I mean..... It's all a bit wooly as to who's who when it comes to possessing Time Witches.

I can't hear Balamb Garden theme and not melt into relaxation.

Both excellent choices. I have a hard time picking between 6, 7, and 8, but 8 usually takes the top spot for me.

Yes, but you made a meta-comment about the sub as a whole.

You didn't mention this post at all in your first comment.

If this movies doesn't win an Oscar for something I'm burning the whole academy down.

He said while ignoring every other developed nation on the planet.

lol, 1) most of that was in the past, technology has changed, and 2) let's see billy bob with his personal arsenal of ARs hide in a 2 foot tall tunnel system for a year.

Tell you what, you can have a pile of guns, and I'll have a pile of drones and vertical strike missiles.

The average person is not going to be more able to defend themselves with a gun.

Technology has changed.

You need to learn English better

You are incorrect. I will explain.

The whole sentence only makes sense if you read it in it's entirety (you know like a sentence is supposed to be read). If they were separate things as right-wing activists argue then they wouldn't be in the same sentence.

As for the rest of it if you aren't familiar with what surplusage is (how they said the entirety of the first part of the sentence is irrelevant) and how that flies smack dab into the face of the Constitution as it has been read since at the latest 1803 in Marbury v Madison then...

To show what I mean

[[A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, ..., shall not be infringed.]]

See now people owning arms for personal use argument doesn't work for you. You just interpret it your way because you like the right-wing activists ruling. This reading doesn't make any less sense. You don't get to just cut up a sentence to suit your views which is exactly what the right wing activists did.

It's not because if we act like they're separate things then the first part says nothing, does nothing.

[[A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,]]

If they were separate things this is all the first part says. It says nothing. It's surplusage. That flies in the face of the way the law (all law [except for right-wing activists who read what they want]) has been read since 1803 in Marbury v Madison.

If you read the amendment in a non-right-wing activist fashion as it was in Miller (the way it had been read in the US up until right-wing activists in 2008) it's a collective right not an individual one. Which would mean the Guard is largely what the 2nd it talking about and the Feds can't stop states from having their own militia and arming/training it.

Grammatically two separate non-linked ideas should not be contained in the same sentence without semicolons or coordinating conjunctions.

I'm ok with the military having guns.

It's only a "fundamental right" because right wing extremists employ purposeful misinterpretation of the second amendment.

An originalist reading of 2A by a court that isn't compromised politically in no way guarantees private individual ownership.

The root issue is easy access to guns.

And yes blaming guns doesn't solve the issue, removing them would.

No, guns absolutely are the issue, because solving a wide spread behavioral cultural negative is far more difficult than removing physical objects.

It's the gun owners who are harping.

Correct. Which means until we address those issues, harping about guns is pointless.

When there are "good" people with guns there, they still don't stop anything.

I like how the colorform implies the childishness required to think guns are a good solution for anything.

Red towns do it too.

Wealthy suburb cops will just grab any homeless they see, drive em into the nearest big blue city, and drop them off at a homeless encampment.

It was 40 across, three tall.

120 homeless total.

Because the fact on its own can be misleading and not representative of the whole picture.

I liked it more than The Abyss.

All I'm saying is, his two best films are sequels.

Don't write off Avatar 2 just yet.

Whether that's true or not is irrelevant to the point I made.