RE: 2nd amendment (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


BamaD -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 3:10:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Not intended as a cheap shot but as an example she can have as many shoes as she wants. I was merely pointing out that excessive to one person is perfectly reasonable to another. I have never had more than three pair, two because the Air Force said I had to have them. Over 4 seems excessive to me but thats just me , if you want one hundred it's ok with me.



The air farce issues two pair of dress shoes two pair of boots one pair of sneekers and a pair of shower shoes.
That is 6 pair before we get to your civilian shoes.


Wow that many now? I do stand partialy correccted when I went in they gave us one pair dress shoes one pair combat boots and one pair of "chucka " boots. so at that time I had 4 pair. lets look at this on something not as emotional as shoes. Jay Leno owns 50 cars thats fine with me but he shouldn't complain if I have fifty gun. A neighbor haveing 6000 rds doesn't bother me what he plans on doing with the first one could.




BamaD -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 3:14:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Wrong on both counts. We already went down this road.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

yep and you are still wrong.

Your usual compelling "argument."


Two compelling arguments having a discussion. Lovely[8|]

[sm=popcorn.gif]

He was bringing up a conversation we had aq couple of months ago and I choose not towaste a couple of pages of this thread rehashing it.




BamaD -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 3:16:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: igor2003



You are talking about an ability, not a freedom.  If doing something means you have to break a law to do it, it is not a freedom.  I have the ability to commit a robbery.  That does not make robbery a freedom.

Why would you want to buy a gun?  It is evident that you don't want to, so no one is forcing you to.  That is a freedom...the right to do as you choose WITHOUT breaking a law.

Not everyone feels a need...or desire...to own a firearm.  In the U.S.we have the right to decide for ourselves as to whether to buy one or not.  It's pretty evident that you are not a hunter and that you live in a relatively low crime area and that you have great faith in the ability of local law enforcement agencies to protect you under all circumstances.  That is not the case with all U.S. citizens.  It is probably not the case with all U.K. citizens either.  You should feel fortunate.

Well put.




Musicmystery -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 3:19:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: OttersSwim


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: OttersSwim
The right to keep and bear arms as written has many interpretations. But the history that follows it, clearly establishes that American citizens have always been well armed and have considered that an essential right. An America without a well armed population, would not be America, it's citizens would not be citizens, they would be subjects.


Fantasies, not interpretations.

The rest of the industrialized world seems to do well as citizen "subjects."

It's a mental deficiency in the American mindset.



I disagree. :)

"The right of the citizens to bear arms in defence of themselves and the State shall not be questioned." -- Pennsylvania Constitution, Article 1, Section 21, which is older than the U.S. Constitution, which was based, in large part, upon it.

“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” -- Thomas Jefferson, (The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, p. 334, 1950)

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of the rulers." -- Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, 1891

"Every citizen should be a soldier. This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state." -- Thomas Jefferson

and lastly:

“Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference. When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour.” -- George Washington, Address to 1st session of Congress

____________

Even though it may be difficult to interpret the Constitution, it is rarely hard to interpret the -intention- of those who wrote it, as they were men of prolific writing who supported their intentions not just with that single sentence.



All of which is discussing the protection of the states against the Federal government.

This myth of individual freedom as an ideal of the founders is pure fantasy. They greatly mistrusted the masses--it's why we have the electoral college. Until the turn of the 20th century, you weren't even allowed to vote for your U.S. Senators--the Governor appointed them. Some guy sitting on his porch with his military ordinance? Fuck no.

But ready militias regulated by the State to serve as an army for the newly created nation---Yes.




Musicmystery -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 3:21:01 PM)

quote:

With the world on the brink of economic chaos and the corruption in government (both sides of the isle here in the USA) why would we want a bunch of crooked politicians to have a monopoly on all the fire power ?


That's what I wonder every time people kiss the NRA's feet.




Musicmystery -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 3:22:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

FR

I wonder what it says about American priorities that gun ownership is a right and health care isn't.

Amen.

And in both cases, letting some people get killed or just die is perfectly acceptable.





Musicmystery -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 3:23:38 PM)

quote:

In spite of protestations to the contrary I can't help but there was pleanty of evidence to have prevented this if any of several people had done their jobs.


And if possessing this ordinance were illegal, they could have done their jobs and stopped this months ago, with no one harmed.




Musicmystery -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 3:24:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Wrong on both counts. We already went down this road.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

yep and you are still wrong.

Your usual compelling "argument."


Two compelling arguments having a discussion. Lovely[8|]

[sm=popcorn.gif]

He was bringing up a conversation we had aq couple of months ago and I choose not towaste a couple of pages of this thread rehashing it.

Take a look back. YOU brought it up again, ignoring all the evidence presented last time you tried this dance.

God, take some simple responsibility.




OttersSwim -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 3:47:51 PM)

If you actually read the quotes above and below, you will see that you are wrong about the intent being to only protect the states.

"The said Constitution [shall] be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms."
Samuel Adams of Massachusetts -- U.S. Constitution ratification convention, 1788

"A people armed and free forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition and is a bulwark for
the nation against foreign invasion and domestic oppression."

James Madison (1751-1836), Father of the Constitution for the USA, 4th US President

But you know, I am really getting the sense that you are not going to be moved by what I, or any of the Founding Generation had to say on the subject, so you know, all good. See ya round...

EDIT: You know, upon re-reading, my last line to you was snippy. Not really what I intended, just that I think that you and I are coming at this from intractable points of view.




gungadin09 -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 4:10:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: gungadin09
It would be seen that way. I see it that way. The Courts disagree.



Damn it. "Could be" seen that way.

Pam




thompsonx -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 4:46:15 PM)

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Not intended as a cheap shot but as an example she can have as many shoes as she wants. I was merely pointing out that excessive to one person is perfectly reasonable to another. I have never had more than three pair, two because the Air Force said I had to have them. Over 4 seems excessive to me but thats just me , if you want one hundred it's ok with me.



The air farce issues two pair of dress shoes two pair of boots one pair of sneekers and a pair of shower shoes.
That is 6 pair before we get to your civilian shoes.


quote:

Wow that many now?


That is how many in 1960.




quote:

I do stand partialy correccted when I went in they gave us one pair dress shoes one pair combat boots and one pair of "chucka " boots. so at that time I had 4 pair. lets look at this on something not as emotional as shoes.

It has nothing to do with shoe ego and everything to do with your hyperbole

quote:

Jay Leno owns 50 cars thats fine with me but he shouldn't complain if I have fifty gun. A neighbor haveing 6000 rds doesn't bother me what he plans on doing with the first one could.


All I care about is that that 6000rnds is in a class a magzine. The same way I care that jay leno has his 500 gal of fuel in a double wall u/l approved tank/




Aswad -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 6:47:07 PM)

NM




LadyHibiscus -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 6:49:59 PM)

We are a long way from free in these our United States. And if someone finds safety in owning a thousand rounds of ammo for that AK47, well I do not share in that delusion.

Might as well prepare for the zombie apocalypse.

And don't get me started about the TSA.




BamaD -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 8:01:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

FR

I wonder what it says about American priorities that gun ownership is a right and health care isn't.

People have a right to health care. I have a right to own a gun but not to expect the government tobuy it for me, same with health care.




BamaD -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 8:07:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Wrong on both counts. We already went down this road.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

yep and you are still wrong.

Your usual compelling "argument."


Two compelling arguments having a discussion. Lovely[8|]

[sm=popcorn.gif]

He was bringing up a conversation we had aq couple of months ago and I choose not towaste a couple of pages of this thread rehashing it.

Take a look back. YOU brought it up again, ignoring all the evidence presented last time you tried this dance.

God, take some simple responsibility.

No I didn't, I was responding to someone else We were talking to each other before but you never realized that you were talking praticality and I was talking intent. We were not and neverwould be in the same conversation.




BamaD -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 8:13:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: OttersSwim

If you actually read the quotes above and below, you will see that you are wrong about the intent being to only protect the states.

"The said Constitution [shall] be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms."
Samuel Adams of Massachusetts -- U.S. Constitution ratification convention, 1788

"A people armed and free forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition and is a bulwark for
the nation against foreign invasion and domestic oppression."

James Madison (1751-1836), Father of the Constitution for the USA, 4th US President

But you know, I am really getting the sense that you are not going to be moved by what I, or any of the Founding Generation had to say on the subject, so you know, all good. See ya round...

EDIT: You know, upon re-reading, my last line to you was snippy. Not really what I intended, just that I think that you and I are coming at this from intractable points of view.


Yes I explained this to him ad nausiun a couple of months ago but he could only talk about treason which all the founders would have faced had they lost, The difficulty of an insurection derfeating a standing army and his belief that the founders didn't believe in the right to overthrow a tryanical government (never told me why they weren't still British subjects if they believed that). So you are correct engaging in this conversation is a waste of you time and his.




BamaD -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 8:14:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyHibiscus

We are a long way from free in these our United States. And if someone finds safety in owning a thousand rounds of ammo for that AK47, well I do not share in that delusion.

Might as well prepare for the zombie apocalypse.

And don't get me started about the TSA.

TSA arrgh, don't they qualify as zombie?




BamaD -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 8:16:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Not intended as a cheap shot but as an example she can have as many shoes as she wants. I was merely pointing out that excessive to one person is perfectly reasonable to another. I have never had more than three pair, two because the Air Force said I had to have them. Over 4 seems excessive to me but thats just me , if you want one hundred it's ok with me.



The air farce issues two pair of dress shoes two pair of boots one pair of sneekers and a pair of shower shoes.
That is 6 pair before we get to your civilian shoes.


quote:

Wow that many now?


That is how many in 1960.




quote:

I do stand partialy correccted when I went in they gave us one pair dress shoes one pair combat boots and one pair of "chucka " boots. so at that time I had 4 pair. lets look at this on something not as emotional as shoes.

It has nothing to do with shoe ego and everything to do with your hyperbole

quote:

Jay Leno owns 50 cars thats fine with me but he shouldn't complain if I have fifty gun. A neighbor haveing 6000 rds doesn't bother me what he plans on doing with the first one could.


All I care about is that that 6000rnds is in a class a magzine. The same way I care that jay leno has his 500 gal of fuel in a double wall u/l approved tank/

OK we didn't get that in 73.
6000 rds doesn't require a class a license now if he converted the AR15 to full auto he would have needed one.




slvemike4u -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 8:18:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Fellow

quote:

I do believe that if the men who wrote the Bill of Rights were alive today, they would be the first ones to try to make changes that could stop mass killings like the one that just happened.


I think an assumption the killings are caused by easy access to guns is oversimplification of the issue. With some martial artist skills one could probably chop 12 people to death using a sword or an axe. There are wide range of possibilities to commit mass murder. One can not avoid analysis of the society and culture that develops the mindset in some individuals. Suppose the government confiscates all general public guns in a massive military/police operation.  Do you think a smart intelligent guy (with twisted mind) will be unable to acquire weapons he wants? There will be a massive underground market. One may just pretend he is a Mexican drug dealer and buy a grenade launcher from the US government.



Where would I even start ?
You have managed to include so many ridiculous,flawed and totally nonsensical statements(including throwing some martial arts ninja warrior into the mix)that responding to you is pointless.




slvemike4u -> RE: 2nd amendment (7/22/2012 8:20:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne


quote:

ORIGINAL: stellauk

If it is necessary to possess a gun to maintain your freedom, then it is clear that you have no freedom.



well we wont need them when we create a world of sane people



Where would you fit in such a world ?




Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875