Biden says “No Amendment to the Constitution is absolute”

Our Second Amendment is quite clear about the rationale and "central authority":

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.
More made up fairy tales. It doesn't say "central authority" and you left out a lot of verbiage such as "to provide for" and "may be employed" or "such part of them"....(taken from YOUR prior post). The Second Amendment does not provide ANY rationale for a "central authority" to prohibit the ownership of firearms or their use. Instead, it commands the government to ASSIST in organizing an armed population from time to time as may be needed. You asshats sure like to make shit up.
What is this?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
well then why is it that California does not have a well-regulated militia?
 
No, it isn't you ignorant right wing Russian tool.

The People are the Militia.

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
The People are made up of individuals, Mr. Marxist. In America those individuals have been guided by Judeo Christian morals and values. Marxist and Marxist tools like you would take away the moral base of our American society and make human beings in control of the so-called 'collective.' When the 'collective' has no moral base it is easy to get them to do most anything. Including disarming themselves, murdering millions of Jews and lately, closing down a whole country and mandate the wearing of nose-diapers. You are so lost I fear you're already gone. Sad really.
Militia and the People are collective and plural not Individual and singular. And, well regulated militia have literal recourse to our Second Amendment when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union; Becuase of the Collective nature of the Organization.

The unorganized militia, as Individuals of the People do not have literal recourse to our Second Amendment for their Individual selves due to that fact and are subject to the police power of their State as a result.

Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Illinois State Constitution)
George Mason says you're a lying sack of shit
No, he doesn't and you can't make an argument to support your ad hominem. Unequal for pay purposes?
 
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
You posted a law from a State in the U.S. not a law from the Federal State, imbecile. A 'well regulated' militia does not mean prohibiting the ownership of firearms no matter what fairy tale you wish to spin.
as I have said many times he does not understand the meaning of what he post.
 
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
You posted a law from a State in the U.S. not a law from the Federal State, imbecile. A 'well regulated' militia does not mean prohibiting the ownership of firearms no matter what fairy tale you wish to spin.
lol. Our Second Amendment is about States' right.
 
Our Second Amendment is quite clear about the rationale and "central authority":

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.
More made up fairy tales. It doesn't say "central authority" and you left out a lot of verbiage such as "to provide for" and "may be employed" or "such part of them"....(taken from YOUR prior post). The Second Amendment does not provide ANY rationale for a "central authority" to prohibit the ownership of firearms or their use. Instead, it commands the government to ASSIST in organizing an armed population from time to time as may be needed. You asshats sure like to make shit up.
What is this?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
well then why is it that California does not have a well-regulated militia?
You are the one claiming it. Prove it. I say it does.
 
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
You posted a law from a State in the U.S. not a law from the Federal State, imbecile. A 'well regulated' militia does not mean prohibiting the ownership of firearms no matter what fairy tale you wish to spin.
as I have said many times he does not understand the meaning of what he post.
Right-wingers are clueless and Causeless.
 
No, it isn't you ignorant right wing Russian tool.

The People are the Militia.

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
The People are made up of individuals, Mr. Marxist. In America those individuals have been guided by Judeo Christian morals and values. Marxist and Marxist tools like you would take away the moral base of our American society and make human beings in control of the so-called 'collective.' When the 'collective' has no moral base it is easy to get them to do most anything. Including disarming themselves, murdering millions of Jews and lately, closing down a whole country and mandate the wearing of nose-diapers. You are so lost I fear you're already gone. Sad really.
Militia and the People are collective and plural not Individual and singular. And, well regulated militia have literal recourse to our Second Amendment when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union; Becuase of the Collective nature of the Organization.

The unorganized militia, as Individuals of the People do not have literal recourse to our Second Amendment for their Individual selves due to that fact and are subject to the police power of their State as a result.

Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Illinois State Constitution)
George Mason says you're a lying sack of shit
No, he doesn't and you can't make an argument to support your ad hominem. Unequal for pay purposes?
yes he does disagree with you
 
Well, this could get interesting...


View attachment 478215
He's right....thus the 21st eliminating the 18th. Know your history.
But more than that, all of the amendments are subject to regulation and the laws passed to enforce them
how does a forced state controlled religion sound to you? with a mandatory contribution of 20% of your income to that religion? not including your income tax?
 
lol. Our Second Amendment is about States' right.
Why because you say so? There is no apostrophe after "State" you simpleton. Much less does it read "States" you fool.
Because I know how to read. And the apostrophe means it is possessive.

Only right-wingers are that clueless and that Causeless; why do y'all want to be taken seriously?
 
No, it isn't you ignorant right wing Russian tool.

The People are the Militia.

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
The People are made up of individuals, Mr. Marxist. In America those individuals have been guided by Judeo Christian morals and values. Marxist and Marxist tools like you would take away the moral base of our American society and make human beings in control of the so-called 'collective.' When the 'collective' has no moral base it is easy to get them to do most anything. Including disarming themselves, murdering millions of Jews and lately, closing down a whole country and mandate the wearing of nose-diapers. You are so lost I fear you're already gone. Sad really.
Militia and the People are collective and plural not Individual and singular. And, well regulated militia have literal recourse to our Second Amendment when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union; Becuase of the Collective nature of the Organization.

The unorganized militia, as Individuals of the People do not have literal recourse to our Second Amendment for their Individual selves due to that fact and are subject to the police power of their State as a result.

Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Illinois State Constitution)
George Mason says you're a lying sack of shit
No, he doesn't and you can't make an argument to support your ad hominem. Unequal for pay purposes?
yes he does disagree with you
Persons who only have fallacy in their reasoning never do.
 
Leo merely has lousy reading, word knowledge, and comprehension skills.
Typical Marxist turn around, accuse others of what you yourself are doing. Did you get that from your "Rules For Radicals" Marxist 'bible?"
I would agree with you, but I resort to the fewest fallacies, unlike those of the Opposing View.
 
well then why is it that California does not have a well-regulated militia?
Danny is trying to conflate rights in individual states with federal rights, he's a marxist tool.
Leo merely has lousy reading, word knowledge, and comprehension skills.
why is it that California does not have a well-regulated militia?
We do. You simply appeal to ignorance, like right-wingers are wont to do by custom and habit.
 
well then why is it that California does not have a well-regulated militia?
Danny is trying to conflate rights in individual states with federal rights, he's a marxist tool.
Leo merely has lousy reading, word knowledge, and comprehension skills.
why is it that California does not have a well-regulated militia?
There are 121,000 law enforcement officers and all these marine and army bases. I'm sure they're all armed and well regulated.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top