Oh come on ava. kkkrellin assured us that there is NO PROBLEM AT ALL.

Stop imagining things.

Oh this is priceless...

dang maple.... I mean, I'm not the type of guy who'll say you shouldn't get chuckles in, or to try to say what another person ought and ought not say at what time.... but... just... dang.

Hey YJ. Freedom isn't free.

U.S.A.!
U.S.A.!
U.S.A.!

Oh my side...

AAAAA HA HA HA HA HA HA.

The funny part is, the school clerk talked the gunman out of doing any real harm by...wait for it...talking to him. What a concept! I could have sworn the only way to stop a gunman was to give teachers guns?

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/21/214085753/school-clerk-in-georgia-persuaded-gunman-to-lay-down-weapons

I see the shit-for-brains 2nd amendment child murdering blowjob artists like kkkrellin are strangely silent this time around.

Nope.

No problem here.

BWAAAAA HA HA HA HA HA HA!

American won its freedom from the British monarchy while Canada has not. If you want true independence you have to win it and keep it with guns.
Once the United States occupied the Third Reich along with Britain, France, and the Soviet Union some documents concerning Hitler's plans to occupy America turned up. An interesting facet of those records was that the Germans could not figure out how they would disarm the civilian population. Guns help insure your continued freedom.
Following the theme of firearms and freedom from oppression the historical record shows repeatedly that armed African Americans in the South during segregation and in northern ghettos suffered less at the hands of white supremacists than those without arms. Finally embracing freedom means embracing the upside and downside of free will. Some countries and peoples don't have the stomach for true freedom that the United States does. Besides our unmatched freedom for the individual to arm themselves we also have an unmatched freedom of speech.

First word, America not American. Worthless Canadian keyboard.

Candians are too busy waiting in a 3-month long line for aspirin to shoot each other. Too sickly and weak to lift up a gun!

I thought I'd read some stupid posts from krellin, but that's got to be the most stupid and inane post I've ever read.

Yes, 2WL, as if mapledick's posts have any merit. You are a fucking dumbass...go away.

It's good to see the LibTard Hive-Mind is back in action. ATTACK ATTACK ATTACKKKK!!!!!

Seriously 2WL - you are the type of moronic Liberal that would walk through a cow pasture full of manure, but then when you spot somebody letting their dog shit without scooping it up would call the cops. You are *that much* of a hypocritical douchebag. Now go finished giving your butt bud mapledick his rubdown.

@Emac

We had the discussion about the monarchy and constitutional freedoms in another thread. It's nowhere near as simple as you make it out to be. Hitler's plans to invade America were particularly batshit crazy and an incidental note about guns doesn't prove anything. They also thought Britain was so resilient because it was populated with their racial kin.

I don't mean to be rude but do you have any idea how arrogant your claims about 'true freedom' are? I very much doubt you have very much knowledge at all about the constitutional status of freedom in most other countries of the world. The USA is not a paragon of freedom and virtue. It is one of the better examples, that's all. There are plenty of countries with an equivalent level of freedom in many areas. Again, I posted various international measures of freedom in another thread and the USA didn't come out on top of any of them.

Your definition of freedom is far too simple and isolated to your country (not that I think many of your compatriots would necessarily agree with your definition) to have any real utility in such an important argument. I have heard good arguments for gun ownership, but not like that.

Hereward, you anti-Americanism shows through, but I don't see much substance in your post.
Please give me your example of free speech. Please give me your example of freedom to bear arms. You sure didn't post any. You say you "posted' so trot on over and cut and paste it here since you can't seem to remember it to type it.
You strike me as completely intellectually dishonest. I offered no "definition of freedom" yet you lie and say I did.
Go burn an American flag. You'll feel better.

I'm not anti-American at all. I'm anti-American exceptionalism. I had no intention to be hostile, I simply wished to challenge what you presented because it seemed simplistic and jingoistic.

I'll repeat what I said in the other thread - the constitutional status of the (British) monarchy is such that there is no impact in real terms on freedom as defined by international measures. Moving on, here's some 'substance'. As an example, here is an international measure of freedom in which the US comes out no better than the rest of the western world:

http://www.freedomhouse.org/report-types/freedom-world

and another...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index

"Finally embracing freedom means embracing the upside and downside of free will. Some countries and peoples don't have the stomach for true freedom that the United States does. Besides our unmatched freedom for the individual to arm themselves we also have an unmatched freedom of speech."

For someone who offered no definition you sure did refer to it a great deal. Anyway, I have provided an explanation for your monarchy point and your Hitler one wasn't really significant.

Oh sorry, I was supposed to offer examples of comparable freedom in terms of guns and speech.

In terms of guns I don't accept that's a 'freedom' that's worth the lives of thousands but even if it was gun ownership is relatively high in quite a few countries (Serbia and Yemen are the two nearest I think). In terms of speech the majority of the European Union has the legally binding Article 11 (Lisbon Treaty) which guarantees it.

Hereward, you certainly aren't honest.
You also don't understand that if you want to make a point you need to use explicit statements.
" the constitutional status of the (British) monarchy is such that there is no impact in real terms on freedom as defined by international measures."
Are you so intellectually inept you don't realize that this statement could hardly be more vague and meaningless?
You give links to opinions at Wiki and Freedom org as if they were scientifically based facts. Do you not realize that Wiki is simply a collection of opinion and that Freedom.org is exactly the same?
You still don't know what a definition of freedom is. My statement doesn't define freedom at all. It says embracing freedom means accepting both the good and bad. This isn't a definition of what freedom is, and you can't comprehend that. Stating the fact the United States has umnatche freedoms also is not a definition, and you can't comprehend that either.

In your next post you differentiate between a constitutionally protected freedom to bear arms and "relatively high gun ownership." Again your intellectual ineptitude is on full display. Next you change the subject to what was obviously your desired line of rant all along "the lives of thousands...." blah blah blah."
The European Union makes an utter mockery of free speech. You can't even stand up and deny the Holocaust in much of Europe because it is against the law.

So continue your simplistic, arrogant, anti-American rant Hereward. I did intend to be rude and hostile because I find you a stupid, anti-American asshat.

So Hereward, now that we both got that out of our system let do something honest and orderly.
Let's both try to find how many sovereign constitutions around the world protect the right to bear arms. One subject, one task, one question. Once "we" establish this one fact we can move on to constitutionally protected speech as the next subject and task.
Post what "you" find and can verify. In other words go read some "constitutions" and find out the facts.

I really would rather you didn't accuse me of dishonesty, or intellectual ineptitude. There's no need for such aggression or condescension. Frankly it just reflects badly on you. I am not inept, stupid, anti-American or arrogant. I'm not the one making sweeping claims about superiority. I made what rebuttals I felt were appropriate because I didn't think you were right. I'm sorry if you feel the need to react as you have.

If you intend to be rude and hostile (oh, and while you're at it reject any data presented that conflicts with your view, then set out an extremely narrow and overly simple task) then I'd rather not have any sort of discourse with you at all, it isn't worth it.

Calling someone dishonest is now more offensive or condescending than calling them arrogant. I can safely call you a dishonest hypocrite now. You post links to someone else's opinion and claim you made a rebuttal. How inept. You offered no data. You offered someone else's opinion.

Real evidence is going to documents yourself. You seem quite too lazy to do so. I looked at constitutional acts and charters of Canada today. I found no constitutional or charter protections whatsoever for Canadian citizens to bear arms. The limited rights Canadians have to bear arms comes from legislative acts and common law precedents. So based on those facts I will argue that the United States possesses superior freedom to bear arms compared to Canada.
You are welcome to keep posting someone else's opinion, ambiguous statements of your own, and hypocritical statements. What you aren't doing is showing evidence concerning the question at hand of the United States having unmatched Costitutional protection of the freedom to bear arms. An intellectually dishonest person like yourself would have trouble dealing with such a straighforward task.

I also looked at the right to bear arms in Spain, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Greece, Belgium, Holland, Sweden, Norway, and Finland. I did not find any constitutional protections at all for the right to bear arms. In fact citizens in those nations face strict barriers to bearings arms. So I can now say that Spain, Canada, German, Italy, and the other nations I listed above do not possess the constitutionally protected right to bear arms enjoyed by American citizens. You are welcome to keep posting the latest study from IHATEAMERICA.COM on subjects different from the one spelled out in my posts because that seems to be all you have to add.

By all means, kill EACH OTHER. Nobody cares.

Hereward, I also don't mind not having any with you at all. That sounds fine.

Fair enough. We've both saved some time.