Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

(post is archived)

[–] • 3 pts

I want an FN P90, not the pussified PS90 that's limited to semi-auto with a much longer barrel.

[–] • 1 pt

stargate enjoyer detected

[–] • 1 pt

I may have partaken in viewing an episode once or five hundred times.

Really though, it is a badass gun.

[–] • 1 pt

Yeah, agreed. Good show and good gun.

You can reduce the barrel size on a PS90 to be shorter like the P90 if you like.

[–] • 2 pts

>recreational nukes

lol

[–] • 0 pt

In 5th grade they taught us how beneficial irradiation of the soil and how all of our crops would benefit. Recreational nukes can only had to the output!

[–] • 2 pts (edited )

I'm not pro-gun. I'm pro-arm. Because the 2nd amendment protects arms. Arms are any common weapon of war. If it's used in most wars of the current era, you should have it.

It's funny when they label the AR-15 a weapon of war, and not useful as a hunting weapon. Exactly. The constitution does not protect recreational equipment. The fact that is is primarily designed to kill people is specifically what makes it protected. The fact that the AR-15 sort of wasn't designed for war but is a partial variation of a weapon that was M-16, kind of makes the M-16 more protected than the AR-15 if our judges understood what the word arm means.

This is the problem with precedent. It becomes the historic case that the second amendment has been used to protect the right to guns and the word gun becomes synonymous with the word arm because that's what arm ends up referring to in legal practice. Meanwhile items both below and above in lethality end up not protected by the second amendment. They can ban knives somehow. They can ban full automatics from common sale. Yet right in the middle, that's protected. It's constitutional tokenism. The semi-automatic gun becomes the token if having followed the constitution, and as long as that token exists no other rational claim following the constitution and be considered a requirement of it.

Take the 5th Amendment. Avoiding self incrimination. What it's intended to do is to make it so the government can't say, testify against yourself or you will receive a punishment for it. That is causing differential punishment based on one's testimony against themselves. But that's what a plea deal is. Instead we get the token of, the 5th amendment refers to being able to plead the 5th in court. So you can't be compelled to testify against yourself. Receiving a greater punishment than you otherwise would if you did tattle on yourself is complement.

Take the 8th Amendment. Says no excessive fines. Token application of it is no torture. The fact that there is other text in that amendment doesn't even matter.

[–] • 1 pt

The only reason arms had to be mentioned in the constitution is that cancerous governments universally try to disarm citizens, to prevent them from keeping the government in check. It's not there to "allow" you to defend yourself from niggers or go hunting, the government doesn't care about that.

[–] • 0 pt

The only thing I think about is private nuclear armaments, thoughts?

[–] • 1 pt

Recreational nukes? Come on, why don't you have a right to the full-sized ones?

[–] • 1 pt

And what you mean is what the founding fathers meant. Enough "arms" to resist a tyrannical government.

[–] • 0 pt

Ordnance isnt arms.

[–] • 0 pt

What would you define as armament, I mean arms.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

I'm down for everything but the genetically engineered cat girls. That shit freaks me out.

[–] • 0 pt

I believe I would draw the line at "recreational nukes". I get angry enough when people shoot their fireworks and the falls scorch my lawn, I do not want to deal with that kind of fallout.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

Genetically modified cat girls? sounds a bit furry for my taste ya reddit faggot

[–] • 0 pt

nobody should have nukes, not even the govt.

[–] • 0 pt

Nukes don't exist anyway

[–] • 0 pt

You sure?

[–] • 0 pt

Positive. The Jap bombs were just huge new high-explosive incendiaries. We already had a massive firebombing campaign, months before the 'nukes' were dropped. Jap houses were almost all made of wood and ricepaper, which burned quickly. Stone walls and buildings were left unaffected after the 'nukes' detonated, and the wily Japs rebuilt immediately. There was and is no radiation, it's all just more jew lies.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

But somebody does have nukes, therefore we all should have access to them just to keep the gubermint clowns in check.

[–] • 0 pt

So what happens when some faggot like George Soros decides to blow up a nuke somewhere populated because he’s a lunatic?

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

Do you really think he can't already?