2nd Amendment should not be infringed upon because of Las Vegas shooter.

[danielpalos]

It is a simple appeal to ignorance of the law. There is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

The People are the Militia; You are either, well regulated or you are unorganized.

There you go again spouting stupidity. What in the Hell is an "appeal to ignorance of the law?" How many years have you been spewing that line? If you're ignorant, I'm NOT appealing to you. I can't fix your stupidity. You'll have to see Dr. Phil about that. Or are you trying to piss me off again so your buddies will delete my post because it is factual?

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia,"

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

A simple appeal to ignorance (of the law).

Only in right wing cognitive disconnect can anyone be unconnected with the militia, only with militia service, well regulated.

You're a dumbass. I'm not appealing to the law. The law is the law. I'm appealing to the posters. You're arguing with the United States Supreme Court. Did it ever dawn on you that you might be freaking delusional? You would be well advised to give it some thought.

There are a lot of people who own firearms and are not active in the militia. The weapons and the Rights of the people are protected from infringements.

Not even the Judicature is immune, as a privilege, from political influence.

Nothing but repeal instead of a valid argument, means I win, by default.

This was established as federal doctrine, with the ratification of our federal Constitution:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

If you aren't the most delusional person on this board, there isn't a cow in the whole state of Texas.

Your repetition of nonsense doesn't mean squat, danielpalos. You've been repeating bullshit this many years because you thought the repetition means you win? Really? You've only to proven to be the most delusional poster on USM.

Look dude,, the words unorganized and disorganized are different in the English language.

The word unorganized is "not brought into a coherent or well-ordered whole"

The word disorganized is lacking coherence, system, or central guiding agency :not organized (Disorganized is the antonym for regulated; unorganized is NOT)

I found great synonyms for "regulate" on the new Thesaurus.com!

What you're selling is snake oil. You've been lying. The unorganized militia simply means we haven't been brought into the regular militia. A disorganized militia would be a group with no central guiding agency. Even the unorganized militia, when called into service, knows full well who the guiding agency is.

It's just that we don't have to be a part of the organized militia in order to own private firearms... and even if we are not in the militia, we still have a Right to keep and bear Arms. The Second Amendment is not about the military. It is about the Right of the people.

dude, you don't know what you are talking about.

A simple appeal to ignorance (of the law).

Only in right wing cognitive disconnect can anyone be unconnected with the militia, only with militia service, well regulated.

 

[danielpalos]

A posse register for gun lovers who love to love their guns in public.

WTF does that mean danielpalos? You couldn't dazzle with me brilliance so you changed tactics and are trying to baffle me with bullshit?

Son, give it up. How many times did you see me with a gun in public?

A posse register for gun lovers who love to love their guns in public.

What part are you not bright enough to understand?

 

[Humorme]

There you go again spouting stupidity. What in the Hell is an "appeal to ignorance of the law?" How many years have you been spewing that line? If you're ignorant, I'm NOT appealing to you. I can't fix your stupidity. You'll have to see Dr. Phil about that. Or are you trying to piss me off again so your buddies will delete my post because it is factual?

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia,"

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

A simple appeal to ignorance (of the law).

Only in right wing cognitive disconnect can anyone be unconnected with the militia, only with militia service, well regulated.

You're a dumbass. I'm not appealing to the law. The law is the law. I'm appealing to the posters. You're arguing with the United States Supreme Court. Did it ever dawn on you that you might be freaking delusional? You would be well advised to give it some thought.

There are a lot of people who own firearms and are not active in the militia. The weapons and the Rights of the people are protected from infringements.

Not even the Judicature is immune, as a privilege, from political influence.

Nothing but repeal instead of a valid argument, means I win, by default.

This was established as federal doctrine, with the ratification of our federal Constitution:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

If you aren't the most delusional person on this board, there isn't a cow in the whole state of Texas.

Your repetition of nonsense doesn't mean squat, danielpalos. You've been repeating bullshit this many years because you thought the repetition means you win? Really? You've only to proven to be the most delusional poster on USM.

Look dude,, the words unorganized and disorganized are different in the English language.

The word unorganized is "not brought into a coherent or well-ordered whole"

The word disorganized is lacking coherence, system, or central guiding agency :not organized (Disorganized is the antonym for regulated; unorganized is NOT)

I found great synonyms for "regulate" on the new Thesaurus.com!

What you're selling is snake oil. You've been lying. The unorganized militia simply means we haven't been brought into the regular militia. A disorganized militia would be a group with no central guiding agency. Even the unorganized militia, when called into service, knows full well who the guiding agency is.

It's just that we don't have to be a part of the organized militia in order to own private firearms... and even if we are not in the militia, we still have a Right to keep and bear Arms. The Second Amendment is not about the military. It is about the Right of the people.

dude, you don't know what you are talking about.

A simple appeal to ignorance (of the law).

Only in right wing cognitive disconnect can anyone be unconnected with the militia, only with militia service, well regulated.

danielpalos, Somehow even my direct quotes have been attacked and contain strikethroughs.

You're in no position to be claiming I'm wrong when everything you've posted on this thread has been refuted and proven wrong by standing court precedents to be inaccurate..That is everything that can be understood in English. The rest of your tripe is pretentious cant and uteer nonsense.

 

[Humorme]

A posse register for gun lovers who love to love their guns in public.

WTF does that mean danielpalos? You couldn't dazzle with me brilliance so you changed tactics and are trying to baffle me with bullshit?

Son, give it up. How many times did you see me with a gun in public?

A posse register for gun lovers who love to love their guns in public.

What part are you not bright enough to understand?

If you could string a few words together to make sense, I might understand it. What in the Hell is a posse register? And again, how many times have you seen me in public with a firearm? How many sir? You tell more lies than a New York politician... bet you're a Democrat.

You can't define your own bullshit terminology and think people are stupid for not being able to define crap you make up??? You got to be kidding.

 

[Humorme]

Between someone editing my posts and others being deleted, I have to keep repeating this stuff. The strikeouts by persons unknown was not something I'd attribute to a moderator, but who knows???

We have to give danielpalos some kind of advantage. He thinks he's winning something.

According to the Heller decision:
The Supreme Court held:
"(1) The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53."

District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia
"In People v. Aguilar (2013), the Illinois Supreme Court summed up the central Second Amendment findings in McDonald:

Two years later, in McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. ___, ___, 130 S. Ct. 3020, 3050 (2010), the Supreme Court held that the second amendment right recognized in Heller is fully applicable to the states through the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment. In so holding, the Court reiterated that “the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense” (id. at ___, 130 S. Ct. at 3026); that “individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right” (emphasis in original) (id. at ___, 130 S. Ct. at 3036 (quoting Heller, 554 U.S. at 599)); and that “elf-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day” (id. at ___, 130 S. Ct. at 3036)"

McDonald v. City of Chicago - Wikipedia

 

[Humorme]

Between someone editing my posts and others being deleted, I have to keep repeating this stuff. The strikeouts by persons unknown was not something I'd attribute to a moderator, but who knows???

We have to give danielpalos some kind of advantage. He thinks he's winning something.

According to the Heller decision:
The Supreme Court held:
"(1) The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53."

District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia
"In People v. Aguilar (2013), the Illinois Supreme Court summed up the central Second Amendment findings in McDonald:

Two years later, in McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. ___, ___, 130 S. Ct. 3020, 3050 (2010), the Supreme Court held that the second amendment right recognized in Heller is fully applicable to the states through the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment. In so holding, the Court reiterated that “the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense” (id. at ___, 130 S. Ct. at 3026); that “individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right” (emphasis in original) (id. at ___, 130 S. Ct. at 3036 (quoting Heller, 554 U.S. at 599)); and that “elf-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day” (id. at ___, 130 S. Ct. at 3036)"

McDonald v. City of Chicago - Wikipedia

Tench Coxe: “As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.” in “Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution,” under the pseudonym “A Pennsylvanian” in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789.

 

[Humorme]

Between someone editing my posts and others being deleted, I have to keep repeating this stuff. The strikeouts by persons unknown was not something I'd attribute to a moderator, but who knows???

We have to give danielpalos some kind of advantage. He thinks he's winning something.

According to the Heller decision:
The Supreme Court held:
"(1) The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53."

District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia
"In People v. Aguilar (2013), the Illinois Supreme Court summed up the central Second Amendment findings in McDonald:

Two years later, in McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. ___, ___, 130 S. Ct. 3020, 3050 (2010), the Supreme Court held that the second amendment right recognized in Heller is fully applicable to the states through the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment. In so holding, the Court reiterated that “the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense” (id. at ___, 130 S. Ct. at 3026); that “individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right” (emphasis in original) (id. at ___, 130 S. Ct. at 3036 (quoting Heller, 554 U.S. at 599)); and that “elf-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day” (id. at ___, 130 S. Ct. at 3036)"

McDonald v. City of Chicago - Wikipedia

Tench Coxe: “As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.” in “Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution,” under the pseudonym “A Pennsylvanian” in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789.

So, somebody is going to strike out part of each of my posts now. Okay. Got it.

Patrick Henry: “The people have a right to keep and bear arms.” (Elliott, Debates at 185)

Alexander Hamilton: “…that standing army can never be formidable (threatening) to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in the use of arms.” (Federalist Paper #29)

 

[sealybobo]

It's not going to happen anyway. I think certain sensible restrictions should be enacted, but the 2nd Amendment is safe.

we already have plenty of sensible restrictions and quite a few that aren't so sensible

Such as?

 

[Humorme]

Like I said, the US has lost its way as a civilized society.

Maybe you should leave. It's safer in France, I hear.

Wrong. France's mortality rate is worse than the U.S.

Death rate, crude (per 1,000 people) | Data

 

[danielpalos]

A simple appeal to ignorance (of the law).

Only in right wing cognitive disconnect can anyone be unconnected with the militia, only with militia service, well regulated.

You're a dumbass. I'm not appealing to the law. The law is the law. I'm appealing to the posters. You're arguing with the United States Supreme Court. Did it ever dawn on you that you might be freaking delusional? You would be well advised to give it some thought.

There are a lot of people who own firearms and are not active in the militia. The weapons and the Rights of the people are protected from infringements.

Not even the Judicature is immune, as a privilege, from political influence.

Nothing but repeal instead of a valid argument, means I win, by default.

This was established as federal doctrine, with the ratification of our federal Constitution:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

If you aren't the most delusional person on this board, there isn't a cow in the whole state of Texas.

Your repetition of nonsense doesn't mean squat, danielpalos. You've been repeating bullshit this many years because you thought the repetition means you win? Really? You've only to proven to be the most delusional poster on USM.

Look dude,, the words unorganized and disorganized are different in the English language.

The word unorganized is "not brought into a coherent or well-ordered whole"

The word disorganized is lacking coherence, system, or central guiding agency :not organized (Disorganized is the antonym for regulated; unorganized is NOT)

I found great synonyms for "regulate" on the new Thesaurus.com!

What you're selling is snake oil. You've been lying. The unorganized militia simply means we haven't been brought into the regular militia. A disorganized militia would be a group with no central guiding agency. Even the unorganized militia, when called into service, knows full well who the guiding agency is.

It's just that we don't have to be a part of the organized militia in order to own private firearms... and even if we are not in the militia, we still have a Right to keep and bear Arms. The Second Amendment is not about the military. It is about the Right of the people.

dude, you don't know what you are talking about.

A simple appeal to ignorance (of the law).

Only in right wing cognitive disconnect can anyone be unconnected with the militia, only with militia service, well regulated.

danielpalos, Somehow even my direct quotes have been attacked and contain strikethroughs.

You're in no position to be claiming I'm wrong when everything you've posted on this thread has been refuted and proven wrong by standing court precedents to be inaccurate..That is everything that can be understood in English. The rest of your tripe is pretentious cant and uteer nonsense.

dude; it is the law, no amount of appealing to ignorance will work on this anymore.

The People are the Militia; You are either well regulated or you are considered, unorganized (by our republican forms of Government).

 

[Humorme]

You're a dumbass. I'm not appealing to the law. The law is the law. I'm appealing to the posters. You're arguing with the United States Supreme Court. Did it ever dawn on you that you might be freaking delusional? You would be well advised to give it some thought.

There are a lot of people who own firearms and are not active in the militia. The weapons and the Rights of the people are protected from infringements.

Not even the Judicature is immune, as a privilege, from political influence.

Nothing but repeal instead of a valid argument, means I win, by default.

This was established as federal doctrine, with the ratification of our federal Constitution:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

If you aren't the most delusional person on this board, there isn't a cow in the whole state of Texas.

Your repetition of nonsense doesn't mean squat, danielpalos. You've been repeating bullshit this many years because you thought the repetition means you win? Really? You've only to proven to be the most delusional poster on USM.

Look dude,, the words unorganized and disorganized are different in the English language.

The word unorganized is "not brought into a coherent or well-ordered whole"

The word disorganized is lacking coherence, system, or central guiding agency :not organized (Disorganized is the antonym for regulated; unorganized is NOT)

I found great synonyms for "regulate" on the new Thesaurus.com!

What you're selling is snake oil. You've been lying. The unorganized militia simply means we haven't been brought into the regular militia. A disorganized militia would be a group with no central guiding agency. Even the unorganized militia, when called into service, knows full well who the guiding agency is.

It's just that we don't have to be a part of the organized militia in order to own private firearms... and even if we are not in the militia, we still have a Right to keep and bear Arms. The Second Amendment is not about the military. It is about the Right of the people.

dude, you don't know what you are talking about.

A simple appeal to ignorance (of the law).

Only in right wing cognitive disconnect can anyone be unconnected with the militia, only with militia service, well regulated.

danielpalos, Somehow even my direct quotes have been attacked and contain strikethroughs.

You're in no position to be claiming I'm wrong when everything you've posted on this thread has been refuted and proven wrong by standing court precedents to be inaccurate..That is everything that can be understood in English. The rest of your tripe is pretentious cant and uteer nonsense.

dude; it is the law, no amount of appealing to ignorance will work on this anymore.

The People are the Militia; You are either well regulated or you are considered, unorganized (by our republican forms of Government).

I told your dumb ass, I'm not appealing to your ignorance. If you don't understand the laws it's because you don't want to understand the law. Anybody that does not understand you have a constitutionally protected individual Right to keep and bear Arms unconnected with service in a militia is an absolute idiot if they have read the posts on this thread and accessed the links.

I've offered so much proof that you've resorted to all kinds of dirty tricks to hide it, but that only shows that while you're patting yourself on the back, claiming victory, you're beginning to admit, via your desperation, you realize you're a bullshit artist and hardly anyone understands... much less agrees with your insanity.

 

[Humorme]

Unable to cite a single source to back his claims, danielpalos has tried every dirty trick ever heard of in order to promote some ridiculous platform regarding gun control that only he understands.

His use of Hitler's National Socialism (repeating a lie over and over until it's accepted as truth) is despicable and a personal insult to me. If anyone on this board understands what point he's trying to make, please inform us.

The founding fathers, having had to rise up against a tyrannical government founded our nation on God given, inherent, natural, absolute, unalienable Rights that are above the law. The Right to keep and bear Arms is an extension of your Right to Life AND Liberty. Without the requisite tools to defend your Rights, they aren't worth a fart in wild whirlwind.

 

[danielpalos]

no amount of appealing to ignorance will work on this anymore.

The People are the Militia; You are either well regulated or you are considered, unorganized (by our republican forms of Government).

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

 

[frigidweirdo]

We as a nation should not accept any Democratic attempt to infringe on our second amendment rights, by the likes of a Diane Feinstein or any other democratic politician, because of the Las Vegas shooter.

No one's talking about infringing the Second Amendment, they're talking about amending the constitution to get RID OF the Second Amendment.

And no, the 2A shouldn't be got rid of because of the Vegas shooting, but because of the 10,000 people a year who die because of guns in the US.

 

[Humorme]

no amount of appealing to ignorance will work on this anymore.

The People are the Militia; You are either well regulated or you are considered, unorganized (by our republican forms of Government).

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

That is utter bullshit; you've been proven wrong on that point and that is not what the law says. Do you have any new material?

 

[Humorme]

We as a nation should not accept any Democratic attempt to infringe on our second amendment rights, by the likes of a Diane Feinstein or any other democratic politician, because of the Las Vegas shooter.

No one's talking about infringing the Second Amendment, they're talking about amending the constitution to get RID OF the Second Amendment.

And no, the 2A shouldn't be got rid of because of the Vegas shooting, but because of the 10,000 people a year who die because of guns in the US.

You're not in the ballpark relative to numbers, but by your position, then alcohol should be banned. More people die due to alcoholic beverages than firearms. For every person killed by a firearm in America, FIVE nonsmokers will die due to second hand smoke because of cigarettes. Do you have a proposal to ban them as well?

300,000 people die each year from obesity. The major sources of the problem: fast food, sodas, and refined sugar. Do you advocate we crack down on fast food and require less sugar in sodas?

Car accidents cause more deaths than firearms. Should we outlaw cars and concentrate on building more buses?

 

[Humorme]

Still unable to document his claims, danienpalos is trying yet again to lie by the repetition of some cockamamie cow dung he invented to sound good, but is totally meaningless. He does not understand I'm not appealing to his ignorance of the law. AND now I'm handicapped because my posts have strikethroughs which discourages people from reading my posts.

The harsh, hard core reality is that the Second Amendment, like the entire Bill of Rights, is a limitation on the government, NOT on the citizenry. danielpalos argument is shot all to Hell (you gotta love the pun) when you consider that the federal government sells military rifles and pistols to the general public without them being in a militia.

Buying M1 Garands from the US Government - CMP - Civilian Marksmanship Program - GunsAmerica Digest

The Right of the people shall not be infringed...

 

[airplanemechanic]

And no, the 2A shouldn't be got rid of because of the Vegas shooting, but because of the 10,000 people a year who die because of guns in the US.

Well then I'll agree to that when you agree to get rid of cars, because 50,000 people a year die in their vehicles.

 

[frigidweirdo]

We as a nation should not accept any Democratic attempt to infringe on our second amendment rights, by the likes of a Diane Feinstein or any other democratic politician, because of the Las Vegas shooter.

No one's talking about infringing the Second Amendment, they're talking about amending the constitution to get RID OF the Second Amendment.

And no, the 2A shouldn't be got rid of because of the Vegas shooting, but because of the 10,000 people a year who die because of guns in the US.

You're not in the ballpark relative to numbers, but by your position, then alcohol should be banned. More people die due to alcoholic beverages than firearms. For every person killed by a firearm in America, FIVE nonsmokers will die due to second hand smoke because of cigarettes. Do you have a proposal to ban them as well?

300,000 people die each year from obesity. The major sources of the problem: fast food, sodas, and refined sugar. Do you advocate we crack down on fast food and require less sugar in sodas?

Car accidents cause more deaths than firearms. Should we outlaw cars and concentrate on building more buses?

Not in the ballpark? No, I am the fucking ballpark.

Guns in the United States — Firearms, gun law and gun control

In the United States, annual firearm homicides total

2014: 10,945
2013: 11,208
2012: 11,622
2011: 11,068
2010: 11,078
2009: 11,493
2008: 12,179
2007: 12,632
2006: 12,791
2005: 12,352
2004: 11,624
2003: 11,920
2002: 11,829
2001: 11,348
2000: 10,801
1999: 10,828
1998: 9,257

Alcohol is different to guns. If it were merely 10,000 people a year committing suicide with guns, then I'd have less of a problem with it.

I believe that smoking should be limited, yes. People can smoke, whatever, but I don't want them smoking around me. The UK implemented a smoking ban and it was great, you could go to the pub and not get filled with smoke. Go to restaurants and the same. If an individual wants to smoke around other smokers, then whatever, but not around non-smokers.

I have actually called for things to combat obesity. In the UK companies like Coca-Cola, Mars, Pepsi, all of those, get massive tax deals and they hardly pay anything. Healthy food suppliers are paying full taxes. It's ridiculous.

But it works for the rich. You buy their sugary items, they get rich. Then you go to hospital and the hospitals and insurance companies get rich too. None of these want to lose their money, so they make sure Americans are fat ass sugar guzzlers.

 

[frigidweirdo]

And no, the 2A shouldn't be got rid of because of the Vegas shooting, but because of the 10,000 people a year who die because of guns in the US.

Well then I'll agree to that when you agree to get rid of cars, because 50,000 people a year die in their vehicles.

Yes, they do, and it's a travesty.

List of countries by traffic-related death rate - Wikipedia

The US has a 10.6 per 100,000 rate of fatalities on the road, or 12.9 per 100,000 motor vehicles.

The UK has a 2.9 per 100,000 rate of fatalities and a 5.1 per 100,000 motor vehicles.

The US's rate is way too high. So, I would actually be in favor of measures that would reduce the US's death rate on the roads by 2/3rds.