Discussion:
Replace Gun Prohibitions With Persecution Of Malintentions
Add Reply
Intelligent Party
2021-05-23 07:51:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
All a police officer has to do, is ask do if someone has any malintentions with
these weapons? If "no," they are 100% legal.

It's just simply not wrong to possess a weapon. It's not wrong as a matter of
fact and scientific unadulterated truth. Possession of weapons is not wrong. It's
fact. Those who believe democracy authors the law, don't believe in the law at
all, so how can they advocate such law? They believe in democracy, but not in the
law. And why would one believe in democracy, or the republic, and not science,
truth, god and man?

"Thug life" is what anti-gunners validly have a grievance against. "Thug life"
writes songs about blowing each other away, echoing their un-civilization, whilst
glorifying it. So the valid grievance would be to persecute gangsters who have
guns, if malintent is what it is. Then, it's not legal to be in a gang, and you
could persecute gangsters period for their malintent, but you could persecute
gangsters who have guns all the more. But if people don't have malintentions,
possession of weapons is not illegal. They can be very upstanding advocates of
liberty, respect and justice, and have all the guns in the world - in their car.
It's like bolt cutters and lock picking sets are 100% legal, unless one's caught
with them in a "Catsuit" at 1:00am or there's suspicion of malintention. Gainfully
employed people don't commit petty burglary, and their bolt cutters and lock
picking sets are generally not suspicious. Same with terrorists and gasoline. We
all have gasoline, but terrorists are suspected of malintention, while good people
drive around with extra gasoline cans on the back of their Jeeps. So if you agree
with this legal theory of malintention by itself being enough to condemn for
crime. Otherwise there's nothing at all, and you'll have to find holistic
solutions, - increase the wealth, decrease the population, share the poverty equally.

Massacres have nothing to do with it, are 100% a red herring, are committed by
poor unemployed upset students, and the like, and merely require a crowd. 100% of
the people who commit massacres have no criminal record and got their guns before
mal-activity. Once one commits a massacre, there's not a second offense. Guns,
vehicles, knives will all do the same for massacres. It's crap to say it's okay
to ban guns for massacres, because that's a non-argument. It's crap to say it's
okay to ban guns for no reason, as it's crap to say, it's a crime to be Jewish. It
truly is prejudice and abhorrent. People who enforce such laws are scum. And I
don't agree to give my name to buy a gun.

There is not a right to ban guns for no reason, or because people who bear guns
are different than you.

The rules of self-defense and engagement, need to be better identified, but
fearing a big man is what fearing a gun is, and anyone can throw rocks at anyone's
head.

People do keep and bear guns for sport and hobby. There's nothing wrong with
being an aficionado, an enthusiast, or a gun lover. When to use the gun, against
another person, is the question. Not because they threw popcorn or water on you.
Wotawonderfulworld
2021-05-23 09:35:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Intelligent Party
All a police officer has to do, is ask do if someone has any
malintentions with these weapons? If "no," they are 100% legal.
It's just simply not wrong to possess a weapon. It's not wrong as a
matter of fact and scientific unadulterated truth. Possession of
weapons is not wrong. It's fact. Those who believe democracy authors
the law, don't believe in the law at all, so how can they advocate
such law? They believe in democracy, but not in the law. And why
would one believe in democracy, or the republic, and not science,
truth, god and man?
"Thug life" is what anti-gunners validly have a grievance against.
"Thug life" writes songs about blowing each other away, echoing their
un-civilization, whilst glorifying it. So the valid grievance would
be to persecute gangsters who have guns, if malintent is what it is.
Then, it's not legal to be in a gang, and you could persecute
gangsters period for their malintent, but you could persecute
gangsters who have guns all the more. But if people don't have
malintentions, possession of weapons is not illegal. They can be very
upstanding advocates of liberty, respect and justice, and have all the
guns in the world - in their car. It's like bolt cutters and lock
picking sets are 100% legal, unless one's caught with them in a
"Catsuit" at 1:00am or there's suspicion of malintention. Gainfully
employed people don't commit petty burglary, and their bolt cutters
and lock picking sets are generally not suspicious. Same with
terrorists and gasoline. We all have gasoline, but terrorists are
suspected of malintention, while good people drive around with extra
gasoline cans on the back of their Jeeps. So if you agree with this
legal theory of malintention by itself being enough to condemn for
crime. Otherwise there's nothing at all, and you'll have to find
holistic solutions, - increase the wealth, decrease the population,
share the poverty equally.
Massacres have nothing to do with it, are 100% a red herring, are
committed by poor unemployed upset students, and the like, and merely
require a crowd. 100% of the people who commit massacres have no
criminal record and got their guns before mal-activity. Once one
commits a massacre, there's not a second offense. Guns, vehicles,
knives will all do the same for massacres. It's crap to say it's okay
to ban guns for massacres, because that's a non-argument. It's crap
to say it's okay to ban guns for no reason, as it's crap to say, it's
a crime to be Jewish. It truly is prejudice and abhorrent. People who
enforce such laws are scum. And I don't agree to give my name to buy
a gun.
There is not a right to ban guns for no reason, or because people who
bear guns are different than you.
The rules of self-defense and engagement, need to be better
identified, but fearing a big man is what fearing a gun is, and anyone
can throw rocks at anyone's head.
People do keep and bear guns for sport and hobby. There's nothing
wrong with being an aficionado, an enthusiast, or a gun lover. When
to use the gun, against another person, is the question. Not because
they threw popcorn or water on you.
Ah Americans, ya got to love them, Can't wait for them to make portable
Nukes you can all carry. Cause its your Freedumb.
Intelligent Party
2021-09-04 19:44:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Intelligent Party
All a police officer has to do, is ask do if someone has any malintentions with
these weapons? If "no," they are 100% legal.
It's just simply not wrong to possess a weapon. It's not wrong as a matter of
fact and scientific unadulterated truth. Possession of weapons is not wrong. It's
fact. Those who believe democracy authors the law, don't believe in the law at
all, so how can they advocate such law? They believe in democracy, but not in the
law. And why would one believe in democracy, or the republic, and not science,
truth, god and man?
"Thug life" is what anti-gunners validly have a grievance against. "Thug life"
writes songs about blowing each other away, echoing their un-civilization, whilst
glorifying it. So the valid grievance would be to persecute gangsters who have
guns, if malintent is what it is. Then, it's not legal to be in a gang, and you
could persecute gangsters period for their malintent, but you could persecute
gangsters who have guns all the more. But if people don't have malintentions,
possession of weapons is not illegal. They can be very upstanding advocates of
liberty, respect and justice, and have all the guns in the world - in their car.
It's like bolt cutters and lock picking sets are 100% legal, unless one's caught
with them in a "Catsuit" at 1:00am or there's suspicion of malintention. Gainfully
employed people don't commit petty burglary, and their bolt cutters and lock
picking sets are generally not suspicious. Same with terrorists and gasoline. We
all have gasoline, but terrorists are suspected of malintention, while good people
drive around with extra gasoline cans on the back of their Jeeps. So if you agree
with this legal theory of malintention by itself being enough to condemn for
crime. Otherwise there's nothing at all, and you'll have to find holistic
solutions, - increase the wealth, decrease the population, share the poverty equally.
Massacres have nothing to do with it, are 100% a red herring, are committed by
poor unemployed upset students, and the like, and merely require a crowd. 100% of
the people who commit massacres have no criminal record and got their guns before
mal-activity. Once one commits a massacre, there's not a second offense. Guns,
vehicles, knives will all do the same for massacres. It's crap to say it's okay
to ban guns for massacres, because that's a non-argument. It's crap to say it's
okay to ban guns for no reason, as it's crap to say, it's a crime to be Jewish. It
truly is prejudice and abhorrent. People who enforce such laws are scum. And I
don't agree to give my name to buy a gun.
There is not a right to ban guns for no reason, or because people who bear guns
are different than you.
The rules of self-defense and engagement, need to be better identified, but
fearing a big man is what fearing a gun is, and anyone can throw rocks at anyone's
head.
People do keep and bear guns for sport and hobby. There's nothing wrong with
being an aficionado, an enthusiast, or a gun lover. When to use the gun, against
another person, is the question. Not because they threw popcorn or water on you.
Bump
dolf
2021-09-04 23:13:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
That Irish Catholic Republican activism (1918-1920) and thereafter is by
nature antagonistic to Queen Victoria's letters patent which was
established during a period of war.

The issue is the #1827 - Eucharist as 4 x #364 + #371 (5 x #364 + 7 days)
of the ecclesiastical calendar.

If one accepts the date of the crucifixion is Friday 3 April 33 and
Pentecost 50 days later.

Then 5 April + 50 days = 24 May...

The Queen as defender of the faith (ie. stated in the letters patent) is as
I suggest by GLOBUS CRUCIGER falling on nous #33 on 24 May (5 April + 50
days).

Since the commemoration of BOER WAR MEMORIAL DAY can fall on the Sunday
within seven days prior to 31 May it conflicts with Roman Catholic piety.

<https://www.grapple369.com/Groundwork/Self%20Determination.pdf>
Post by Intelligent Party
All a police officer has to do, is ask do if someone has any malintentions with
these weapons? If "no," they are 100% legal.
It's just simply not wrong to possess a weapon. It's not wrong as a matter of
fact and scientific unadulterated truth. Possession of weapons is not wrong. It's
fact. Those who believe democracy authors the law, don't believe in the law at
all, so how can they advocate such law? They believe in democracy, but not in the
law. And why would one believe in democracy, or the republic, and not science,
truth, god and man?
"Thug life" is what anti-gunners validly have a grievance against. "Thug life"
writes songs about blowing each other away, echoing their un-civilization, whilst
glorifying it. So the valid grievance would be to persecute gangsters who have
guns, if malintent is what it is. Then, it's not legal to be in a gang, and you
could persecute gangsters period for their malintent, but you could persecute
gangsters who have guns all the more. But if people don't have malintentions,
possession of weapons is not illegal. They can be very upstanding advocates of
liberty, respect and justice, and have all the guns in the world - in their car.
It's like bolt cutters and lock picking sets are 100% legal, unless one's caught
with them in a "Catsuit" at 1:00am or there's suspicion of malintention. Gainfully
employed people don't commit petty burglary, and their bolt cutters and lock
picking sets are generally not suspicious. Same with terrorists and gasoline. We
all have gasoline, but terrorists are suspected of malintention, while good people
drive around with extra gasoline cans on the back of their Jeeps. So if you agree
with this legal theory of malintention by itself being enough to condemn for
crime. Otherwise there's nothing at all, and you'll have to find holistic
solutions, - increase the wealth, decrease the population, share the poverty equally.
Massacres have nothing to do with it, are 100% a red herring, are committed by
poor unemployed upset students, and the like, and merely require a crowd. 100% of
the people who commit massacres have no criminal record and got their guns before
mal-activity. Once one commits a massacre, there's not a second offense. Guns,
vehicles, knives will all do the same for massacres. It's crap to say it's okay
to ban guns for massacres, because that's a non-argument. It's crap to say it's
okay to ban guns for no reason, as it's crap to say, it's a crime to be Jewish. It
truly is prejudice and abhorrent. People who enforce such laws are scum. And I
don't agree to give my name to buy a gun.
There is not a right to ban guns for no reason, or because people who bear guns
are different than you.
The rules of self-defense and engagement, need to be better identified, but
fearing a big man is what fearing a gun is, and anyone can throw rocks at anyone's
head.
People do keep and bear guns for sport and hobby. There's nothing wrong with
being an aficionado, an enthusiast, or a gun lover. When to use the gun, against
another person, is the question. Not because they threw popcorn or water on you.
Bump
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"



SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private Street on the edge of the Central Business District dated 16th May,
2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as a Notice of an
Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS AS DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTASIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO[iOS] SAPIEN[T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO[iOS] SAPIEN[T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grumble.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS.
Loading...