Quote:Welp, it’s been a minute since we’ve heard from this guy. And by this guy, I mean the self-aggrandizing, irrelevant independent filmmaker and attention w***e extraordinaire, Michael Moore, who for some delusional reason continues to believe he’s a super-respected, far-left influencer. Hell, maybe he is.

Either way, Moore’s back with another radical leftist idea — one of his “best” efforts in a while.

As the left continues its meltdown in the aftermath of several mass shootings and a couple of Second Amendment rights decisions by the Supreme Court, Moore has taken it upon himself to write his version of a 28th Amendment — there are currently 27 amendments to the U.S. Constitution — which if passed by Congress would do away with the Second Amendment and the rights it preserves and instead, put in place massive federal confiscation of legally-purchased firearms owned by law-abiding gun owners.

Nope, nothing totalitarian police state about any of this, at all.

Moore’s proposed 28th Amendment, which he laughably signed, “The above constitutional amendment was written by Michael Moore of Michigan and presented to the 117th United States Congress on July 11, 2022,” reads like something out of Vladimir Putin’s Russia (or that “WW II guy” Democrats love to equate with Donald Trump), from beginning to end. Let’s check out a few excerpts:

XXVIII AMENDMENT

SECTION 1.
The inalienable right of a free people to be kept safe from gun violence and the fear thereof must not be infringed and shall be protected by the Congress and the States. This Amendment thus repeals and replaces the Second Amendment.

SECTION 2.
Congress shall create a mandatory system of firearm registration and licensing for the following limited purposes: (a) licensed hunters of game; (b) licensed ranges for the sport of target shooting; and © for the few who can demonstrate a special need for personal protection.

All who seek a firearm will undergo a strict vetting process with a thorough background check, including the written and confidential approval of family members, spouses and ex-spouses and/or partners and ex-partners, co-workers and neighbors. A mental health check will also be required. There will be a waiting period of one month to complete the full background check.

SECTION 3.
Those who meet all the requirements for the restricted gun owners groups and successfully pass the background check must take a firearms safety class and pass a written test on an annual basis.

Coupla questions, Mikey. (Most Mikes and Michaels loathe “Mikey.” Long story, but trust me, here.)

“The right of people to be kept safe from gun violence.” By whom? With self-defense all but made unconstitutional by your silly amendment proposal, you’re suggesting that more than 300 million Americans should rely only on police officers — the very people your equally silly comrades want to “defund”?

And hunters and recreational firearms enthusiasts must receive approval from not only family members and ex-family members, but from co-workers and neighbors, as well? Dude, have you even read the U.S. Constitution and/or any of its amendments? I highly doubt it.

Ah, but there’s more. A few “highlights”:

SECTION 5.
Congress will stipulate and continually update the limited list of approved firearms for civilian use, including weapons in the future that are not yet invented. The following firearms are heretofore banned:

• All automatic and semi-automatic weapons and all devices which can enable a single-shot gun to fire automatically or semi-automatically;

• Any weapon that can hold more than six bullets or rounds at a time or any magazine that holds more than six bullets;

• All guns made of plastic or any homemade equipment and machinery or a 3D printer that can make a gun or weapon that can take a human life.

SECTION 6.
Congress shall regulate all ammunition, capacity of ammunition, the storage of guns, gun locks, gun sights, body armor and the sale and distribution of such items. No weapons of any kind whose sole intention is the premeditated elimination of human life are considered legal. Congress may create future restrictions as this amendment specifically does not grant any American the “right” to own any weapon.

Maybe it’s just me, but I love it when the gun-grabbers refer to ammunition as “bullets.” “Rounds” or “shells” is fine, but “bullets” always sound a bit too Barney Fife in my mind.

Anyway, Moore’s clairvoyance as to “any kind (of weapon) whose [sic] sole intention is the premeditated (wait — now guns can think?) elimination of human life are considered illegal,” is ominously hilarious, as is this line: “Congress may create future restrictions as this amendment specifically does not grant any American the ‘right’ to own any weapon.”

Nebulous as hell, right? Of course, it is — on purpose — because it would give the federal government the legal right to change the rules on the fly.

Finally, Section 8:

Persons already owning any of the above banned firearms, and who do not fall into the legal groups of restricted firearms owners, will have one month from the ratification of this Amendment to turn in their firearms for destruction by local law enforcement. These local authorities may organize a gun buy-back program to assist in this effort.

Good luck with that, Michael.

While it’s virtually impossible to determine the number of legally-owned guns in America, according to American Gun Facts, earlier this year, more than 81 million private American citizens legally own in excess of 393 million firearms.

Moreover, estimates of legally-owned AR-15-type rifles (AKA: “assault rifles,” “weapons of war,” “really scary-looking guns only owned by white supremacists and other lunatics,” etc.) range from a low of 5 million to well beyond 20 million.

Yep, Michael, good luck with that.

Link

29th amendment...no right to be a loud mouthed fatass who thinks his opinion matters.

Let me file this with the rest of Moore's stuff:

(07-11-2022 12:39 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Quote:Welp, it’s been a minute since we’ve heard from this guy. And by this guy, I mean the self-aggrandizing, irrelevant independent filmmaker and attention w***e extraordinaire, Michael Moore, who for some delusional reason continues to believe he’s a super-respected, far-left influencer. Hell, maybe he is.

Either way, Moore’s back with another radical leftist idea — one of his “best” efforts in a while.

As the left continues its meltdown in the aftermath of several mass shootings and a couple of Second Amendment rights decisions by the Supreme Court, Moore has taken it upon himself to write his version of a 28th Amendment — there are currently 27 amendments to the U.S. Constitution — which if passed by Congress would do away with the Second Amendment and the rights it preserves and instead, put in place massive federal confiscation of legally-purchased firearms owned by law-abiding gun owners.

Nope, nothing totalitarian police state about any of this, at all.

Moore’s proposed 28th Amendment, which he laughably signed, “The above constitutional amendment was written by Michael Moore of Michigan and presented to the 117th United States Congress on July 11, 2022,” reads like something out of Vladimir Putin’s Russia (or that “WW II guy” Democrats love to equate with Donald Trump), from beginning to end. Let’s check out a few excerpts:

XXVIII AMENDMENT

SECTION 1.
The inalienable right of a free people to be kept safe from gun violence and the fear thereof must not be infringed and shall be protected by the Congress and the States. This Amendment thus repeals and replaces the Second Amendment.

SECTION 2.
Congress shall create a mandatory system of firearm registration and licensing for the following limited purposes: (a) licensed hunters of game; (b) licensed ranges for the sport of target shooting; and © for the few who can demonstrate a special need for personal protection.

All who seek a firearm will undergo a strict vetting process with a thorough background check, including the written and confidential approval of family members, spouses and ex-spouses and/or partners and ex-partners, co-workers and neighbors. A mental health check will also be required. There will be a waiting period of one month to complete the full background check.

SECTION 3.
Those who meet all the requirements for the restricted gun owners groups and successfully pass the background check must take a firearms safety class and pass a written test on an annual basis.

Coupla questions, Mikey. (Most Mikes and Michaels loathe “Mikey.” Long story, but trust me, here.)

“The right of people to be kept safe from gun violence.” By whom? With self-defense all but made unconstitutional by your silly amendment proposal, you’re suggesting that more than 300 million Americans should rely only on police officers — the very people your equally silly comrades want to “defund”?

And hunters and recreational firearms enthusiasts must receive approval from not only family members and ex-family members, but from co-workers and neighbors, as well? Dude, have you even read the U.S. Constitution and/or any of its amendments? I highly doubt it.

Ah, but there’s more. A few “highlights”:

SECTION 5.
Congress will stipulate and continually update the limited list of approved firearms for civilian use, including weapons in the future that are not yet invented. The following firearms are heretofore banned:

• All automatic and semi-automatic weapons and all devices which can enable a single-shot gun to fire automatically or semi-automatically;

• Any weapon that can hold more than six bullets or rounds at a time or any magazine that holds more than six bullets;

• All guns made of plastic or any homemade equipment and machinery or a 3D printer that can make a gun or weapon that can take a human life.

SECTION 6.
Congress shall regulate all ammunition, capacity of ammunition, the storage of guns, gun locks, gun sights, body armor and the sale and distribution of such items. No weapons of any kind whose sole intention is the premeditated elimination of human life are considered legal. Congress may create future restrictions as this amendment specifically does not grant any American the “right” to own any weapon.

Maybe it’s just me, but I love it when the gun-grabbers refer to ammunition as “bullets.” “Rounds” or “shells” is fine, but “bullets” always sound a bit too Barney Fife in my mind.

Anyway, Moore’s clairvoyance as to “any kind (of weapon) whose [sic] sole intention is the premeditated (wait — now guns can think?) elimination of human life are considered illegal,” is ominously hilarious, as is this line: “Congress may create future restrictions as this amendment specifically does not grant any American the ‘right’ to own any weapon.”

Nebulous as hell, right? Of course, it is — on purpose — because it would give the federal government the legal right to change the rules on the fly.

Finally, Section 8:

Persons already owning any of the above banned firearms, and who do not fall into the legal groups of restricted firearms owners, will have one month from the ratification of this Amendment to turn in their firearms for destruction by local law enforcement. These local authorities may organize a gun buy-back program to assist in this effort.

Good luck with that, Michael.

While it’s virtually impossible to determine the number of legally-owned guns in America, according to American Gun Facts, earlier this year, more than 81 million private American citizens legally own in excess of 393 million firearms.

Moreover, estimates of legally-owned AR-15-type rifles (AKA: “assault rifles,” “weapons of war,” “really scary-looking guns only owned by white supremacists and other lunatics,” etc.) range from a low of 5 million to well beyond 20 million.

Yep, Michael, good luck with that.

Link

My version of the First Amendment using Leftwing nutjob Micheal Moores own logic.

SECTION 2.
Congress shall create a mandatory system of pubic speech registration and licensing for the following limited purposes: (a) dissemination of reasonable speech to be determined by government officials; (b) licensed platforms for the very limited debate of issues; and © for the few who can prove a pressing need, a limited licence to speak across multiple public platforms.

All who seek a free speech licence will undergo a strict vetting process with a thorough background check, including the written and confidential approval of family members, spouses and ex-spouses and/or partners and ex-partners, co-workers and neighbors. A mental health check will also be required. There will be a waiting period of one month to complete the full background check.

SECTION 5.
Congress will stipulate and continually update the limited list of approved free speech outlets for civilian use, including websites, blogs, bulletin boards, social media platforms, radio, tv, and other mass communication options in the future that are not yet invented. The following websites are heretofore banned:

• All social media

• All broadcast or cable networks not run by the US Government or the states.

• Any website, newspaper, blog, bulletin board, magazine, or public meeting with a audience or circulation of greater than 6.

SECTION 6.
Congress shall regulate all internet, print, radio, social media platforms, and television broadcast media--including all equiptment and technology necessary produce and distribution of such media. No media of any kind whose sole intention is the mass broadcast of free speech to an audience larger than 6 will be considered legal. Congress may create future restrictions as this amendment specifically does not grant any American the “right” to own any form of free speech.

30th amendment; fat people should be rationed food so the rest of us do not run out. Fat assed Canuck’s get only left overs.

What a useless fat slob. I’d invite him to personally come and take my guns.

I wonder if this fat fuk would support something similar for voting laws? Just look at the carnage this senile old fossil in the WH has done in less than 2 years. Way worse than any mass shooting

Oh man... my sides...

Then again if they thought this could pass congress they'd do it, set it up with votes like the 21st and rig that too.

Wonder if he understands that Congress can’t pass a Constitutional Amendment and that with the current red/blue divide that you couldn’t pass an amendment for anything. It just makes me smile knowing that he spent countless hours at the computer contemplating this, researching, and writing drafts. Should have spent the time in a gym to get some benefit.

I laughed out loud a good several times at that jewel of a write up.

Moore is just as much a fat dumbarse as he was in the late 90s and early 2000s when about 8 people actually listened to him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Only good thing to come from a Moore movie was his interview with Marilyn Manson. I to this day don't think Moore understood was Manson was trying to say

Quote:Marilyn Manson: When I was a kid growing up, music was the escape. That’s the only thing that had no judgements. You can put on a record and it’s not gonna yell at you for dressing the way you do. It’s gonna make you feel better about it.

Marilyn Manson: I definitely can see why they would pick me, because I think it’s easy to throw my face on a TV, because I’m, in the end, sort of a poster boy for fear. Because I represent what everyone’s afraid of, because I do and say what I want.

Marilyn Manson: The two by-products of that whole tragedy were, uh… violence in entertainment and gun control. And how perfect that that was the two things that we were gonna talk about with the upcoming election. And also, then we forgot about Monica Lewinsky and we forgot about… The president was shooting bombs overseas, yet I’m a bad guy because I sing some rock'n'roll songs. And who’s a bigger influence, the president or Marilyn Manson? I’d like to think me, but I’m gonna go with the president.

Michael Moore: Do you know the day that Columbine happened, the United States dropped more bombs on Kosovo than any other time during that war?

Marilyn Manson: I do know that and I think that’s really ironic, that nobody said, "Well, maybe the president had an influence on this violent behavior. Because that’s not the way the media wants to take it and spin it and turn it into fear. ‘Cause then you’re watching television, you’re watching the news; you’re being pumped full of fear. And there’s floods, there’s AIDS, there’s murder. You cut to commercial, buy the Acura, buy the Colgate. If you have bad breath, they’re not gonna talk to you. If you got pimples, the girl’s not gonna **** you. It’s a campaign of fear and consumption. And that’s what I think that’s it’s all based on, is the whole idea that: keep everyone afraid, and they’ll consume. And that’s really as simple as it can be boiled down to.

Michael Moore: Right. If you were to talk directly to the kids at Columbine and the people in that community, what would you say to them, if they here right now?

Marilyn Manson: I wouldn’t say a single word to them. I would listen to what they have to say. And that’s what no one did

Actually, I have listened to kids at Columbine, or at least one kid. My ex-wife's cousin's son was a student there. He was a straight-A student, captain of the soccer team, exactly the kind of high school "in crowd" member that outcasts Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris were targeting. He had English class just before lunch and as he was leaving the classroom the teacher asked him, "Could you hang around for a minute or two, I have a special project I would like to see if you'd be interested in taking on." Because he stopped to talk, he was late heading to the lunchroom, where the incident started. As he headed that way, he saw students running out. So he left and went home.

Incidentally, neither Klebold nor Harris used an "assault weapon."

From the guy that hates capitalism yet gladly accepts all money from his movies.

Huh, what did somebody say something?