Trying is the point.

Actually making a difference instead of immediately surrendering at any amount of conflict is the point.

Added to the wall of “free speech.”

So they DO know due process exists?

They just choose to ignore it for everyone else?

Watch how quickly certain people suddenly drop the “stopped eight wars” narrative.

Actually, pressure them on it. They dug themselves into a lose-lose scenario, and they need to remember who’s fault that is.

Worth noting that I do not keep this for the sake of gloom. I made it to remember that bad people exist. Who will do everything in their power to avoid ever being happy.

And although we will never remember who they are (that part was intentional) we can live our lives in a way that they will hate.

Then of course:

#2026

What you can do however, is distract them from it.

If you can find common ground with them surrounding another issue, or wire them to have a more understandable enemy, eventually they will forget they ever hated you.

They chose to be evil, it has to be their choice to stop being evil.

If a right were used to attack things in the declaration (such as all people being equal) would that not be the same as attacking the constitution itself?

It’s not to say that you cannot ever hate someone, but using your right to freedom of speech, to deny others their rights, is unconstitutional.

If that argument doesn’t work for you:

the constitution is designed protect itself. Not just that, but the declaration of independence as well. Since the declaration is the destination and the constitution is the vehicle to get there, the two are linked.

Nice poncho!

Well-regulated also means sustainable. Or in other terms, not left to the point it becomes a problem.

If every civilian can own a tank or other strong weapon with zero regulation whatsoever, does that not go against it?

Crazy people should not be allowed to own assault weaponry. Thats common sense