This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

Tb0n3,

Roblox is full of different kinds of games, right? Why don’t you find out the kinds of games he likes there and find recommendations based on that? It’s a start at least. I would imagine most of the Roblox games are clones of better games anyway.

Tb0n3,

Wat

Then entire weirdness of this all aside, the older a person gets the more likely they’ll be seen as attractive by the general population. You don’t suddenly become sexually attractive once you reach the age of consent.

Tb0n3,

Having kept up on the drama I’m sure Jirard was devastated by this. He’s built a brand on being a nice guy, but be it by malfeasance, or incompetence he screwed up royaly. Hope we get the full story and find out he and his family are just idiots, not criminals. Especially with it all steming from his mother’s illness.

Tb0n3,

That the Open Hand charity screwed up bad. Jirard’s character was a guy that took donations to complete charitable works. The real life charity took all the donations and held them for 10 years while telling everybody that their money was going directly to charities for research. They listed multiple charities that they work with that they had never worked with. These are indisputable facts and at the very least should be enough to justify this removal.

To add to that, it seems like they were at least procrastinating in their donations. They claimed that it was to find a charity that would use all the money donated exclusively for research but the charity they finally donated to allows that for any amount if you ask. The donation was made a month after being called out for not donating for 10 years.

Tb0n3,

It doesn’t add up because we have zero internal numbers. He already admitted the donations went towards paying for the events so why couldn’t it be possible that the numbers reported are what they are because of all the money spent on the events. It doesn’t make it right in the least since Jirard was saying all the money was going to the charity, but it is a possible explanation aside from embezzlement.

Tb0n3,

Possibly but I’m trying my best to not make any statements that do not have concrete proof.

Tb0n3,

Implying you couldn’t figure out by meeting them. I’m guessing just like people who listen to Christian music these people are loud and proud. Probably have SS tattoos on their neck. Unless it’s actually decent music and random listeners just got doxxed as Nazis.

Tb0n3,

Super cringe faith music. Like easy listening with lyrics all about Jesus.

Tb0n3,

One has a 650cc engine. How do you think it would handle 1800 lb of payload? How about a 5,000 pound trailer?

Tb0n3,

Okay then how about something truck owners do a lot. Which one is better for a husband wife and two kids? Which one can reach highway speeds? Which one won’t make you deaf trying to drive to work?

Tb0n3,

Not everybody has the space or money for multiple vehicles. Sometimes a pickup is just what works or what they need in every circumstance.

Tb0n3,

The recent article about kids getting arrested for words and it’s positive reception should give you a hint.

Tb0n3,

Bring back balaclavas.

Tb0n3,

Also the mirrors are unusable by the driver, and the right side mirror isn’t even connected.

Tb0n3,

This was a funny comic with a joke in it. You appear to disagree that this comic should have a joke in it.

Tb0n3,

If it’s anything like in the US sometimes the intersections are screwed up and you can sit at a light through a few greens without moving because the road you need to go on gets filled by turning lanes before the light turns red and fills up before yours is green again.

Tb0n3,

I don’t need to do that because my 7s are distinct from my 1s. That’s right. I’m better than you.

Tb0n3,

Wow. That’s bullshit. Every gun law is bullshit but that’s extra.

Tb0n3,

Or against a bear. You won’t win that fight without a gun.

Tb0n3,

Bears are far from bullet proof. In grizzly country just remember your .45-70.

Texas defendant challenging federal gun law at the Supreme Court says he doesn’t want firearms anymore (www.cnn.com)

Zackey Rahimi, the Texas criminal defendant challenging a federal gun law before the Supreme Court on Tuesday, said this summer that he no longer wanted to own firearms and expressed remorse for his actions that got him in trouble with the law....

Tb0n3,

It doesn’t fucking matter. The right is not for a militia. The right is for all the people to bear arms.

And well regulated meant well supplied. The militia has plenty of guns when the militia is the people and the people have plenty of guns.

Tb0n3,

Even if that were true, it doesn’t matter because the militia is not the right. The right is the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Tb0n3,

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Everything to the left of it is just a justification for why that right exists. Can you tell me with a straight face that that right is not clear?

Tb0n3,

It doesn’t really matter what it means because the right is the right of the people to keep and bare arms. The militia is merely the justification for that right. I’m not putting in the effort here because I don’t have to. It is extremely clear and simple.

Tb0n3,

Shall not be infringed.

Tb0n3,

If someone is in custody they can have their rights Curtailed. As soon as they are free they should be able to exercise all of their rights once more. The only definition that matters is the right defined which is the right to bear arms and that hasn’t changed.

reason.com/…/what-is-a-well-regulated-militia-any…

Tb0n3, (edited )

The revolutionary war was won with the help of private warships. That would have been well known to the founding fathers who wrote the bill of rights. Do you think that they would suddenly not want the citizens to be able to defend the homeland because guns are scary?

The part of the amendment that could be its own stand-alone sentence—the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed—is known as the “operative clause.” The well regulated Militia part—the prefatory clause—is understood by enthusiastic gun regulators as defining the only reason for preserving the right to keep and bear arms (as opposed to one of the reasons). Anyone who is not a member of a well-regulated militia would have no such right.

The late Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote the majority opinion in Heller, thought it made no sense to read the prefatory clause that way, because that would essentially nullify the direct and clear meaning of the operative clause. While the prefatory clause could give insight into some of the specifics of how to apply the operative clause, he argued, it could not make the right to arms contingent on militia service.

Scalia pointed out that the amendment refers to “the right of the people.” When that language is used elsewhere in the Bill of Rights—in the First and Fourth Amendments, for example—it plainly means a right that belongs to every individual, as opposed to a collective with special properties, such as a militia. A prefatory clause mentioning a purpose, Scalia argued, is not sufficient to overwhelm the commonsense and contextual meaning of a right guaranteed to everyone. Furthermore, he said, contemporaneous usage makes it clear that the phrase bear arms cannot be restricted to a military context, as Justice John Paul Stevens suggested it should be in his dissent.

reason.com/…/what-is-a-well-regulated-militia-any…

Tb0n3,

You are either disingenuous or an idiot.

Tb0n3,

You should be able to but there are infringements in place like the originally excessively expensive $200 tax stamp for fully automatic weapons.

Tb0n3,

It is far from ambiguous. The first half tells you why the right exists and only part of why. The second half is the right itself, which is the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Tb0n3,

Shall not be infringed. Pretty god damn simple.

Tb0n3,

The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

Important parts in bold.

Tb0n3,

If they’re too dangerous to be trusted in polite society then why are they released? If they just so happen to try it in a polite society that’s well armed we won’t have to worry any longer.

Tb0n3,

Yes, as we all know words never change. Have a gay day.

Tb0n3,

It’s only unclear if you have an ulterior motive.

Tb0n3,

Read the first sentence again.

Tb0n3,

At least some of the founders had the intention of the second amendment allowing the population to overthrow tyrannical rulers.

Tb0n3,

Arms, not guns. Also, tell that to the Vietnamese, and Afghanis.

Tb0n3,

Right, civilians with fighter jets and stealth bombers.

Yes.

I wasn’t talking about laws in other countries. I was talking about armed rebellions that beat the US. You know the country with planes, bombers, tanks, and whatnot.

Tb0n3,

That’s funny, because it looks to me like the PEOPLE were guaranteed a right.

Tb0n3,

You’ve got to be trying to be that obtuse.

Tb0n3,

The point is that an armed populace isn’t just rolled over by the largest military in the world. Everybody thinks the “what do you think guns will do against jets” is such a gotcha, but there’s lots of evidence even fighting foreign powers it’s not that simple. Then you must consider that lots of the US military is pretty big on guns and you have a high likelihood of defection or sabotage of the military. And then even after that any use of the military in our own soil will be extremely unpopular creating even more insurgents.

Tb0n3,

Then if they’ve served their time don’t steal their rights for the rest of their lives.

Tb0n3,

Security of a free state.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • uselessserver093
  • Food
  • aaaaaaacccccccce
  • test
  • CafeMeta
  • testmag
  • MUD
  • RhythmGameZone
  • RSS
  • dabs
  • KamenRider
  • TheResearchGuardian
  • KbinCafe
  • Socialism
  • oklahoma
  • SuperSentai
  • feritale
  • All magazines