why that was nice

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

Are you sure?

yes. i threw out that it may be necessary so that ridiculous people can't use the 2nd ammendment to own anthrax. not in favor of changing it.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

i know what it says. we both know what the right was written to protect, which is fire arms. as i stated earlier, you are correct in your assertion, and maybe the common sense in the current united states makes it neccesary to actually ammend the right to exclude weapons of mass destruction. where that becomes tricky is when we speak of things such as dynamite, which actually has a practical use.

sounds like a change to me. In fact, you actually tried to use the word amend, but spelled it wrong.

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

sounds like a change to me. In fact, you actually tried to use the word amend, but spelled it wrong.

do you want a cookie? oh speller of all words correct.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

Amend 1: to put right; especially : to make emendations in (as a text)

2 a: to change or modify for the better

 

[tommyk90 5,000+ posts]

Wow, is that picture an epitome of the 1980's or what?

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

do you want a cookie? oh speller of all words correct.

Hey if i was trying to be a dick, i would have pointed out that you also misspelled necessary.

I was just trying to draw you out into another argument which i would win.

I succeeded.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

However, it was a very minor victory.

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

Hey if i was trying to be a dick, i would have pointed out that you also misspelled necessary.
I was just trying to draw you out into another argument which i would win.

I succeeded.

you sure come off as a small man being big on the internet. maybe i'm wrong. if so. my apologies. you know the old saying: if it quacks like a duck..........

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

you sure come off as a small man being big on the internet. maybe i'm wrong. if so. my apologies. you know the old saying: if it quacks like a duck..........

I'm not the one who resorts to personal insults.

I'm above trying to hurt people's feelings when I lose an argument, so i will let that slide and be the bigger man.

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

I'm not the one who resorts to personal insults.
I'm above trying to hurt people's feelings when I lose an argument, so i will let that slide and be the bigger man.

you're full of shit. i don't care enough to look at your previous posts. you know and i know that you resort to insults as much as anyone, whether you win or lose an argument. :fyi:frequently you think you win arguments that are based on opinion rather than facts. arrogance at it's finest.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

you're full of shit. i don't care enough to look at your previous posts. you know and i know that you resort to insults as much as anyone, whether you win or lose an argument. :fyi:frequently you think you win arguments that are based on opinion rather than facts. arrogance at it's finest.
I'm not arrogant in the least, in fact I'm particularly modest for someone who constantly wins arguments.

Don't be upset that i made you look foolish.

 

[azimuth 5,000+ posts]

I'm not arrogant in the least, in fact I'm particularly modest for someone who constantly wins arguments.
Don't be upset that i made you look foolish.

you didn't win this argument modest mouse. you appear to win arguments because you care about winning arguments more than most on the forum. everyone here knows that you're intelligent, although most don't care. you having to prove how smart you are all the time gives an appearance of extreme arrogance. you're the pompous english lord of the forum. all you need now is the accent.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

you didn't win this argument modest mouse. you appear to win arguments because you care about winning arguments more than most on the forum. everyone here knows that you're intelligent, although most don't care. you having to prove how smart you are all the time gives an appearance of extreme arrogance. you're the pompous english lord of the forum. all you need now is the accent.

I did indeed win the argument. You lied and were proven a liar when you first said that you didn't favor changing the Constitution, and then admitted you were in favor of changing it.

I win, once again.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

Also, its evident that you are getting a little hostile and irritated.

You do realize I'm entitled to double points if you are actually upset.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

If i am the pompous English lord, what does that make you?

I would guess it makes you the serf who isn't even smart enough to ever win just one altercation with the foolish and arrogant lord.

feudalism ftw.