Page 7 of 52 FirstFirst ... 3456789101117 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 769
  1. #91
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    A Little South of Sanity
    Posts
    12,925

    Re: The Great 2nd Ammendment Debate

    I don't watch the turd.....ever.

  2. #92
    Joined
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Colorafornia, USSA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    13,823

    Re: The Great 2nd Ammendment Debate

    I didn't watch the child give his speech tonight as I never watch the idiot, but I read the transcript and here's the gist of it.

    Gun control-This works! Just look how great things in France are!

    More bomb dropping in the ME-This works too! Just look how many fewer terrorists we have now than we did 10 years ago!

    The Patriot Act-Let's really use this thing to it's full advantage online. Thanks W!

    And finally, the idiot drops this shit:

    "Let's not forget that freedom is more powerful than fear; that we have always met challenges -- whether war or depression, natural disasters or terrorist attacks -- by coming together around our common ideals as one nation, as one people. So long as we stay true to that tradition, I have no doubt America will prevail."

    Yes, Dear Leader, let's take away still more freedoms from the natives and keep welcoming into our country people who have no desire to accept those traditions you speak so highly of at all. And of course, once the people who live here see this as a problem, let's call THEM the racists! Sorry, BO and liberals et. al., but more and more Americans are FINALLY starting to wake up to the fact that the road you're driving us down ends in France, and we'll be taking the wheel soon.
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

    Edmund Burke

    RIP PCPER TLR
    7-14-19

  3. #93
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    A Little South of Sanity
    Posts
    12,925

    Re: The Great 2nd Ammendment Debate

    ^ Gun Control is the fix for everything - except, of course Climate Change, which requires additional taxation...

  4. #94
    Joined
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,097

    Re: The Great 2nd Ammendment Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveW View Post
    ^ Gun Control is the fix for everything - except, of course Climate Change, which requires additional taxation...
    I control and use my gun just fine ;D
    American Public Education Made Me Ignorant and MSM Keeps Me Stupid.

  5. #95
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    A Little South of Sanity
    Posts
    12,925

    Re: The Great 2nd Ammendment Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Skennar View Post
    I control and use my gun just fine ;D
    Same here, particularly the tactical shotguns.

  6. #96
    Joined
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Colorafornia, USSA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    13,823

    Re: The Great 2nd Ammendment Debate

    Yes, my guns are always under control. My AK has never been on a jihad either. I do need to get around to buying a nicer stock for it though. It's way too small for me to shoot comfortably. It makes you wonder how much smaller men must have been in 1947 in Russia! I had the gun safe open yesterday and my 11 year old mistook the AK (no magazine in it) for the Ruger 10/22!
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

    Edmund Burke

    RIP PCPER TLR
    7-14-19

  7. #97
    Joined
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,097

    Re: The Great 2nd Ammendment Debate

    This worries me. I repeat this in this thread so we can deal with the issue-

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2...-ban/73817344/
    The Supreme Court's refusal Monday to hear a challenge to a Chicago suburb's ban on semiautomatic "assault" weapons keeps similar bans in place from Massachusetts to Hawaii
    -
    The action, hailed by gun control advocates, signaled that the majority of justices agree with the lower courts, or at least feel it's a matter to be left up to state and local governments. Similar bans are on the books in California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Maryland, Connecticut and Hawaii.
    This is EXACTLY the camel's nose under the tent Obama wants. Now some states may feel they can outright ban and confiscate semi-automatic weapons and large clips- including shotguns. While they left handguns off the list, handguns are far more technical and require a LOT of training to be good at- even at a short range. A semi-auto rifle gives a terrorist or criminal an appalling edge.

    The SCOTUS has no authority to qualify the constitution. Nor do the states. The right of the people to bear arms shall NOT be infringed. Further more, the people can be recruited for a militia and should at least have right to a standard issue firearm. To me a person who thinks they need automatic mode will never know how to use it right anyhow- so that doesn't bother me so bad but ....

    What the states CAN do is authorize background checks and demand training or proof of it at purchase time. That much I would go with.
    Last edited by Skennar; 12-09-2015 at 08:28 AM.
    American Public Education Made Me Ignorant and MSM Keeps Me Stupid.

  8. #98
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    10,812

    Re: The Great 2nd Ammendment Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Skennar View Post
    The SCOTUS has no authority to qualify the constitution. Nor do the states. The right of the people to bear arms shall NOT be infringed. Further more, the people can be recruited for a militia and should at least have right to a standard issue firearm. To me a person who thinks they need automatic mode will never know how to use it right anyhow- so that doesn't bother me so bad but ....

    What the states CAN do is authorize background checks and demand training or proof of it at purchase time. That much I would go with.
    If not SCOTUS then who? You and Alex Jones?

    Where does this militia of yours come in? The guys who went down to help that Texas rancher who decided he didn't have to pay for grazing? Scary.
    Thomas Jefferson to John Page Fairfeilds Dec: 25. 1762.
    ... But the old-fellows say we must read to gain knowledge; and gain knowledge to make us happy and be admired. Mere jargon! Is there any such thing as happiness in this world? No: And as for admiration I am sure the man who powders most, parfumes most, embroiders most, and talks most nonsense, is most admired.

  9. #99
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    A Little South of Sanity
    Posts
    12,925

    Re: The Great 2nd Ammendment Debate

    "Scalia and Justice Clarence Thomas said Monday, however, they would have taken the case. Thomas wrote a blistering, six-page dissent from the court's refusal to hear Arie Friedman's challenge to the gun ban.

    "Roughly 5 million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles," Thomas wrote. "The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons.""

  10. #100
    Joined
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,097

    Re: The Great 2nd Ammendment Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by otoc View Post
    If not SCOTUS then who? You and Alex Jones?

    Where does this militia of yours come in? The guys who went down to help that Texas rancher who decided he didn't have to pay for grazing? Scary.
    I have a saying at the shop: RTFM
    Amendment II

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    American Public Education Made Me Ignorant and MSM Keeps Me Stupid.

  11. #101
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    10,812

    Re: The Great 2nd Ammendment Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Skennar View Post
    I have a saying at the shop: RTFM
    You can't use a manual by only reading one chapter. We're talking about the role of scotus in light of the constitution and not a single amendment.
    Their role is quite defined as is the meaning of the vague way the constitution and early amendments were worded. To be flexible and not rigid as how I see your interpretation.

    http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/constitutional.aspx
    Last edited by otoc; 12-09-2015 at 06:05 PM.
    Thomas Jefferson to John Page Fairfeilds Dec: 25. 1762.
    ... But the old-fellows say we must read to gain knowledge; and gain knowledge to make us happy and be admired. Mere jargon! Is there any such thing as happiness in this world? No: And as for admiration I am sure the man who powders most, parfumes most, embroiders most, and talks most nonsense, is most admired.

  12. #102
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,280

    Re: The Great 2nd Ammendment Debate



    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  13. #103
    Joined
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,097

    Re: The Great 2nd Ammendment Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by otoc View Post
    You can't use a manual by only reading one chapter. We're talking about the role of scotus in light of the constitution and not a single amendment.
    Their role is quite defined as is the meaning of the vague way the constitution and early amendments were worded. To be flexible and not rigid as how I see your interpretation.

    http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/constitutional.aspx
    It's tempting to say you flunked civics, but I probably had less of an education in civics than you. See my sig. It's true.

    So I'll spare you a post of insult- but understand this: I had to look up, ask and figure out most of this on my own because my education didn't bother or avoided the issues and most kids didn't give a rip anyhow. WHY?- that is is another sad issue, but ....

    Another saying I have: KISS. Stick with the single sentence the 2nd ammendment is and STOP making a chapter or more out of it. Leave the reams of BS for the Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Bullets, Bombs and Banks criminals to choke on.

    In short, the 2nd Ammendment granted the people the right to bear military arms so that they could defend themselves AND the country could rally the people for quick numbers at little cost to repel foreign invaders and deal with local conflicts. Well regulated meant that there was to be some organization and training

    The ACLU has a definition that says a couple of things very well about the Bill of Rights:
    "The Constitution was remarkable, but deeply flawed. For one thing, it did not include a specific declaration - or bill - of individual rights. It specified what the government could do but did not say what it could not do. For another, it did not apply to everyone. The "consent of the governed" meant propertied white men only."

    Or the government only.

    The Bill of Rights takes some from the English Bill of Rights of 1689 which stated: "- subjects who are Protestants may bear arms for their defence as permitted by law;" which was enhanced in the 2nd Ammendment to not discriminate or infringe with law on the right to bear arms.

    It was quite clear the 2nd Ammendment allowed the people to protect themselves from enemies both foreign and domestic. It is also clear that the government could take advantage of this. Dictionary time: Militia- a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.

    So bother to read and understand the single sentence. It was meant for the people and it was kept simple for them- for us. It was NOT written for the Harvard, Princeton, Yale, bullets, bombs and banks asswholes to define it for you. Stop trusting others to cheat and swindle you out of it.
    Last edited by Skennar; 12-09-2015 at 10:17 PM.
    American Public Education Made Me Ignorant and MSM Keeps Me Stupid.

  14. #104
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    10,812

    Re: The Great 2nd Ammendment Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Skennar View Post
    It was quite clear the 2nd Ammendment allowed the people to protect themselves from enemies both foreign and domestic. It is also clear that the government could take advantage of this. Dictionary time: Militia- a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.

    So bother to read and understand the single sentence. It was meant for the people and it was kept simple for them- for us. It was NOT written for the Harvard, Princeton, Yale, bullets, bombs and banks asswholes to define it for you. Stop trusting others to cheat and swindle you out of it.
    You can think whatever you wish about me. I've heard it all, and it doesn't make it true. Bear in mind, I'm addressing your words, and not expressing an opinion about you. Wish I had time to address all the other jump offs, but work is calling.

    So let's keep with the thread topic and the section of your words above.

    Dictionary time: Those commas in the 2nd. They represent groupings, not a run on sentence.

    Dictionary time: Militia = State National Guard. States rights, here. And the 2nd amendment is fulfilled.

    Dictionary time: Bear arms = ability to have a weapon. It doesn't say what weapon. Just weapons, or actually arms. K, then you can have a knife. I don't trust you having a gun. You have arms. It doesn't say rifles here, just like it didn't say women when it came to the original release in terms of rights. The 2nd amendment is fulfilled.

    Dictionary time: not be infringed = I won't violate the above. Since they are fulfilled, I'm not infringing. Have fun with your knife.

    That's an interpretation, Skennar. An opinion. And one that obviously has not happened. But precedent has established the right of the state to define parameters and restrictions. That's a fact.

    The truth is, if you took the time to read the link I gave a few posts back, SCOTUS is there by definition of the Constitution to deal with the vagueness written by the founders.

    Civics time:
    The words of SCOTUS on SCOTUS
    The Constitution of the United States is a carefully balanced document. It is designed to provide for a national government sufficiently strong and flexible to meet the needs of the republic, yet sufficiently limited and just to protect the guaranteed rights of citizens; it permits a balance between society's need for order and the individual's right to freedom. To assure these ends, the Framers of the Constitution created three independent and coequal branches of government. That this Constitution has provided continuous democratic government through the periodic stresses of more than two centuries illustrates the genius of the American system of government.

    The complex role of the Supreme Court in this system derives from its authority to invalidate legislation or executive actions which, in the Court's considered judgment, conflict with the Constitution. This power of "judicial review" has given the Court a crucial responsibility in assuring individual rights, as well as in maintaining a "living Constitution" whose broad provisions are continually applied to complicated new situations.
    In retrospect, it is evident that constitutional interpretation and application were made necessary by the very nature of the Constitution. The Founding Fathers had wisely worded that document in rather general terms leaving it open to future elaboration to meet changing conditions. As Chief Justice Marshall noted in McCulloch v. Maryland, a constitution that attempted to detail every aspect of its own application "would partake of the prolixity of a legal code, and could scarcely be embraced by the human mind. . . . Its nature, therefore, requires that only its great outlines should be marked, its important objects designated, and the minor ingredients which compose those objects be deduced from the nature of the objects themselves."

    The Constitution limits the Court to dealing with "Cases" and "Controversies." John Jay, the first Chief Justice, clarified this restraint early in the Court's history by declining to advise President George Washington on the constitutional implications of a proposed foreign policy decision. The Court does not give advisory opinions; rather, its function is limited only to deciding specific cases.

    The Justices must exercise considerable discretion in deciding which cases to hear, since more than 10,000 civil and criminal cases are filed in the Supreme Court each year from the various state and federal courts. The Supreme Court also has "original jurisdiction" in a very small number of cases arising out of disputes between States or between a State and the Federal Government.

    When the Supreme Court rules on a constitutional issue, that judgment is virtually final; its decisions can be altered only by the rarely used procedure of constitutional amendment or by a new ruling of the Court. However, when the Court interprets a statute, new legislative action can be taken.

    Chief Justice Marshall expressed the challenge which the Supreme Court faces in maintaining free government by noting: "We must never forget that it is a constitution we are expounding . . . intended to endure for ages to come, and consequently, to be adapted to the various crises of human affairs."
    So Skennar, you're certainly entitled to your opinion. I'll take the curtain in the above quotes.
    Thomas Jefferson to John Page Fairfeilds Dec: 25. 1762.
    ... But the old-fellows say we must read to gain knowledge; and gain knowledge to make us happy and be admired. Mere jargon! Is there any such thing as happiness in this world? No: And as for admiration I am sure the man who powders most, parfumes most, embroiders most, and talks most nonsense, is most admired.

  15. #105
    Joined
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,097

    Re: The Great 2nd Ammendment Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by otoc View Post
    -
    I don't trust you having a gun. You have arms. It doesn't say rifles here, just like it didn't say women when it came to the original release in terms of rights. The 2nd amendment is fulfilled.=

    So Skennar, you're certainly entitled to your opinion. I'll take the curtain in the above quotes.
    Fuk that. I'm entitled to my rights. Opinions are already covered in the 1st Amendment that they're also trying to qualify. Well, tough sh!t.

    Wow. I see you had issues with history too.

    1787- They had guns which were state of the art WEAPONS at the time.
    The amendment says THE PEOPLE, not anything specific at all. Of course you have racist and discrimination issues with "TEA Party" and those "conservatives", so we can mitigate that into your box somehow.

    Where do you think you live? You make it sound like conservatives have turned the country into Lebanon. We the AMERICAN PEOPLE had these rights for centuries and don't live in terror in a 3rd world country, there are no daily OK Coral shoot outs everywhere- like you liars want everyone to think there is. We have had no mass famine and pestilence for decades and built a prosperous wonderland that a great chunk of the rest of the world could only steal and kill to have.

    Much of "conservative" America, where there are almost no gun laws, have far less shootings than Chicago that has far more laws. You build your case to disarm the American people so that women have to face psychopathic rapists of much greater size with only a knife. Good luck with that- even with mace (much easier to neutralize than a bullet). Now you want us to face militant Islamic terrorists this president is deliberately importing in with our tax dollars by showing up at a gunfight with only a knife.

    Yeah, I know who you are. You're Nazi fascist fodder who will be glad to let the government jackboot everyone who insists on the rights of the constitution many swore an oath to uphold. You think that the people cannot be trusted with these rights AS GIVEN so others need to tell them what they are. You are stuck on "guns kill people not people" stupid. You tell the dictionary what it doesn't say- a power fascists revel in and murder with. Well, I'm sorry, the rest of the world doesn't revolve around you.
    https://www.google.com/search?q=defi...utf-8&oe=utf-8
    mi·li·tia
    məˈliSHə/
    noun
    noun: militia; plural noun: militias

    a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.
    a military force that engages in rebel or terrorist activities, typically in opposition to a regular army.
    all able-bodied civilians eligible by law for military service.
    So I'll leave you to your miserable self in this country that is so miserable for you and hope you find a better place where you can live.
    Last edited by Skennar; 12-10-2015 at 08:35 AM.
    American Public Education Made Me Ignorant and MSM Keeps Me Stupid.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •