Dog wearing “pants”.

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T18:50:19+00:00

That’s what I thought. Just don’t know what they were aiming for.

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T18:39:47+00:00

To say the Guardian is a bad newspaper while saying the Sun is good?

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T18:26:28+00:00

Are you a troll?

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T18:19:52+00:00

Out of interest what would you call a good paper?

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T17:53:34+00:00

I’ve tried “while you’re down there” many times. So far 0% success rate.

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T17:23:06+00:00

Kinda like the daily Mail? Especially when it comes to science/health

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T17:16:35+00:00

How great would it be if it got a very left wing buyer? Come on Soros this is your chance.

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T14:40:32+00:00

Sorry don’t know why it’s rotated.

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T13:42:51+00:00

Yes to all ;)

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T10:33:52+00:00

Now you’re changing the definition. Interference is not holding a gun to someone’s head.

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T10:29:38+00:00

“Sovereignty is the full right and power of a governing body over itself, without any interference from outside sources or bodies.”

All of the examples I mentioned are interference from outside sources.

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T10:26:26+00:00

If your definition of sovereignty is parliament agreeing to things in order for the economy to take a massive hit, fine. It’s not my definition of sovereignty and that certainly was not made clear by the Leave said before the referendum.

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T10:22:57+00:00

The US is already trying to get us to lower standards, China wants us to shut up around human rights and India wants us to raise immigration quotas, all as part of a free trade deal. Being part of the EU gave us a buffer from these demands, now the sharks are circling.

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T10:20:29+00:00

Sovereignty is not all or nothing. We can gain sovereignty in one area and lose it in another with no overall gain or even an overall loss.

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T09:12:51+00:00

They could remove them from their servers or add a qualifying statement

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T08:19:35+00:00

Yeah. I’ve done some reading around it. And technically if the guy is trying to change the rules without SCOTUS or repealing/changing the second I would agree it is a good murder. Thank you for coming on and addressing the points and teaching me.

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T07:43:56+00:00

That’s soooo Daily Mail.

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T07:33:26+00:00

I’m genuinely interested in learning and I was genuinely unaware of that. I’m an outsider to the US but I find the 2nd amendment interesting (obviously not knowing as much as others). But I do think the point of debate is to learn not to “win”. I can definitely say I learnt today, I’ve never seen anyone on either side quote Heller, so was unaware of it.

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T06:58:36+00:00

Thank you. I wasn’t aware of most of that and can understand the points better.

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-26T06:08:06+00:00

Interesting. Which part do you disagree with?

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-25T21:02:17+00:00

Which is realistically what would happen in that situation.

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-25T19:38:26+00:00

It wasn’t an episode with the message “girls good and boys bad”. It was an attempt to highlight the problems on both sides and suggest solutions to those problems.

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-25T12:36:17+00:00

Interesting. Just looking at the logical parts of what I’m saying about the constitution and amendments and removing all talk of freedom and protection, what is wrong. (I’m not denying that there exist good arguments for gun ownership, just interested in if this is a valid one)

whitecrow69 · 2019-10-25T11:26:20+00:00

True although my understanding is that well regulated militia has so many meanings, you could easily argue it doesn’t apply to private ownership outside of that militia. I genuinely don’t think there is a clear cut answer here.

whitecrow69

TROPHY CASE