NRA issues threatening video to intimidate opponents

[Taz]

But it's not just nukes that they have more than your guns, they have tanks, mortars, bombs, cruise missiles AA missiles... all kinds of things that you're not allowed to have. Nukes was just an example.

You should be able to have all those things as long as you do it without violating the rights of other citizens.

And the hypocrite who thinks children have 2nd amendment rights but not 14th amendment equal protection rights trying to show this is a conflicting argument is hysterical

I agree that you SHOULD have the right to these weapon, but we don't, that's my point. My other point is that nobody seems to care about that, they only care about guns, in a cherry-picking kind of way.

As you know, I do support those rights. But of course the discussion is more about guns since that is the primary issue that effects us right now. You cannot assign to your opposition what you think their priority should be.

I am against capital punishment. But it's not a big issue to me. I wouldn't go to a demonstration.

I cannot agree with my theoretical right to nuclear weapons being blocked by our government, but I see no practical application of that since I don't have any idea why I would want them or if I did how I would do that without killing my neighbors with radiation.

It's not a real argument to tell people you want to assign our priorities.

Your restricting my ability to defend myself is directly impacting my life today. Of course that's my priority

But a rich Arab-American might want to purchase a nuke or any other weapons we're currently not allowed to have, so practical applications are out there. You're just happy cherry-picking your outrage. Got it.

So you treat every view you have with the same priority? Of course you don't you stupid bimbo

So you don't disagree with me. Good for you. But does that make YOU a bimbo as well?

 

[kaz]

So race is OK with you to discriminate but not religion. Thanks for clarifying.

You didn't answer my question ... again. If children cannot be denied the right to buy a gun, how can you force a children to take a nap? How are you so dim you can't grasp that contradiction?

I don't get the analogy with the nap, do you have a right to a nap in the Constitution?

I'm not saying Arabs shouldn't be able to buy guns (although not a terrible idea ). Geez, lucky for you that you didn't have to pass an IQ test to get a weapon.

I keep saying "force" a child to take a nap. I also said you put them in a crib and detain them against their will. You admitted you can't do that to an adult. That is a violation of equal protection if the child has 14th amendment rights. You cannot forcibly detain an adult. If a child has the same rights, you can't forcibly detain them either. How do you not get that?

You're arguing the child has 2nd amendment rights, it does not have 14th amendment rights. You lose.

You really aren't very smart. No wonder your other arguments are so bad.

there are many rights that are limited until adulthood.... I'm not quite sure what the confusion is here.

You meant to say that to Taz, not me. That's exactly what I'm arguing. It's Taz who's arguing children have the same rights as adults. You only look at sides and which one they're on, not what they are saying, don't you?

I'm not arguing that children have the same rights, I'm getting you to acknowledge that you're ok with putting limits on the 2nd Amendment, so that your argument to not touch the 2nd is moot.

Why would the second be different than any other rights? The only amendment that states an age is voting. Note I keep saying that, our rights are equal. You're the one saying it's not, it's not, it's not. And you think that makes me the extreme one. You're a dim bulb. Seriously, listen to Blamery and let your husband do the thinking for you

 

[kaz]

So race is OK with you to discriminate but not religion. Thanks for clarifying.

You didn't answer my question ... again. If children cannot be denied the right to buy a gun, how can you force a children to take a nap? How are you so dim you can't grasp that contradiction?

I don't get the analogy with the nap, do you have a right to a nap in the Constitution?

I'm not saying Arabs shouldn't be able to buy guns (although not a terrible idea ). Geez, lucky for you that you didn't have to pass an IQ test to get a weapon.

I keep saying "force" a child to take a nap. I also said you put them in a crib and detain them against their will. You admitted you can't do that to an adult. That is a violation of equal protection if the child has 14th amendment rights. You cannot forcibly detain an adult. If a child has the same rights, you can't forcibly detain them either. How do you not get that?

You're arguing the child has 2nd amendment rights, it does not have 14th amendment rights. You lose.

You really aren't very smart. No wonder your other arguments are so bad.

"The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment is said to apply to children"
Children's Rights

Neither of your links support your position.

You need to turn yourself into police for violating the Constitutional rights of your children by holding them captive against their will. You should write down every time you did that so they can charge you with each count

My position is that you're ok with limiting the 2nd Amendment. So stop cherry-picking your outrage.

I'm "cherry picking" my outrage by saying the 2nd amendment is the same as the other rights protected int he Bill of Rights in that it applies to adults, not children? Not making it different than other amendments is "cherry picking?"

They don't have dictionaries in Nit Wit Ville? Gawd you're an airhead

 

[kaz]

OMG. OK, fine, I'll really, really dumb this down for you.

The equal protection clause says you cannot treat people differently under the law.

There is no age stated on the equal protection clause, there is no age stated on the second amendment.

You agreed you cannot detain an adult against their will, but you are arguing that you can detain a child against their will.

You are contradicting yourself. You are arguing equal protection does not apply to children, but the second amendment does apply to children.

That's what happens when you argue the stupid crap you argue. You contradict yourself all the time and you're just too dim witted to see it.

You cannot have it both ways. Either it's Unconstitutional to force a child to take a nap, or it's not Unconstitutional for a child to not be able to buy a gun

A child WANTS to take a nap, I'm not forcing anyone to take a nap. I've had children, so I know. And I've NEVER locked a child in a crib, you must be a sicko. So, um... looks like you failed EPICALLY again.

You never forcibly detained your children. You never made your children stay in their crib, a playpen or their room. If they wanted to wander off in the store, go into the basement unsupervised, get down from the table, go into the yard, run out into the street, you tried to persuade them, but you never forced them to stay anywhere against their will.

Gawd you're a liar.

It's hilarious how every time you're pressed, your arguments get even more pathetic

That's different than a nap, now you're adding all kinds of things. So let see, my kids have wandered off in a store, went in the basement unsupervised, got down from the table on their own, went into the yard (assuming they were old enough to know how to open a door), never ran out into the street though because they're not retards, and I can't get them to go or stay anywhere they don't want to be. Does that answer your questions?

Yes, you have a double standard. You cannot kidnap an adult. By the 14th amendment, that means you cannot kidnap a child. Which you did.

Notice how you claim your point is that you're just establishing there are limits on the bill of rights. Here's how your argument goes.

If you can establish any limit no matter how contrived, then you can limit the amendment in any way you want to limit it.

If children cannot buy guns, then you can ban guns and because the second amendment means nothing. It can be limited in one way, therefore it can be limited in any and all ways.

It's a bull shit argument

There can only be a kidnapping if you have a complainant. My children never made such a claim to police, but I feel sorry for you, because apparently, yours have.

Wrong. Not reporting a crime doesn't mean it's not a crime.

kaz: The 14th amendment applies to adults
kaz: The 2nd amendment applies to adults

Taz: OMG, you're cherry picking!

You're dumb to the point of being an embarrassment to leftists. Keep posting, my brainless twit little dear. Scare the children what could happen to them

 

[kaz]

You should be able to have all those things as long as you do it without violating the rights of other citizens.

And the hypocrite who thinks children have 2nd amendment rights but not 14th amendment equal protection rights trying to show this is a conflicting argument is hysterical

I agree that you SHOULD have the right to these weapon, but we don't, that's my point. My other point is that nobody seems to care about that, they only care about guns, in a cherry-picking kind of way.

As you know, I do support those rights. But of course the discussion is more about guns since that is the primary issue that effects us right now. You cannot assign to your opposition what you think their priority should be.

I am against capital punishment. But it's not a big issue to me. I wouldn't go to a demonstration.

I cannot agree with my theoretical right to nuclear weapons being blocked by our government, but I see no practical application of that since I don't have any idea why I would want them or if I did how I would do that without killing my neighbors with radiation.

It's not a real argument to tell people you want to assign our priorities.

Your restricting my ability to defend myself is directly impacting my life today. Of course that's my priority

But a rich Arab-American might want to purchase a nuke or any other weapons we're currently not allowed to have, so practical applications are out there. You're just happy cherry-picking your outrage. Got it.

So you treat every view you have with the same priority? Of course you don't you stupid bimbo

So you don't disagree with me. Good for you. But does that make YOU a bimbo as well?

What? Prioritizing means cherry picking? They don't have dictionaries in Stupid Twit Ville?

 

[hunarcy]

Don't forget to mention where we're all supposed to be as stupid as Taz and believe there's some direct corollary between firearms and radioactive materials.

So our Constitution purposely leaves us outgunned by a tyrannical government?

Only if you assume the government is going to nuke its own territory, and leave itself governing nothing but empty, radioactive wasteland.

But then, you're probably stupid enough to actually think that.

But it's not just nukes that they have more than your guns, they have tanks, mortars, bombs, cruise missiles AA missiles... all kinds of things that you're not allowed to have. Nukes was just an example.

And again, your point is WHAT, precisely? That we should just concede our freedoms, disarm entirely, and become vulnerable wards of the state? I mean, seriously. Relate this to some kind of intelligent, logical, mature statement of position, here.

It's to point out that you're ok with your 2nd Amendment rights being infringed on, so your argument about protecting your 2nd rights in the gun debate is bullshit.

But you aren’t pointing that out. You are merely exposing your ignorance of the real issues

 

[Taz]

I don't get the analogy with the nap, do you have a right to a nap in the Constitution?

I'm not saying Arabs shouldn't be able to buy guns (although not a terrible idea ). Geez, lucky for you that you didn't have to pass an IQ test to get a weapon.

I keep saying "force" a child to take a nap. I also said you put them in a crib and detain them against their will. You admitted you can't do that to an adult. That is a violation of equal protection if the child has 14th amendment rights. You cannot forcibly detain an adult. If a child has the same rights, you can't forcibly detain them either. How do you not get that?

You're arguing the child has 2nd amendment rights, it does not have 14th amendment rights. You lose.

You really aren't very smart. No wonder your other arguments are so bad.

"The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment is said to apply to children"
Children's Rights

Neither of your links support your position.

You need to turn yourself into police for violating the Constitutional rights of your children by holding them captive against their will. You should write down every time you did that so they can charge you with each count

My position is that you're ok with limiting the 2nd Amendment. So stop cherry-picking your outrage.

I'm "cherry picking" my outrage by saying the 2nd amendment is the same as the other rights protected int he Bill of Rights in that it applies to adults, not children? Not making it different than other amendments is "cherry picking?"

They don't have dictionaries in Nit Wit Ville? Gawd you're an airhead

I got you to admit hat the 2nd Amendment can be limited. My job is done here.

 

[Taz]

A child WANTS to take a nap, I'm not forcing anyone to take a nap. I've had children, so I know. And I've NEVER locked a child in a crib, you must be a sicko. So, um... looks like you failed EPICALLY again.

You never forcibly detained your children. You never made your children stay in their crib, a playpen or their room. If they wanted to wander off in the store, go into the basement unsupervised, get down from the table, go into the yard, run out into the street, you tried to persuade them, but you never forced them to stay anywhere against their will.

Gawd you're a liar.

It's hilarious how every time you're pressed, your arguments get even more pathetic

That's different than a nap, now you're adding all kinds of things. So let see, my kids have wandered off in a store, went in the basement unsupervised, got down from the table on their own, went into the yard (assuming they were old enough to know how to open a door), never ran out into the street though because they're not retards, and I can't get them to go or stay anywhere they don't want to be. Does that answer your questions?

Yes, you have a double standard. You cannot kidnap an adult. By the 14th amendment, that means you cannot kidnap a child. Which you did.

Notice how you claim your point is that you're just establishing there are limits on the bill of rights. Here's how your argument goes.

If you can establish any limit no matter how contrived, then you can limit the amendment in any way you want to limit it.

If children cannot buy guns, then you can ban guns and because the second amendment means nothing. It can be limited in one way, therefore it can be limited in any and all ways.

It's a bull shit argument

There can only be a kidnapping if you have a complainant. My children never made such a claim to police, but I feel sorry for you, because apparently, yours have.

Wrong. Not reporting a crime doesn't mean it's not a crime.

kaz: The 14th amendment applies to adults
kaz: The 2nd amendment applies to adults

Taz: OMG, you're cherry picking!

You're dumb to the point of being an embarrassment to leftists. Keep posting, my brainless twit little dear. Scare the children what could happen to them

It's not a crime if no one complains that it's a crime. You stand corrected.

If the 2nd applies only to adults, then you're ok with limiting the Amendment, that's all I was trying to prove.

Gawd, you're a ******* doofus.

 

[kaz]

I keep saying "force" a child to take a nap. I also said you put them in a crib and detain them against their will. You admitted you can't do that to an adult. That is a violation of equal protection if the child has 14th amendment rights. You cannot forcibly detain an adult. If a child has the same rights, you can't forcibly detain them either. How do you not get that?

You're arguing the child has 2nd amendment rights, it does not have 14th amendment rights. You lose.

You really aren't very smart. No wonder your other arguments are so bad.

"The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment is said to apply to children"
Children's Rights

Neither of your links support your position.

You need to turn yourself into police for violating the Constitutional rights of your children by holding them captive against their will. You should write down every time you did that so they can charge you with each count

My position is that you're ok with limiting the 2nd Amendment. So stop cherry-picking your outrage.

I'm "cherry picking" my outrage by saying the 2nd amendment is the same as the other rights protected int he Bill of Rights in that it applies to adults, not children? Not making it different than other amendments is "cherry picking?"

They don't have dictionaries in Nit Wit Ville? Gawd you're an airhead

I got you to admit hat the 2nd Amendment can be limited. My job is done here.

I always said it didn't apply to children, brainless twit. So what is it you think you accomplished by somehow getting me to admit what I always said? That is an accomplishment in your mind?

This part is going to go over your head because you're stupid. But I didn't say the 2nd is limited. Saying it's limited is a "what" point. What arms are protected. I said "who" is covered by the second amendment. I said children aren't covered by it. Convicted felons lose the right. Foreigners never have the right. Who is covered by the second is an entirely different question than what is covered by the second.

That was a simple, clear point. You didn't grasp it at all, did you? Bricks are smarter than you are

 

[Taz]

So our Constitution purposely leaves us outgunned by a tyrannical government?

Only if you assume the government is going to nuke its own territory, and leave itself governing nothing but empty, radioactive wasteland.

But then, you're probably stupid enough to actually think that.

But it's not just nukes that they have more than your guns, they have tanks, mortars, bombs, cruise missiles AA missiles... all kinds of things that you're not allowed to have. Nukes was just an example.

And again, your point is WHAT, precisely? That we should just concede our freedoms, disarm entirely, and become vulnerable wards of the state? I mean, seriously. Relate this to some kind of intelligent, logical, mature statement of position, here.

It's to point out that you're ok with your 2nd Amendment rights being infringed on, so your argument about protecting your 2nd rights in the gun debate is bullshit.

But you aren’t pointing that out. You are merely exposing your ignorance of the real issues

No, that was the point all along, to show you 2nd Amendment defenders on guns that you're already ok with limiting the Amendment, and you all fell right into it.

 

[Taz]

"The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment is said to apply to children"
Children's Rights

Neither of your links support your position.

You need to turn yourself into police for violating the Constitutional rights of your children by holding them captive against their will. You should write down every time you did that so they can charge you with each count

My position is that you're ok with limiting the 2nd Amendment. So stop cherry-picking your outrage.

I'm "cherry picking" my outrage by saying the 2nd amendment is the same as the other rights protected int he Bill of Rights in that it applies to adults, not children? Not making it different than other amendments is "cherry picking?"

They don't have dictionaries in Nit Wit Ville? Gawd you're an airhead

I got you to admit hat the 2nd Amendment can be limited. My job is done here.

I always said it didn't apply to children, brainless twit. So what is it you think you accomplished by somehow getting me to admit what I always said? That is an accomplishment in your mind?

This part is going to go over your head because you're stupid. But I didn't say the 2nd is limited. Saying it's limited is a "what" point. What arms are protected. I said "who" is covered by the second amendment. I said children aren't covered by it. Convicted felons lose the right. Foreigners never have the right. Who is covered by the second is an entirely different question than what is covered by the second.

That was a simple, clear point. You didn't grasp it at all, did you? Bricks are smarter than you are

Because all you gun people like to use the 2nd as an inviolable right, which I got you to admit it isn't. I so beat you, go cry on your NRA card.

 

[kaz]

You never forcibly detained your children. You never made your children stay in their crib, a playpen or their room. If they wanted to wander off in the store, go into the basement unsupervised, get down from the table, go into the yard, run out into the street, you tried to persuade them, but you never forced them to stay anywhere against their will.

Gawd you're a liar.

It's hilarious how every time you're pressed, your arguments get even more pathetic

That's different than a nap, now you're adding all kinds of things. So let see, my kids have wandered off in a store, went in the basement unsupervised, got down from the table on their own, went into the yard (assuming they were old enough to know how to open a door), never ran out into the street though because they're not retards, and I can't get them to go or stay anywhere they don't want to be. Does that answer your questions?

Yes, you have a double standard. You cannot kidnap an adult. By the 14th amendment, that means you cannot kidnap a child. Which you did.

Notice how you claim your point is that you're just establishing there are limits on the bill of rights. Here's how your argument goes.

If you can establish any limit no matter how contrived, then you can limit the amendment in any way you want to limit it.

If children cannot buy guns, then you can ban guns and because the second amendment means nothing. It can be limited in one way, therefore it can be limited in any and all ways.

It's a bull shit argument

There can only be a kidnapping if you have a complainant. My children never made such a claim to police, but I feel sorry for you, because apparently, yours have.

Wrong. Not reporting a crime doesn't mean it's not a crime.

kaz: The 14th amendment applies to adults
kaz: The 2nd amendment applies to adults

Taz: OMG, you're cherry picking!

You're dumb to the point of being an embarrassment to leftists. Keep posting, my brainless twit little dear. Scare the children what could happen to them

It's not a crime if no one complains that it's a crime. You stand corrected.

If the 2nd applies only to adults, then you're ok with limiting the Amendment, that's all I was trying to prove.

Gawd, you're a ******* doofus.

You think it's not a crime if no one reports it and I'm a doofus? If I kill a homeless man and no one reports it, it wasn't a crime? I'd love to see you debate a brick ... and lose

 

[kaz]

Neither of your links support your position.

You need to turn yourself into police for violating the Constitutional rights of your children by holding them captive against their will. You should write down every time you did that so they can charge you with each count

My position is that you're ok with limiting the 2nd Amendment. So stop cherry-picking your outrage.

I'm "cherry picking" my outrage by saying the 2nd amendment is the same as the other rights protected int he Bill of Rights in that it applies to adults, not children? Not making it different than other amendments is "cherry picking?"

They don't have dictionaries in Nit Wit Ville? Gawd you're an airhead

I got you to admit hat the 2nd Amendment can be limited. My job is done here.

I always said it didn't apply to children, brainless twit. So what is it you think you accomplished by somehow getting me to admit what I always said? That is an accomplishment in your mind?

This part is going to go over your head because you're stupid. But I didn't say the 2nd is limited. Saying it's limited is a "what" point. What arms are protected. I said "who" is covered by the second amendment. I said children aren't covered by it. Convicted felons lose the right. Foreigners never have the right. Who is covered by the second is an entirely different question than what is covered by the second.

That was a simple, clear point. You didn't grasp it at all, did you? Bricks are smarter than you are

Because all you gun people like to use the 2nd as an inviolable right, which I got you to admit it isn't. I so beat you, go cry on your NRA card.

Again, you just aren't smart enough to grasp that what is covered by the second amendment is a completely different question than who is covered by it. You're just a dingbat. Blamery was right. Let your husband do your thinking for you. Just wash the dishes and make his lunch

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Criminals, Terrorist, Marxist, Fascist and Democrats…people who are afraid of a person’s right to self defense

 

[kaz]

Criminals, Terrorist, Marxist, Fascist and Democrats…people who are afraid of a person’s right to self defense

Yes, they are. Democrats want the people subjugated to government. Guns are a direct threat to that. Both because we're armed, but that's secondary to that we don't feel dependent on government. They are collectivist conformists, we are individuals. Individuals don't want an authoritarian leftist government.

A few dead kids is in their mind a small price to pay for their goal

 

[hunarcy]

I keep saying "force" a child to take a nap. I also said you put them in a crib and detain them against their will. You admitted you can't do that to an adult. That is a violation of equal protection if the child has 14th amendment rights. You cannot forcibly detain an adult. If a child has the same rights, you can't forcibly detain them either. How do you not get that?

You're arguing the child has 2nd amendment rights, it does not have 14th amendment rights. You lose.

You really aren't very smart. No wonder your other arguments are so bad.

"The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment is said to apply to children"
Children's Rights

Neither of your links support your position.

You need to turn yourself into police for violating the Constitutional rights of your children by holding them captive against their will. You should write down every time you did that so they can charge you with each count

My position is that you're ok with limiting the 2nd Amendment. So stop cherry-picking your outrage.

I'm "cherry picking" my outrage by saying the 2nd amendment is the same as the other rights protected int he Bill of Rights in that it applies to adults, not children? Not making it different than other amendments is "cherry picking?"

They don't have dictionaries in Nit Wit Ville? Gawd you're an airhead

I got you to admit hat the 2nd Amendment can be limited. My job is done here.

The amendment is not limited. The rights of non-citizens can be limited

 

[hunarcy]

Neither of your links support your position.

You need to turn yourself into police for violating the Constitutional rights of your children by holding them captive against their will. You should write down every time you did that so they can charge you with each count

My position is that you're ok with limiting the 2nd Amendment. So stop cherry-picking your outrage.

I'm "cherry picking" my outrage by saying the 2nd amendment is the same as the other rights protected int he Bill of Rights in that it applies to adults, not children? Not making it different than other amendments is "cherry picking?"

They don't have dictionaries in Nit Wit Ville? Gawd you're an airhead

I got you to admit hat the 2nd Amendment can be limited. My job is done here.

I always said it didn't apply to children, brainless twit. So what is it you think you accomplished by somehow getting me to admit what I always said? That is an accomplishment in your mind?

This part is going to go over your head because you're stupid. But I didn't say the 2nd is limited. Saying it's limited is a "what" point. What arms are protected. I said "who" is covered by the second amendment. I said children aren't covered by it. Convicted felons lose the right. Foreigners never have the right. Who is covered by the second is an entirely different question than what is covered by the second.

That was a simple, clear point. You didn't grasp it at all, did you? Bricks are smarter than you are

Because all you gun people like to use the 2nd as an inviolable right, which I got you to admit it isn't. I so beat you, go cry on your NRA card.

LOL! You’re joking!

 

[hunarcy]

Only if you assume the government is going to nuke its own territory, and leave itself governing nothing but empty, radioactive wasteland.

But then, you're probably stupid enough to actually think that.

But it's not just nukes that they have more than your guns, they have tanks, mortars, bombs, cruise missiles AA missiles... all kinds of things that you're not allowed to have. Nukes was just an example.

And again, your point is WHAT, precisely? That we should just concede our freedoms, disarm entirely, and become vulnerable wards of the state? I mean, seriously. Relate this to some kind of intelligent, logical, mature statement of position, here.

It's to point out that you're ok with your 2nd Amendment rights being infringed on, so your argument about protecting your 2nd rights in the gun debate is bullshit.

But you aren’t pointing that out. You are merely exposing your ignorance of the real issues

No, that was the point all along, to show you 2nd Amendment defenders on guns that you're already ok with limiting the Amendment, and you all fell right into it.

LOL! I had no idea you would fall apart so completely.

 

[Taz]

That's different than a nap, now you're adding all kinds of things. So let see, my kids have wandered off in a store, went in the basement unsupervised, got down from the table on their own, went into the yard (assuming they were old enough to know how to open a door), never ran out into the street though because they're not retards, and I can't get them to go or stay anywhere they don't want to be. Does that answer your questions?

Yes, you have a double standard. You cannot kidnap an adult. By the 14th amendment, that means you cannot kidnap a child. Which you did.

Notice how you claim your point is that you're just establishing there are limits on the bill of rights. Here's how your argument goes.

If you can establish any limit no matter how contrived, then you can limit the amendment in any way you want to limit it.

If children cannot buy guns, then you can ban guns and because the second amendment means nothing. It can be limited in one way, therefore it can be limited in any and all ways.

It's a bull shit argument

There can only be a kidnapping if you have a complainant. My children never made such a claim to police, but I feel sorry for you, because apparently, yours have.

Wrong. Not reporting a crime doesn't mean it's not a crime.

kaz: The 14th amendment applies to adults
kaz: The 2nd amendment applies to adults

Taz: OMG, you're cherry picking!

You're dumb to the point of being an embarrassment to leftists. Keep posting, my brainless twit little dear. Scare the children what could happen to them

It's not a crime if no one complains that it's a crime. You stand corrected.

If the 2nd applies only to adults, then you're ok with limiting the Amendment, that's all I was trying to prove.

Gawd, you're a ******* doofus.

• You think it's not a crime if no one reports ita nd I'm a doofus? If I kill a homeless man and no one reports it, it wasn't a crime? I'd love to see you debate a brick ... and lose[/QUOT

That's different than a nap, now you're adding all kinds of things. So let see, my kids have wandered off in a store, went in the basement unsupervised, got down from the table on their own, went into the yard (assuming they were old enough to know how to open a door), never ran out into the street though because they're not retards, and I can't get them to go or stay anywhere they don't want to be. Does that answer your questions?

Yes, you have a double standard. You cannot kidnap an adult. By the 14th amendment, that means you cannot kidnap a child. Which you did.

Notice how you claim your point is that you're just establishing there are limits on the bill of rights. Here's how your argument goes.

If you can establish any limit no matter how contrived, then you can limit the amendment in any way you want to limit it.

If children cannot buy guns, then you can ban guns and because the second amendment means nothing. It can be limited in one way, therefore it can be limited in any and all ways.

It's a bull shit argument

There can only be a kidnapping if you have a complainant. My children never made such a claim to police, but I feel sorry for you, because apparently, yours have.

Wrong. Not reporting a crime doesn't mean it's not a crime.

kaz: The 14th amendment applies to adults
kaz: The 2nd amendment applies to adults

Taz: OMG, you're cherry picking!

You're dumb to the point of being an embarrassment to leftists. Keep posting, my brainless twit little dear. Scare the children what could happen to them

It's not a crime if no one complains that it's a crime. You stand corrected.

If the 2nd applies only to adults, then you're ok with limiting the Amendment, that's all I was trying to prove.

Gawd, you're a ******* doofus.

You think it's not a crime if no one reports it and I'm a doofus? If I kill a homeless man and no one reports it, it wasn't a crime? I'd love to see you debate a brick ... and lose

In some circumstances you need a complaining witness. Geez, are you being obtuse on purpose?

 

[Taz]

"The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment is said to apply to children"
Children's Rights

Neither of your links support your position.

You need to turn yourself into police for violating the Constitutional rights of your children by holding them captive against their will. You should write down every time you did that so they can charge you with each count

My position is that you're ok with limiting the 2nd Amendment. So stop cherry-picking your outrage.

I'm "cherry picking" my outrage by saying the 2nd amendment is the same as the other rights protected int he Bill of Rights in that it applies to adults, not children? Not making it different than other amendments is "cherry picking?"

They don't have dictionaries in Nit Wit Ville? Gawd you're an airhead

I got you to admit hat the 2nd Amendment can be limited. My job is done here.

The amendment is not limited. The rights of non-citizens can be limited

If children can't have guns, it's limited. Children do have some Constitutional protections.