Has the United States become a Terrorist Organization; Killing Americans over Turtles

[The2ndAmendment]

then get your votes together and get the law changed.

The law is unconstitutional. Article IV, Section 3 does not apply to US territories within the boundaries of a State.

Get yo votes together and amend the Constitution to change it.

 

[KissMy]

Let's all be honest, in the absence of MSM, had the Alternative Media not been there they would have gone full Ruby Ridge on them.

The fact that the feds arrived in full military gear should be TERRIFying enough.

You Repubs are in love with the police state. Reap what you sowed.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

You Repubs are in love with the police state. Reap what you sowed.

Neocons love it, they started it, the Progressives enhanced and honed it.

The moderate left and right in the middle are saying "WTF is this"

 

[nodoginnafight]

then get your votes together and get the law changed.

The law is unconstitutional. Article IV, Section 3 does not apply to US territories within the boundaries of a State.

Get yo votes together and amend the Constitution to change it.

LOL - I never made mention of Article IV, Section 3.
It is not the Constitutional foundation for the point I have been making in this discussion.

Where on earth did you get such an idea?

Oh wait .... lemme guess .... a satire site?

 

[The2ndAmendment]

then get your votes together and get the law changed.

The law is unconstitutional. Article IV, Section 3 does not apply to US territories within the boundaries of a State.

Get yo votes together and amend the Constitution to change it.

LOL - I never made mention of Article IV, Section 3.
It is not the Constitutional foundation for the point I have been making in this discussion.

Where on earth did you get such an idea?

Oh wait .... lemme guess .... a satire site?

Had I simply said the law is unconstitutional, you would have immediately quoted Art IV Sec 3, whilst purposely ignoring all the case law and Ratification debates that made it clear that the Admission of a State into the Union renders this clause operable for all US territories contained therein.

 

[nodoginnafight]

The law is unconstitutional. Article IV, Section 3 does not apply to US territories within the boundaries of a State.

Get yo votes together and amend the Constitution to change it.

LOL - I never made mention of Article IV, Section 3.
It is not the Constitutional foundation for the point I have been making in this discussion.

Where on earth did you get such an idea?

Oh wait .... lemme guess .... a satire site?

Had I simply said the law is unconstitutional, you would have immediately quoted Art IV Sec 3, whilst purposely ignoring all the case law and Ratification debates that made it clear that the Admission of a State into the Union renders this clause operable for all US territories contained therein.

No I wouldn't. So you decided to try to make my argument for me and then argue with yourself.

Very shrewd.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The law is unconstitutional. Article IV, Section 3 does not apply to US territories within the boundaries of a State.

Get yo votes together and amend the Constitution to change it.

LOL - I never made mention of Article IV, Section 3.
It is not the Constitutional foundation for the point I have been making in this discussion.

Where on earth did you get such an idea?

Oh wait .... lemme guess .... a satire site?

Had I simply said the law is unconstitutional, you would have immediately quoted Art IV Sec 3, whilst purposely ignoring all the case law and Ratification debates that made it clear that the Admission of a State into the Union renders this clause operable for all US territories contained therein.

1. There is no "case law" that says what you think it does. Article 4 section 3 most certainly does apply to federal land within states.

2. Even if your argument was true (it's not), the Nevada state constitution also explicitly gives control and ownership of public lands in Nevada to the federal government.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

1. There is no "case law" that says what you think it does. Article 4 section 3 most certainly does apply to federal land within states.

2. Even if your argument was true (it's not), the Nevada state constitution also explicitly gives control and ownership of public lands in Nevada to the federal government.

If what you're saying is true, how come people living on all that Federal Land are considered Citizens of Nevada and are able to vote and receive Nevada driver's licenses? Should these people be be of the same legal status as those in Washington DC?

Oh right, they don't have the same legal status as DC residents, because Nevada is the Sovereign of all US territory contained within its boundaries.

Do Nevada's laws become null and void on these federal lands? If I commit a violent crime on these lands, am I charged under federal law or Nevada law?

Are people living on these federal lands barred from voting in Nevada elections?

See your train of thought is inconsistent with reality.

 

[nodoginnafight]

It always cracks me up when the folks who yell and scream about the Constitution the most - are the ones who know the least about the Constitution.

Maybe they assume everyone else knows as little about it as they do, and they can con them into thinking it supports their position.

Just funny stuff

 

[The2ndAmendment]

It always cracks me up when the folks who yell and scream about the Constitution the most - are the ones who know the least about the Constitution.

Maybe they assume everyone else knows as little about it as they do, and they can con them into thinking it supports their position.

Just funny stuff

What does "shall not be infringed" mean to you, since you claim to be a Constitutional expert?

 

[nodoginnafight]

It always cracks me up when the folks who yell and scream about the Constitution the most - are the ones who know the least about the Constitution.

Maybe they assume everyone else knows as little about it as they do, and they can con them into thinking it supports their position.

Just funny stuff

What does "shall not be infringed" mean to you, since you claim to be a Constitutional expert?

Please show me my quote saying I am a Constitutional expert.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

1. There is no "case law" that says what you think it does. Article 4 section 3 most certainly does apply to federal land within states.

2. Even if your argument was true (it's not), the Nevada state constitution also explicitly gives control and ownership of public lands in Nevada to the federal government.

If what you're saying is true, how come people living on all that Federal Land are considered Citizens of Nevada and are able to vote and receive Nevada driver's licenses? Should these people be be of the same legal status as those in Washington DC?

Oh right, they don't have the same legal status as DC residents, because Nevada is the Sovereign of all US territory contained within its boundaries.

Do Nevada's laws become null and void on these federal lands? If I commit a violent crime on these lands, am I charged under federal law or Nevada law?

Are people living on these federal lands barred from voting in Nevada elections?

See your train of thought is inconsistent with reality.

For the hundredth time: No one lives on BLM land, aside from possible vagrants.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Are people living on these federal lands barred from voting in Nevada elections?

Who? The Cows?!?!?

 

[The2ndAmendment]

For the hundredth time: No one lives on BLM land, aside from possible vagrants.

Is your claim that 87% of Nevada is uninhabited?

 

[nodoginnafight]

This one is all yours Doc, LOL.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

This one is all yours Doc, LOL.

He just claimed 87% of Nevada is uninhabited, indeed it is all his, that's a pretty wild claim, a such an extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof.

He also didn't' address criminal and civil jurisdictions, such as driving violations or violent crimes.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

For the hundredth time: No one lives on BLM land, aside from possible vagrants.

Is your claim that 87% of Nevada is uninhabited?

Yes, that's pretty much exactly what I'm saying.

Some of that 87% are military bases, and people live on those. But the vast majority of the state is barren desert that no one lives on - and that's the BLM land.

Take a look at a satellite picture of Nevada at night, and you'll notice how little of the state, in terms of area, is populated.

 

[nodoginnafight]

For the hundredth time: No one lives on BLM land, aside from possible vagrants.

Is your claim that 87% of Nevada is uninhabited?

Yes, that's pretty much exactly what I'm saying.

Some of that 87% are military bases, and people live on those. But the vast majority of the state is barren desert that no one lives on - and that's the BLM land.

Take a look at a satellite picture of Nevada at night, and you'll notice how little of the state, in terms of area, is populated.

You are a better man than I. Much more patient. Have a great weekend.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

This one is all yours Doc, LOL.

He just claimed 87% of Nevada is uninhabited, indeed it is all his, that's a pretty wild claim, a such an extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof.

He also didn't' address criminal and civil jurisdictions, such as driving violations or violent crimes.

It is not a "wild claim", it's something that anyone who's spent any time at all in the west would know.

Have you ever been to Nevada?

 

[The2ndAmendment]

It always cracks me up when the folks who yell and scream about the Constitution the most - are the ones who know the least about the Constitution.

Maybe they assume everyone else knows as little about it as they do, and they can con them into thinking it supports their position.

Just funny stuff

What does "shall not be infringed" mean to you, since you claim to be a Constitutional expert?

Please show me my quote saying I am a Constitutional expert.

You've assumed the authority to declare who does and who does not know about the Constitution.