor, on 10 February 2013 - 11:29 AM, said:


Not trying to turn this into a gun debate, but do you really think background checks for gun purchases are unnecessary and infringing on your rights?

Doctor - I wasn't trying to either.  But "necessary" doesn't matter.  Fact is, the constitution is the supreme law, and we claim to be a nation of laws, not of men.  Well, if men (and women) in congress and the white house impose their will in violation of that supreme law, then it's not really a law, is it.  And the word "infringe" means limit or impede.  Yes, they're limiting or impeding my right to own a gun - however slight that impediment might be (and by the way, they're going to ban assault weapons again, so it's not like they only make small infringements).  

I'm opposed to the federal gov't doing anything that is not expressly authorized to per the constitution.  If people feel background checks are reasonable and necessary, then amend the constitution.  We've done it before.  I'm personally opposed to any infringement, as I don't think the citizenry should have to ask the gov't for it's permission to protect the citizenry from the gov't (remember, we had just fought a war against our own gov't at the time).  But if constitution is amended, then that's the law.  But if we let people, who by and large cannot be trusted, impose their will in violation of the constitution, where does it stop?  It doesn't - unconstitutional department of education, unconstitutional health care, unconstitutional prohibition of growing marijuana in California.  It simply will not stop.  And that was never the aim of this federation of sovereign states.

Anyway - that's my 2 cents worth.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

Little taste of the palmetto coast

#49
StallingsBaldSpot

StallingsBaldSpot

    conquer and prevail

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Posts:
    12,432
  • Joined:
    Mar 2007
  • Cash:
    0
  • High Fives:
    3,699
So you think EVERYONE should be allowed to own a gun?

Even people who have done things to have certain rights taken away?
Twitter: @country_cookin

Posted Image

#50
Hothotz

Hothotz

    Fire Richt

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • Posts:
    6,682
  • Joined:
    Aug 2012
  • Cash:
    0
  • High Fives:
    3,307

View Postjusfishin, on 11 February 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

Doctor - I wasn't trying to either.  But "necessary" doesn't matter.  Fact is, the constitution is the supreme law, and we claim to be a nation of laws, not of men.  Well, if men (and women) in congress and the white house impose their will in violation of that supreme law, then it's not really a law, is it.  And the word "infringe" means limit or impede.  Yes, they're limiting or impeding my right to own a gun - however slight that impediment might be (and by the way, they're going to ban assault weapons again, so it's not like they only make small infringements).  

I'm opposed to the federal gov't doing anything that is not expressly authorized to per the constitution.  If people feel background checks are reasonable and necessary, then amend the constitution.  We've done it before.  I'm personally opposed to any infringement, as I don't think the citizenry should have to ask the gov't for it's permission to protect the citizenry from the gov't (remember, we had just fought a war against our own gov't at the time).  But if constitution is amended, then that's the law.  But if we let people, who by and large cannot be trusted, impose their will in violation of the constitution, where does it stop?  It doesn't - unconstitutional department of education, unconstitutional health care, unconstitutional prohibition of growing marijuana in California.  It simply will not stop.  And that was never the aim of this federation of sovereign states.

Anyway - that's my 2 cents worth.

MERICA!!!!!

#51
Hothotz

Hothotz

    Fire Richt

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • Posts:
    6,682
  • Joined:
    Aug 2012
  • Cash:
    0
  • High Fives:
    3,307

View PostPenguin, on 10 February 2013 - 11:54 AM, said:

GUNS GUNBS SNASDLKJSDK JSDKLJ A;KLSDJF;ALSKDJ FA;SLKD JSA;KJ A;SKJFASLK DJ

YOURE WRONG NO MATTER WHAT YOU SAY CONSTITUTION GUNS OBAMA DOOMSDAY FUCCCCCK

Your forgot to add

MERICA to that



Similar Topics