You know why I hate reading conservative news? Because if I wanted to read a fiction, I could do literally anything else with fiction and be happier for it.
The argument is in the first paragraph:
MLG unilaterally suspended the 2nd Amendment
Nothing stopped her from doing it. (this bit is implied)
Therefore, nothing will stop MLG and her defenders from suspending all the amendments.
So, the articles just takes that stupid argument and runs with it
Does that include the Nineteenth Amendment giving women the right to vote?
How about the Thirteenth Amendment that abolished slavery?
The logical implication is that MLG and her defenders will reinstitute slavery and suspend women’s suffrage.
Be afraid! Your country is under attack!
Except the local sheriff said he wouldn’t enforce it, a Senator implied he didn’t support it. That is, the implied premise is violated, and therefore, the conclusion, on which the rest of the article is based, doesn’t follow. But it’s asserted like it is, and is pure fiction and removed from reality.
Wtf are you talking about? 1934 was the first major federal gun control law, and there was a lot to say back then. Even if you just mean recently, there was the AWB.
Right, cause its intellectual to just ignore half of a sentence and the stare decisis that came before. Maybe try something else, attempted insults aren't your forte.
Not defending Grisham here, but it is really odd to see the party of “protect the children” to constantly be doing everything in their power to allow children to get shot.
To the lefties, remember that Marx said " Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary"
Add comment