First of, I did not argue that the fed mandating the purchase of guns was constitutional in response to your hypothetical with assumption included. That was NOT what I said. The fact that you would wrongly attribute that argument to me shows that you are NOT following along. I did state later that in the past mandated purchases have been imposed so one could NOT argue that the government does not have that power.
The reason little of what you say gets responded to is so much of it is irrelevant. This right here is the only paragraph in the entire post that even comes close to you committing to a position of any type. You're a common troll smith. Someone who is disagreeable for the sake of being disagreeable and is too spineless to actually have a position
And even when you make some lame ass attempt at one even that is inaccurate. If government did it, it must have been constitutional? Try again.
Wow more vague generalities from you so you can turn tail and run away from points that you can't counter.
Come on hack, give some specifics and show how what I said was either irrelevant or doesn't make sense. Saying it doesn't make it so and if you continue to fail to provide specifics then it's obvious that you are merely avoiding points that you can't counter.
BTW did you happen to notice how I showed that you were wrongly attributing an argument to me that I did NOT make?? Stop running away and address what was said or is that too much to ask of you??
Stop blathering about making an argument and actually make one. Then I'll respond to it. Pretty simple concept.