RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it.

RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (Full Version)

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

Message

Musicmystery -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 12:47:07 PM)
Everyone doesn't appear aware they are in the militia.

crazyml -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 12:48:22 PM)
Sorry, are you now saying that everyone is part of a well regulated militia? Or are you being fucking stupid. Ponders....

Louve00 -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 12:49:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle "The Second Amendment reads, “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.” Perhaps this is a naive question but does any one know what proportion of current legal gun owners are members of a "well regulated militia"? how many leftists know what the right of the people shall not be infringed means at the time everyone was part of the militia by Federal law every male between 18 and 50 is part of the militia so while this sounds good it is BS This is absurd, bizarre, and sounds like something straight out of the Twilight Zone. So much so that I took out in search (via Google) of a better definition of a well regulated militia. I suppose that's because I am a leftist that doesn't know the right (that out of context thought makes me snicker) of the people shall not be infringed. In my search I found a definition that sounds much saner to me. Because defining a "well-regulated" militia as Anyone (blanketly and randomly) between the ages of 18-50 is a recipe for chaos and anarchy, much less regulation, in and of itself! Well-regulated militia

BamaD -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 12:49:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml Has has been gently explained to you, talking about one of the amendments on a thread that sets out to discuss the amendments is only a derailment if you're a fucking moron. But then.... To your OP. Now, it's absolutely wrong to try to "chip away" at laws rather than repealing them or modifying them through a democratic process. But the constitution has placed enormous barriers against the right of citizens of the USA to democratically change their own laws. So, without some massive constitutional crisis (which is bound to happen sometime in the next 50-100 years), "chipping away" is the only way to take laws that were passed 200 years ago and make them fit for the 21st C. It's a shame, and every day I wake up and thank goodness that I live in a functioning democracy that allows its citizens to change laws. You show your ignorance of out system. First, the Constitution is not a series of laws, until you understand this you argue from ignorance. You would have to be a halfwit to attempt to argue that the constitution does not form an intrinsic part of your nation's laws. But, then.... quote: The constitution is the framework for the creation of laws, much different from being laws. The constitution is a legal framework. The word "legal" is a clue... quote: The framework is deliberately and wisely hard to change, laws are much different. Changing a 200 year old law is a simple matter of getting a simple majority of both houses and a Presidential signature, or a 2/3 majority in each house. If you had read I started this thread because I knew the gun control debate would take over and I didn't want it to derail the general discussion of the wisdom of undermining the Constitution. Thus nothing in your post has any validity. You fucking halfwit. You're so stupid, you can't even recognise when someone might actually be in faint agreement with you. Now... since you're so fucking expert... What would it take to repeal the second amendment? three fourths of both houses plus 3/4 of state legislatures and the fact that you see yourself in "faint" agreement with me doesn't change the fact that you don't understand the difference between a Constitution and a law.

crazyml -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 12:51:25 PM)
Your interweb must be broken, because that definition is nothing like the definition that Bama is using. You cannot possibly be right, because Bama has explained that everyone is in the militia. And you don't want to get into drama with Bama.

BamaD -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 12:52:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml Sorry, are you now saying that everyone is part of a well regulated militia? Or are you being fucking stupid. Ponders.... If you could read you would know that I said that everyone is part of the militia. By saying the right of the people they clearly did not see being part of a "well regulated militia" as a prerequisite for the right. If it was it would not be a right.

crazyml -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 12:54:58 PM)
I'm really happy with my understanding, thanks. And it's awesome that you did that little bit of research for me, which oddly - marries very nicely with what I thought. So in order to make a substantive change to the gun laws of the USA, the 2nd would have to be amended - This would require agreement from three fourths of both houses plus 3/4 of state legislatures. Which was my point. Thanks!

crazyml -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 12:56:16 PM)
You are babbling. You don't know what a militia is. Babble babble babble. And what you think, by the way, counts for shit. It's what the SC thinks that matters.

Louve00 -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 12:58:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml Your interweb must be broken, because that definition is nothing like the definition that Bama is using. You cannot possibly be right, because Bama has explained that everyone is in the militia. And you don't want to get into drama with Bama. Darn it all...that must be where I keep going wrong [8D]

Musicmystery -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 1:00:12 PM)
OK, this thread is worth it for "Don't get into drama with Bama." [:D]

BamaD -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 1:13:06 PM)
FR It should be noted that former Justice Stevens, in his preferred wording of the 2nd. unwittingly pointed out that the writers specifically avoided stating that citizens needed to be members of a militia in order to exercise their right to bear arms.

crazyml -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 1:15:13 PM)
What a stupid man he must be. I mean, you've just 'splained to us how everyone is in the militia anyway, so why would he make such a stupid point?

BamaD -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 1:19:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml You are babbling. You don't know what a militia is. Babble babble babble. And what you think, by the way, counts for shit. It's what the SC thinks that matters. Since I am a US citizen and you are not, in matters of US policy my opinion matters far more than yours, and the SC has generally agreed with me and not with you.

crazyml -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 1:20:42 PM)
Not much more, poppet, unless you're going to be sitting on the SC

BamaD -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 1:21:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml What a stupid man he must be. I mean, you've just 'splained to us how everyone is in the militia anyway, so why would he make such a stupid point? He didn't mean to, he was trying to argue to change the 2nd and most leftist have taken his word as gospel but they didn't notice this point.

Musicmystery -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 1:21:45 PM)
that's actually the crux of your ignorance -- you have no concept of the difference between matters of fact and matters of opinion, believing all to be matters of opinion.

BamaD -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 1:22:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml Not much more, poppet, unless you're going to be sitting on the SC So now you are a fortune teller.

crazyml -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 1:23:49 PM)
You don't even know what a law is, dumbass. How can you possibly continue this conversation?

crazyml -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 1:25:10 PM)
Hmm... I don't need to be very gifted to predict that your future doesn't involve wearing a gown and sitting on the supreme court. Check this out... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_United_States

slvemike4u -> RE: Why would you want to chip away at the 2nd amendment instead of trying to repeal it. (12/30/2014 1:28:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml What a stupid man he must be. I mean, you've just 'splained to us how everyone is in the militia anyway, so why would he make such a stupid point? He didn't mean to, he was trying to argue to change the 2nd and most leftist have taken his word as gospel but they didn't notice this point. Leftists are "stoopid" that way [8\|]

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

5.859375E-02