Jim Carrey's "Cold Dead Hands"

The lil yellow commie is a canook

 

Haha

 

Jim Carrey was born in Canada , not sure who you're talking about

 

Come on oz ,Who is the thread aboot and I did quote you!! Thanks now I understand y he hates a great Maracan actor,, hates gun's & has on pink bvd's backwards.. Now it all comes in very clear

 

"holmes" aka Joe D would defend the 1st A for anyone including those who can't understand the meaning of "shall not be infringed". Have a look at my post in this thread (and all others) and you'll see I didn't (wouldn't) say he (or anyone) couldn't show a lack of understanding. I support all parts of the Constitution.

But, what's next for those who would step on the 2nd?

 

Yep , everyone with an opinion that doesn't align with yours is a communist Canadian

 

Thanks Jim.

I've known more then a few people who have quoted those in the entertainment industy in an attempt to sway intepretation and understanding. Further, look at all the industry, cause groups, and political factions (and others) that seek celebrity endorsements (they pay big bucks for it). But, for the life of me I fail to understand why anyone would be swayed by anything other than their own, individual understanding.

Regarding education, IMO, they (and too many others) are victims of that & their own system. Somewhat akin to long term inbreeding or a cult like mindset. It's been "programmed" in their brains so long they don't realize how their views became distorted and out touch with the true intent of the Constitution.

 

you mean like the NRA?

 

You good folks in 'merica keep Jim Carrey please. We have enough pinko's we are still trying to get rid of.

 

Anyone who doesn't agree with me has distorted and wrong views!!!!!

 

In fact, EXACTLY like the NRA. Our rights and the limits of government regarding this issue are very clear. Paying an entertainer in an attempt to influence the mass mind set by any group is an insult to the thinking ability of the population or maybe it's a reflection of the clay we either have or assume we have for brains.

 

How else does one define the meaning of "shall not be infringed"? People who twist it have a distorted view and are wrong. If we don't like it, provisions exist in the Constitution to revise it.

 

Wrong MOST are knee walking load chocking Merkins Who think that Everyone should suck the Gov tit and do as you are told..

 

summbitch
Damn you Marty McFly!

I mean.... moooo

 

You can walk out and purchase a gun now, can you not?

Also if you acknowledge that constitutional revisions can be made if the masses decided they didn't want guns anymore and the constitution was revised accordingly you'd be okay with it?

 

Sacrilege !!

 

Awesome

 

I can purchase a gun now so long as the government approves of me and it's a gun they say I can own. In some cases that right can be gained by paying a fee.

No. I would NOT be okay with a government that attempted to remove my gun and would vote accordingly to try to have them removed or not elected. However, if the government wants to revise the Bill of Rights, I would prefer they persue doing so in a method other then passing "bandaids" to just nip and cut at the "shall not be infringed" part. Those interested, should go for it, amend the Constitution, Bill of Rights & follow on amemdments if they see fit.

Still missing how one can confuse the very clear "shall not be ingringed" part of it.... To me, it's pretty clear and easy to understand. Without revising that part, any contridiction is a violation IMO.

 

LOL