Explain to me, the lawful meaning of "SHALL"

[whitehall]

Anybody who compares one of the Bill of Rights in the Constitution to some obscure provision of the Tax Code is afflicted with TDS.

 

[B. Kidd]

Ad hominem smears of me don't change the fact that you're a total ignoramus about this topic.

Calling you Ignoble is not a personal affront, clearly in your case it is high praise.

I posted the citation to Black's Law Dictionary and gave an accurate layman's translation, ignoramus shithead.

Grow the **** up.

I have Ballentine's Law Dictionary - 3rd Ed. 1969. To wit:

"Shall, providing generally, but not always, a mandate, when appearing in a Constitutional provision" 16 Am J2d, ordinarily, a word of mandate, the equivalent of "must" where appearing in a statute.

Are you capable of comprehending this ^^^ paragraph?

"Shall, providing generally, but not always, a mandate, when appearing in a Constitutional provision" 16 Am J2d, ordinarily, a word of mandate, the equivalent of "must" where appearing in a statute.

Reading for comprehension really isn't your strong suit, is it?

Had enough of getting your ass handed to you yet, Psycho?

Read my posts carefully you f'n idiot, I asked a question in the OP.

In my experience Shall is mandatory, reading orders of probation which include terms and conditions such as "You shall not own, possess or have in your custody and control a firearm"; You shall not drink alcohol;you will report to your Probation Officer as directed. If they do violate these shall not's we would arrest them when a no bail bench warrant is issued at the PO's request and signed by the judge.

Reality reflects that the 2nd A. phrase, shall not be infringed is not mandatory, as too many situations exist where that right is not enforced. Read Heller, moron.

Go pound nails you ignorant jackass.

Shall is mandatory to you because you are an unhinged lefty Stalinist!

 

[Oddball]

Anybody who compares one of the Bill of Rights in the Constitution to some obscure provision of the Tax Code is afflicted with TDS.

No, they're afflicted with sheer stupidity, along with an inability/unwillingness to understand the goofy nuances of legalese.

Does this mean that I necessarily approve of this sort of Orwellian twisting of semantics?...Decidedly not.

But if you don't understand the law and your rights, then you have no rights.

 

[nat4900]

Believe it or not.....on another popular thread, Trump "defenders" are arguing that the term (verb) SHALL really means a politte "may" when House committee members cite the existing LAW as to why Trump's tax returns should be handed over.

But, this is not the only moronic attempt by Trump sycophants.....

Since the Mueller report was handed over to the Trump stooge Barr, it has become obvious that the existing DOJ policy places a sitting president ABOVE the law since it clearly states that such a sitting president cannot be indicted......essentially, a sitting president is ABOVE the scrutiny and repercussions for acts committed by any other citizen.....

However, when it comes to handing over Trump's tax returns, his ass kissers DO revert to making Trump just another citizen who must be "protected" from the meanies who are investigating his probable misdeeds.

I don't expect for Trump followers to take this obvious hypocrisy too seriously....after all, there are strict rules within the Trump cult and any attack on his orange ass SHALL not be tolerate.....LOL

 

[kyzr]

WTF is your whiny OP about? needs a link.

 

[Crepitus]

Believe it or not.....on another popular thread, Trump "defenders" are arguing that the term (verb) SHALL really means a politte "may" when House committee members cite the existing LAW as to why Trump's tax returns should be handed over.

But, this is not the only moronic attempt by Trump sycophants.....

Since the Mueller report was handed over to the Trump stooge Barr, it has become obvious that the existing DOJ policy places a sitting president ABOVE the law since it clearly states that such a sitting president cannot be indicted......essentially, a sitting president is ABOVE the scrutiny and repercussions for acts committed by any other citizen.....

However, when it comes to handing over Trump's tax returns, his ass kissers DO revert to making Trump just another citizen who must be "protected" from the meanies who are investigating his probable misdeeds.

I don't expect for Trump followers to take this obvious hypocrisy too seriously....after all, there are strict rules within the Trump cult and any attack on his orange ass SHALL not be tolerate.....LOL

So then "shall not be infringed" is only a guideline?

 

[Oddball]

Ad hominem smears of me don't change the fact that you're a total ignoramus about this topic.

Calling you Ignoble is not a personal affront, clearly in your case it is high praise.

I posted the citation to Black's Law Dictionary and gave an accurate layman's translation, ignoramus shithead.

Grow the **** up.

I have Ballentine's Law Dictionary - 3rd Ed. 1969. To wit:

"Shall, providing generally, but not always, a mandate, when appearing in a Constitutional provision" 16 Am J2d, ordinarily, a word of mandate, the equivalent of "must" where appearing in a statute.

Are you capable of comprehending this ^^^ paragraph?

"Shall, providing generally, but not always, a mandate, when appearing in a Constitutional provision" 16 Am J2d, ordinarily, a word of mandate, the equivalent of "must" where appearing in a statute.

Reading for comprehension really isn't your strong suit, is it?

Had enough of getting your ass handed to you yet, Psycho?

Read my posts carefully you f'n idiot, I asked a question in the OP.

In my experience Shall is mandatory, reading orders of probation which include terms and conditions such as "You shall not own, possess or have in your custody and control a firearm"; You shall not drink alcohol;you will report to your Probation Officer as directed. If they do violate these shall not's we would arrest them when a no bail bench warrant is issued at the PO's request and signed by the judge.

Reality reflects that the 2nd A. phrase, shall not be infringed is not mandatory, as too many situations exist where that right is not enforced. Read Heller, moron.

Go pound nails you ignorant jackass.

And I explained to you, in plain English (which your arrogance and confirmation bias prevent you from comprehending), the legal definition of the words "shall" and "must"....Again, in the hope that this might permeate your concrete skull; if those words are used in a manner that they can be construed to compel you to surrender your rights, they then read as the permissive "may", implying that you "may not" if you so choose....This is not my opinion, it is a point of settled law.

The 2nd Amendment, in this context, is entirely irrelevant, and all your haughty and ignorant bluster cannot make it relevant.

 

[B. Kidd]

Believe it or not.....on another popular thread, Trump "defenders" are arguing that the term (verb) SHALL really means a politte "may" when House committee members cite the existing LAW as to why Trump's tax returns should be handed over.

But, this is not the only moronic attempt by Trump sycophants.....

Since the Mueller report was handed over to the Trump stooge Barr, it has become obvious that the existing DOJ policy places a sitting president ABOVE the law since it clearly states that such a sitting president cannot be indicted......essentially, a sitting president is ABOVE the scrutiny and repercussions for acts committed by any other citizen.....

However, when it comes to handing over Trump's tax returns, his ass kissers DO revert to making Trump just another citizen who must be "protected" from the meanies who are investigating his probable misdeeds.

I don't expect for Trump followers to take this obvious hypocrisy too seriously....after all, there are strict rules within the Trump cult and any attack on his orange ass SHALL not be tolerate.....LOL

Meet the new thread....
Same as the old thread.
Only a loser ***** like the OP would construct a new thread from an old one.
Mods, please merge.

 

[Pete7469]

WTF is your whiny OP about? needs a link.

It's basically the same asinine shit. The bed wetter hates Trump. Rinse and repeat all day long, until Deanturd takes over and reposts all the same bullshit, then Lakoturd takes over and runs it's spam bot along with some of Fakey's.

It's not really worth paying attention too.


.

 

[Butch_Coolidge]

He’s not turning over his tax returns, not being impeached, and he’s going to be in office through 2024. He will be in your lib dim head 24/7 until then. He will be the last thing you think about before you attempt to sleep, butt ******* you in your nightmares, and fresh in your tortured [emoji37] mind when you wake. Do yourself a favor, and renew your meds. It’s been over two years. Dims are pussies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Harry Dresden]

Believe it or not.....on another popular thread, Trump "defenders" are arguing that the term (verb) SHALL really means a politte "may" when House committee members cite the existing LAW as to why Trump's tax returns should be handed over.

But, this is not the only moronic attempt by Trump sycophants.....

Since the Mueller report was handed over to the Trump stooge Barr, it has become obvious that the existing DOJ policy places a sitting president ABOVE the law since it clearly states that such a sitting president cannot be indicted......essentially, a sitting president is ABOVE the scrutiny and repercussions for acts committed by any other citizen.....

However, when it comes to handing over Trump's tax returns, his ass kissers DO revert to making Trump just another citizen who must be "protected" from the meanies who are investigating his probable misdeeds.

I don't expect for Trump followers to take this obvious hypocrisy too seriously....after all, there are strict rules within the Trump cult and any attack on his orange ass SHALL not be tolerate.....LOL

you mean that thread ran from after getting your ass handed to you again?....that one?....

 

[TemplarKormac]

Believe it or not.....on another popular thread, Trump "defenders" are arguing that the term (verb) SHALL really means a politte "may" when House committee members cite the existing LAW as to why Trump's tax returns should be handed over.

But, this is not the only moronic attempt by Trump sycophants.....

Since the Mueller report was handed over to the Trump stooge Barr, it has become obvious that the existing DOJ policy places a sitting president ABOVE the law since it clearly states that such a sitting president cannot be indicted......essentially, a sitting president is ABOVE the scrutiny and repercussions for acts committed by any other citizen.....

However, when it comes to handing over Trump's tax returns, his ass kissers DO revert to making Trump just another citizen who must be "protected" from the meanies who are investigating his probable misdeeds.

I don't expect for Trump followers to take this obvious hypocrisy too seriously....after all, there are strict rules within the Trump cult and any attack on his orange ass SHALL not be tolerate.....LOL

To be fair...

Shall Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Believe it or not.....on another popular thread, Trump "defenders" are arguing that the term (verb) SHALL really means a politte "may" when House committee members cite the existing LAW as to why Trump's tax returns should be handed over.

Hate to burst your bubble, nat. For that I am truly sorry. Not.

WHAT IS SHALL?

As used in statutes and similar instruments, this word is generally imperative or mandatory; but it may be construed as merely permissive or directory, (as equivalent to “may,”) to carry out the legislative intention and In cases where no right or benefit to any one depends on its being taken in the imperative sense, and where no public or private right is impaired by its interpretation in the other sense. Also, as against the government, “shall” is to be construed as “may,” unless a contrary intention is manifest.

What is SHALL? definition of SHALL (Black's Law Dictionary)

You gonna run away again?

 

[Harry Dresden]

Believe it or not.....on another popular thread, Trump "defenders" are arguing that the term (verb) SHALL really means a politte "may" when House committee members cite the existing LAW as to why Trump's tax returns should be handed over.

But, this is not the only moronic attempt by Trump sycophants.....

Since the Mueller report was handed over to the Trump stooge Barr, it has become obvious that the existing DOJ policy places a sitting president ABOVE the law since it clearly states that such a sitting president cannot be indicted......essentially, a sitting president is ABOVE the scrutiny and repercussions for acts committed by any other citizen.....

However, when it comes to handing over Trump's tax returns, his ass kissers DO revert to making Trump just another citizen who must be "protected" from the meanies who are investigating his probable misdeeds.

I don't expect for Trump followers to take this obvious hypocrisy too seriously....after all, there are strict rules within the Trump cult and any attack on his orange ass SHALL not be tolerate.....LOL

So then "shall not be infringed" is only a guideline?

the supreme court ruled on the meaning of shall and must in a statute....must means its mandatory, while shall means may.....so shall not be infringed means it may be...

 

[JGalt]

Believe it or not.....on another popular thread, Trump "defenders" are arguing that the term (verb) SHALL really means a politte "may" when House committee members cite the existing LAW as to why Trump's tax returns should be handed over.

But, this is not the only moronic attempt by Trump sycophants.....

Since the Mueller report was handed over to the Trump stooge Barr, it has become obvious that the existing DOJ policy places a sitting president ABOVE the law since it clearly states that such a sitting president cannot be indicted......essentially, a sitting president is ABOVE the scrutiny and repercussions for acts committed by any other citizen.....

However, when it comes to handing over Trump's tax returns, his ass kissers DO revert to making Trump just another citizen who must be "protected" from the meanies who are investigating his probable misdeeds.

I don't expect for Trump followers to take this obvious hypocrisy too seriously....after all, there are strict rules within the Trump cult and any attack on his orange ass SHALL not be tolerate.....LOL

Dude, you are a sad clown, but I still find you funny. You know there's nothing you can do to stop Donald J. Trump, so you desperately try to drive his supporters away?

Not the sharpest tack in the box, are you?

 

[Oddball]

Believe it or not.....on another popular thread, Trump "defenders" are arguing that the term (verb) SHALL really means a politte "may" when House committee members cite the existing LAW as to why Trump's tax returns should be handed over.

But, this is not the only moronic attempt by Trump sycophants.....

Since the Mueller report was handed over to the Trump stooge Barr, it has become obvious that the existing DOJ policy places a sitting president ABOVE the law since it clearly states that such a sitting president cannot be indicted......essentially, a sitting president is ABOVE the scrutiny and repercussions for acts committed by any other citizen.....

However, when it comes to handing over Trump's tax returns, his ass kissers DO revert to making Trump just another citizen who must be "protected" from the meanies who are investigating his probable misdeeds.

I don't expect for Trump followers to take this obvious hypocrisy too seriously....after all, there are strict rules within the Trump cult and any attack on his orange ass SHALL not be tolerate.....LOL

you mean that thread ran from after getting your ass handed to you again?....that one?....

A-yup.

 

[Crepitus]

Believe it or not.....on another popular thread, Trump "defenders" are arguing that the term (verb) SHALL really means a politte "may" when House committee members cite the existing LAW as to why Trump's tax returns should be handed over.

But, this is not the only moronic attempt by Trump sycophants.....

Since the Mueller report was handed over to the Trump stooge Barr, it has become obvious that the existing DOJ policy places a sitting president ABOVE the law since it clearly states that such a sitting president cannot be indicted......essentially, a sitting president is ABOVE the scrutiny and repercussions for acts committed by any other citizen.....

However, when it comes to handing over Trump's tax returns, his ass kissers DO revert to making Trump just another citizen who must be "protected" from the meanies who are investigating his probable misdeeds.

I don't expect for Trump followers to take this obvious hypocrisy too seriously....after all, there are strict rules within the Trump cult and any attack on his orange ass SHALL not be tolerate.....LOL

So then "shall not be infringed" is only a guideline?

the supreme court ruled on the meaning of shall and must in a statute....must means its mandatory, while shall means may.....so shall not be infringed means it may be...

Well gun control just got easier.

 

[Oddball]

the supreme court ruled on the meaning of shall and must in a statute....must means its mandatory, while shall means may.....so shall not be infringed means it may be...

Not quite.

If "shall" can be construed to you being forced to surrender your rights (i.e. the 2nd Amendment) it then legally reads as "may" (or may not).

 

[Harry Dresden]

Believe it or not.....on another popular thread, Trump "defenders" are arguing that the term (verb) SHALL really means a politte "may" when House committee members cite the existing LAW as to why Trump's tax returns should be handed over.

But, this is not the only moronic attempt by Trump sycophants.....

Since the Mueller report was handed over to the Trump stooge Barr, it has become obvious that the existing DOJ policy places a sitting president ABOVE the law since it clearly states that such a sitting president cannot be indicted......essentially, a sitting president is ABOVE the scrutiny and repercussions for acts committed by any other citizen.....

However, when it comes to handing over Trump's tax returns, his ass kissers DO revert to making Trump just another citizen who must be "protected" from the meanies who are investigating his probable misdeeds.

I don't expect for Trump followers to take this obvious hypocrisy too seriously....after all, there are strict rules within the Trump cult and any attack on his orange ass SHALL not be tolerate.....LOL

So then "shall not be infringed" is only a guideline?

the supreme court ruled on the meaning of shall and must in a statute....must means its mandatory, while shall means may.....so shall not be infringed means it may be...

Well gun control just got easier.

possibly....shall is one of the most litigated words in the English language....because it can also mean "may, will or must."

 

[Harry Dresden]

the supreme court ruled on the meaning of shall and must in a statute....must means its mandatory, while shall means may.....so shall not be infringed means it may be...

Not quite.

If "shall" can be construed to you being forced to surrender your rights (i.e. the 2nd Amendment) it then legally reads as "may" (or may not).

post 15....