Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
A supreme court decision is not an appeal to ignorance it is a citation from people much smarter than you.a simple appeal to ignorance.no, it doesn't. both the people and the militia are plural and collective in regard to the security of our free States.Wrongthere are no individual rights expressed in the second clause; the People is collective and plural as is the militia.It is about individual rights as the second clause irrefutably proves.
It protects the rights of individuals and no one else which is what it says
The people refers to individuals and that is clear
Groups have no rights only individuals do
Simple english and reality which you lack the ability to conprehend
STFU, dumbass!
" 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
You can only be unconnected with well regulated militia not the unorganized militia.
We have a McCarthy era phrase in our pledge. The person who resorts to the fewest fallacies is the truest witness bearer and the most moral; hypocrite.you have no facts, only appeals to ignorance.I stated facts not fallacy.you need more than fallacy to convince me.It is bit right or left wing
You have a knee jerk reaction to call any inconvenient facts right wing.
Very illogical and unreasonable but you are not very intelligent
Plain english proves you wrong and that is fact
I know you cannot be convinced but that is simply because you are immature and too childish to admit you are wrong or to think intelligently
I stated facts and you know it and are simply a liar and coward
A well regulate militia being necessary to the security of a free State!Our Second Amendment clearly states it is about the security of our free States not the rights of indivduals.Yes it does and that is irrefutable.no, it doesn't. both the people and the militia are plural and collective in regard to the security of our free States.Wrong
The people refers to individuals and that is clear
Groups have no rights only individuals do
Simple english and reality which you lack the ability to conprehend
It means individuals as only individuals have rights which is another fact you cannot refute,
The people means individual citizens'
that is an appeal to ignorance.a simple appeal to ignorance.no, it doesn't. both the people and the militia are plural and collective in regard to the security of our free States.Wrong
The people refers to individuals and that is clear
Groups have no rights only individuals do
Simple english and reality which you lack the ability to conprehend
STFU, dumbass!
" 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
You can only be unconnected with well regulated militia not the unorganized militia.
A supreme court decision is not an appeal to ignorance it is a citation from people much smarter than you.
The second requires no connection as it applies to individual rights as we have proven here in this debate which you lost
You are either well regulated or not.
"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
It says the right of the people ( individual citizens ) shall not be infringed. Their right is not contingent on being a member of anything at allit does not say, individuals of the People are necessary.A well regulate militia being necessary to the security of a free State!Our Second Amendment clearly states it is about the security of our free States not the rights of indivduals.Yes it does and that is irrefutable.
It means individuals as only individuals have rights which is another fact you cannot refute,
The people means individual citizens'
Half does not count.
The right of the people means individual citizens not members of a specific group
A well regulate militia being necessary to the security of a free State!Our Second Amendment clearly states it is about the security of our free States not the rights of indivduals.Yes it does and that is irrefutable.no, it doesn't. both the people and the militia are plural and collective in regard to the security of our free States.Wrong
The people refers to individuals and that is clear
Groups have no rights only individuals do
Simple english and reality which you lack the ability to conprehend
It means individuals as only individuals have rights which is another fact you cannot refute,
The people means individual citizens'
that is an appeal to ignorance.A supreme court decision is not an appeal to ignorance it is a citation from people much smarter than you.a simple appeal to ignorance.no, it doesn't. both the people and the militia are plural and collective in regard to the security of our free States.Wrong
The people refers to individuals and that is clear
Groups have no rights only individuals do
Simple english and reality which you lack the ability to conprehend
STFU, dumbass!
" 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
You can only be unconnected with well regulated militia not the unorganized militia.
The second requires no connection as it applies to individual rights as we have proven here in this debate which you lost
You are either well regulated or not.
"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
i don't need to take the, nine hundred ninety-nine, seriously.We have a McCarthy era phrase in our pledge. The person who resorts to the fewest fallacies is the truest witness bearer and the most moral; hypocrite.you have no facts, only appeals to ignorance.I stated facts not fallacy.
I know you cannot be convinced but that is simply because you are immature and too childish to admit you are wrong or to think intelligently
I stated facts and you know it and are simply a liar and coward
And the pledge is meaningless tripe unrelated to what we are proving you massively ignorant and wrong about
You only make claims right winger because it is your knee jerk defense when proven wrong
it does not say, individuals of the People are necessary.A well regulate militia being necessary to the security of a free State!Our Second Amendment clearly states it is about the security of our free States not the rights of indivduals.Yes it does and that is irrefutable.
It means individuals as only individuals have rights which is another fact you cannot refute,
The people means individual citizens'
Half does not count.
The right of the people means individual citizens not members of a specific group
Good because no one with even average intelligence takes you seriouslyi don't need to take the, nine hundred ninety-nine, seriously.We have a McCarthy era phrase in our pledge. The person who resorts to the fewest fallacies is the truest witness bearer and the most moral; hypocrite.you have no facts, only appeals to ignorance.I stated facts not fallacy.
I know you cannot be convinced but that is simply because you are immature and too childish to admit you are wrong or to think intelligently
I stated facts and you know it and are simply a liar and coward
And the pledge is meaningless tripe unrelated to what we are proving you massively ignorant and wrong about
You only make claims right winger because it is your knee jerk defense when proven wrong
Yes it does and that is irrefutable.
It means individuals as only individuals have rights which is another fact you cannot refute,
The people means individual citizens'
It's always so funny to see these "experts" who have clearly never even held a firearm. I can fire a round per second from a bolt action rifle, and easily put six aimed shots downrange in less than two seconds with a revolver.I have absolutely zero problem with a person owning a bolt action rifle.
Not only are they more accurate than semi automatics, but it takes a lot longer than 30 seconds to throw 30 rounds downrange. If we had only bolt action rifles, mass shootings would be a thing of the past.
Our Second Amendment clearly states it is about the security of our free States not the rights of indivduals.
A well regulate militia being necessary to the security of a free State!
All above are simply WRONG.it does not say, individuals of the People are necessary.
If I knew more about guns I wouldn`t mind seeing 11 bodies leaving the synagogue, school, movie theater, concert, etc. in body bags? Got it. I`ll try to educate myself.It's always so funny to see these "experts" who have clearly never even held a firearm. I can fire a round per second from a bolt action rifle, and easily put six aimed shots downrange in less than two seconds with a revolver.I have absolutely zero problem with a person owning a bolt action rifle.
Not only are they more accurate than semi automatics, but it takes a lot longer than 30 seconds to throw 30 rounds downrange. If we had only bolt action rifles, mass shootings would be a thing of the past.
I don't think I've ever seen a gun control advocate who knew anything about firearms. Maybe they realize that actual knowledge will change their opinions? Or perhaps they are just hopelessly arrogant...
It is not an appeal to ignorance it is irrefutable fact.it is a simple appeal to ignorance. our Constitution is Express not Implied. Only the right wing, never gets it.that is an appeal to ignorance.a simple appeal to ignorance.STFU, dumbass!
" 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
You can only be unconnected with well regulated militia not the unorganized militia.
A supreme court decision is not an appeal to ignorance it is a citation from people much smarter than you.
The second requires no connection as it applies to individual rights as we have proven here in this debate which you lost
You are either well regulated or not.
"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
It is not an appeal to ignorance which is an expression you do not understand as it always applies to your argument
The USSC is far smarter than you are and their decision destroys your idiotic opinion
No it is not militia members are also subject to having their rights infringed on for crimes.Individuals may be infringed as punishment for a crime. The militia is exempted from those individual infringements to individual rights.It says the right of the people ( individual citizens ) shall not be infringed. Their right is not contingent on being a member of anything at allit does not say, individuals of the People are necessary.A well regulate militia being necessary to the security of a free State!
Half does not count.
The right of the people means individual citizens not members of a specific group
Judicial activism and you will be giving me Standing for our Ninth Amendment. It is a simple appeal to ignorance. The People are the Militia, you are either well regulated or not for Second Amendment purposes.A well regulate militia being necessary to the security of a free State!Our Second Amendment clearly states it is about the security of our free States not the rights of indivduals.Yes it does and that is irrefutable.
It means individuals as only individuals have rights which is another fact you cannot refute,
The people means individual citizens'
that is an appeal to ignorance.A supreme court decision is not an appeal to ignorance it is a citation from people much smarter than you.a simple appeal to ignorance.STFU, dumbass!
" 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
You can only be unconnected with well regulated militia not the unorganized militia.
The second requires no connection as it applies to individual rights as we have proven here in this debate which you lost
You are either well regulated or not.
"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
i don't need to take the, nine hundred ninety-nine, seriously.We have a McCarthy era phrase in our pledge. The person who resorts to the fewest fallacies is the truest witness bearer and the most moral; hypocrite.I stated facts and you know it and are simply a liar and coward
And the pledge is meaningless tripe unrelated to what we are proving you massively ignorant and wrong about
You only make claims right winger because it is your knee jerk defense when proven wrong
it does not say, individuals of the People are necessary.A well regulate militia being necessary to the security of a free State!
Half does not count.
The right of the people means individual citizens not members of a specific group
1 more time, then I start reporting your bullshit.
" 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
Judicial activism and you will be giving me Standing for our Ninth Amendment. It is a simple appeal to ignorance. The People are the Militia, you are either well regulated or not for Second Amendment purposes.A well regulate militia being necessary to the security of a free State!Our Second Amendment clearly states it is about the security of our free States not the rights of indivduals.
that is an appeal to ignorance.A supreme court decision is not an appeal to ignorance it is a citation from people much smarter than you.a simple appeal to ignorance.
You can only be unconnected with well regulated militia not the unorganized militia.
The second requires no connection as it applies to individual rights as we have proven here in this debate which you lost
You are either well regulated or not.
"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
i don't need to take the, nine hundred ninety-nine, seriously.We have a McCarthy era phrase in our pledge. The person who resorts to the fewest fallacies is the truest witness bearer and the most moral; hypocrite.
And the pledge is meaningless tripe unrelated to what we are proving you massively ignorant and wrong about
You only make claims right winger because it is your knee jerk defense when proven wrong
it does not say, individuals of the People are necessary.A well regulate militia being necessary to the security of a free State!
Half does not count.
The right of the people means individual citizens not members of a specific group
1 more time, then I start reporting your bullshit.
" 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
Wrong.
The people join the militia.
The purpose if the second amendment is to protect individual rights as it clearly expresses.
It was a sound interpretation not activism.
Your desperate spin is an intellectual failure
...says the guy who insists the Second Amendment is a collective right.LOL. Yes, logic and reason, unlike with the whole and entire, right wing.Yes, I do have a question. Have you had a CAT scan recently? Because there's something going on in your head.Our Second Amendment is Express not Implied. We have a Ninth Amendment. Any questions?The Supreme Court disagrees with you.No, it doesn't. The People and the Militia are collective and plural not Individual.Yes there is
" The right of the people "
Which applies strictly to individuals
If I knew more about guns I wouldn`t mind seeing 11 bodies leaving the synagogue, school, movie theater, concert, etc. in body bags? Got it. I`ll try to educate myself.It's always so funny to see these "experts" who have clearly never even held a firearm. I can fire a round per second from a bolt action rifle, and easily put six aimed shots downrange in less than two seconds with a revolver.I have absolutely zero problem with a person owning a bolt action rifle.
Not only are they more accurate than semi automatics, but it takes a lot longer than 30 seconds to throw 30 rounds downrange. If we had only bolt action rifles, mass shootings would be a thing of the past.
I don't think I've ever seen a gun control advocate who knew anything about firearms. Maybe they realize that actual knowledge will change their opinions? Or perhaps they are just hopelessly arrogant...
I'm thinking this may require a new Bill. There are a LOT of Democrats now needing inpatient care!Unfortunately, State Mental Health programs have been closed down
