Poor poor liberal gun grabbers.

[danielpalos]

Our Second Amendment clearly states the Intent and Purpose for Only well regulated militias having literal recourse.

Nonsense.

"The people" unambiguously have the right. "Well regulated militias" are dependent upon that right not being infringed.

That's what the 2nd Amendment clearly states.

Only if you appeal to ignorance of the law and the Intent and Purpose clearly established.

Only the Body politic of a Militia is declared necessary to the security of a free State, not the People as Individuals.

The SCOTUS says you are a dumbass.

so what; they only have fallacy for their Cause.

 

[danielpalos]

dude, there is no appeal to ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of any law much less our Second Article of Amendment.

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.

"Appeal to ignorance" does not mean what you think it means.

It certainly does not, in any fashion, have any bearing upon the clear assertion that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

And finally, I am making no appeal to ignorance. Sorry about your luck.

Yes, it does.

No. It doesn't. As evidence by the way you're using it. You should look it up.

Or demonstrate how I am making an appeal to ignorance.

I'm not even worried that you'll make an attempt.

There is no appeal to ignorance of the law, or, the Intent and Purpose of the law.

I've made no such appeal. You keep implying that I have with your repeated application of the term, yet you fail to demonstrate how I've made such an appeal.

Despite every single opportunity you've had to do so.

Why is that, Pumpkin?

Of course it Must have the most Standing upon any bearing on any assertion regarding what is necessary to the security of a free State, any Thing to the contrary not with Standing.

I have clearly addressed this; and since you bring only a refusal to acknowledge rather than a substantive rebuttal, I am left to conclude only that you concede the validity my point with no contest.

Which causes me to wonder: Why do you then continue to deny the obvious reality that the right enumerated by the 2nd Amendment is in no way contingent upon regulated militias or state security?

I tried logic, reason and fact all to no avail, what we have here is a doctrinaire, committed in its belief the repeating of a lie often enough will ultimately convince people of its "truth".........
The best approach with such a fanatic is to ostracize by exclusion or by derision.

Or, in a thread like this one where I continually remind them that they are losing the battle.

You cannot reason with these people, just point at them, laugh, and rub it in their faces. That's what I do.

I just get them to resort to fallacy for their Cause first.

 

[PredFan]

Post of the year so far.

 

[Ringel05]

Guns aren't necessary and it doesn't matter are they legal or not!
Every problem can be solved without gun usage and in every case(except terrorist attack)police can solve it without deaths!

That is not the underlying social dilemma we are being presented with.

The problem is simply and merely, that gun lovers refuse to love their republic as much as they claim to love their guns.

“Men did not love Rome because she was great. She was great because they had loved her.”
― G.K. Chesterton

If only, we could goad, cajole, or enjoin gun lovers to get more serious about a really really serious relationship with their republic.

So you're implying that people who have a different idea of what the second amendment means don't love their 'country"..........?

You're kidding, right?

What different idea can you mean?

This is the only idea that matters:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Hate to tell ya this but that isn't the second amendment.......... Just thought you'd like to know.........

 

[PredFan]

Our Second Amendment clearly states the Intent and Purpose for Only well regulated militias having literal recourse.

Nonsense.

"The people" unambiguously have the right. "Well regulated militias" are dependent upon that right not being infringed.

That's what the 2nd Amendment clearly states.

Only if you appeal to ignorance of the law and the Intent and Purpose clearly established.

Only the Body politic of a Militia is declared necessary to the security of a free State, not the People as Individuals.

The SCOTUS says you are a dumbass.

so what; they only have fallacy for their Cause.

So what, nit wit? They know a hell of a lot more about it than you. You think because you say a thing that that thing becomes true? It doesn't you are wrong.

 

[PredFan]

"Appeal to ignorance" does not mean what you think it means.

It certainly does not, in any fashion, have any bearing upon the clear assertion that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

And finally, I am making no appeal to ignorance. Sorry about your luck.

Yes, it does.

No. It doesn't. As evidence by the way you're using it. You should look it up.

Or demonstrate how I am making an appeal to ignorance.

I'm not even worried that you'll make an attempt.

There is no appeal to ignorance of the law, or, the Intent and Purpose of the law.

I've made no such appeal. You keep implying that I have with your repeated application of the term, yet you fail to demonstrate how I've made such an appeal.

Despite every single opportunity you've had to do so.

Why is that, Pumpkin?

Of course it Must have the most Standing upon any bearing on any assertion regarding what is necessary to the security of a free State, any Thing to the contrary not with Standing.

I have clearly addressed this; and since you bring only a refusal to acknowledge rather than a substantive rebuttal, I am left to conclude only that you concede the validity my point with no contest.

Which causes me to wonder: Why do you then continue to deny the obvious reality that the right enumerated by the 2nd Amendment is in no way contingent upon regulated militias or state security?

I tried logic, reason and fact all to no avail, what we have here is a doctrinaire, committed in its belief the repeating of a lie often enough will ultimately convince people of its "truth".........
The best approach with such a fanatic is to ostracize by exclusion or by derision.

Or, in a thread like this one where I continually remind them that they are losing the battle.

You cannot reason with these people, just point at them, laugh, and rub it in their faces. That's what I do.

I just get them to resort to fallacy for their Cause first.

No, that only exists in your mind.

 

[LOki]

You seem to be missing the point about the Militia of the United States.

No. I have demonstrated that your point regarding militias is irrelevant, and your conclusion from that irrelvant point is patently wrong--I have missed NOTHING.

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of the law; especially, this one--10USC311.

I warned you about this. From this point forward I will treat like the mendaciously obtuse retard you have demanded I regard you as.

1) Before you use "Appeal to Ignorance", like the complete imbecile you are, ever again, CLICK HERE.

2) Without ever looking at 10 USC 311 (Militia: composition and classes), even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

For the profoundly retarded, such as yourself, the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 you moron, is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

3) Even so, considering that 10 USC 311 make no mention at all of a well regulated milita, your reference to it remains entirely meaningless--like your half-witted point.

Not all of the Militia of the United States is well regulated.

So what? Really. Explain the significance of this idiotic non-sequitur.

Only well regulated militias are expressly declared necessary to the security of a free State,...

No one is contesting this, you retard. No one.

And since a well regulated Militia is necessary (but not exclusively so) to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

This is because a well regulated Militia is dependent upon (NOT a constraint upon) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms; hence, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed--not by any limitation to militia membership.

You can reference "a well regulated militia" ad-nauseam, but your reference will remain entirely irrelevant to the unambiguous, and explicitly asserted declaration that it is the people's right, not any militia's, but each individual US sovereign's right to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed.

Infringement upon the right of the people--the individual soverigns of the United States--to keep and bear arms is a direct threat to the security of a free state, BECAUSE the condition of having a well regulated militia explicitly requrires that the right of the people--those individual soverigns of the United States upon whom a well relgulated milita depends--to keep and bear arms not be infringed.

 

[PredFan]

The gun grabbing nutters have been getting bitch slapped by the NRA, the SCOTUS, and freedom a lot lately. Being left wing nut jobs they cannot ever admit when they are wrong so they resort to more and more insane nonsense.

 

[Gunman]

Still say how you gonna get all the 600,000,000 guns in the USA.... ? ? ?

 

[BULLDOG]

Still say how you gonna get all the 600,000,000 guns in the USA.... ? ? ?

I don't think it would be possible to do that. Fortunately, no one is trying to do that.

 

[PredFan]

Still say how you gonna get all the 600,000,000 guns in the USA.... ? ? ?

It would be easy. There are a couple of ways:
1. Make them illegal to own. Most people won't turn theirs in right away, but without the ability to take them with you, or shoot them ever, eventually people will give them up. They will have to.
2. Tax ammo to the point where it will be unaffordable.
3. Shut down all gun manufacturers and gun stores. Again eventually they will all be gone.
4. Any combination of the above.

Just because gun confiscation doesn't happen all in one fell swoop doesn't mean it isn't going to happen.

 

[BULLDOG]

Still say how you gonna get all the 600,000,000 guns in the USA.... ? ? ?

It would be easy. There are a couple of ways:
1. Make them illegal to own. Most people won't turn theirs in right away, but without the ability to take them with you, or shoot them ever, eventually people will give them up. They will have to.
2. Tax ammo to the point where it will
be unaffordable.
3. Shut down all gun manufacturers and gun stores. Again eventually they will all be gone.
4. Any combination of the above.

Just because gun confiscation doesn't happen all in one fell swoop doesn't mean it isn't going to happen.

How long has paranoia been a problem for you?

 

[PredFan]

Still say how you gonna get all the 600,000,000 guns in the USA.... ? ? ?

It would be easy. There are a couple of ways:
1. Make them illegal to own. Most people won't turn theirs in right away, but without the ability to take them with you, or shoot them ever, eventually people will give them up. They will have to.
2. Tax ammo to the point where it will
be unaffordable.
3. Shut down all gun manufacturers and gun stores. Again eventually they will all be gone.
4. Any combination of the above.

Just because gun confiscation doesn't happen all in one fell swoop doesn't mean it isn't going to happen.

How long has paranoia been a problem for you?

Never. How long until you learn how to read at higher than a 3rd grade level?

 

[BULLDOG]

Still say how you gonna get all the 600,000,000 guns in the USA.... ? ? ?

It would be easy. There are a couple of ways:
1. Make them illegal to own. Most people won't turn theirs in right away, but without the ability to take them with you, or shoot them ever, eventually people will give them up. They will have to.
2. Tax ammo to the point where it will
be unaffordable.
3. Shut down all gun manufacturers and gun stores. Again eventually they will all be gone.
4. Any combination of the above.

Just because gun confiscation doesn't happen all in one fell swoop doesn't mean it isn't going to happen.

How long has paranoia been a problem for you?

Never. How long until you learn how to read at higher than a 3rd grade level?

I can understand where you might think third grade level might be something to aspire to, but in reality, most non GOP followers are well beyond that. It's ok if that is your present goal though.

 

[PredFan]

Still say how you gonna get all the 600,000,000 guns in the USA.... ? ? ?

It would be easy. There are a couple of ways:
1. Make them illegal to own. Most people won't turn theirs in right away, but without the ability to take them with you, or shoot them ever, eventually people will give them up. They will have to.
2. Tax ammo to the point where it will
be unaffordable.
3. Shut down all gun manufacturers and gun stores. Again eventually they will all be gone.
4. Any combination of the above.

Just because gun confiscation doesn't happen all in one fell swoop doesn't mean it isn't going to happen.

How long has paranoia been a problem for you?

Never. How long until you learn how to read at higher than a 3rd grade level?

I can understand where you might think third grade level might be something to aspire to, but in reality, most non GOP followers are well beyond that. It's ok if that is your present goal though.

Apparently I estimated too high. 2nd grade maybe?

 

[2aguy]

Guns aren't necessary and it doesn't matter are they legal or not!
Every problem can be solved without gun usage and in every case(except terrorist attack)police can solve it without deaths!

Hmmmm tell that to murder, rape and beating and stabbing victims....did you actually think about what you posted.....?

 

[PredFan]

The butthurt is strong with liberal gun grabbers.

 

[danielpalos]

Guns aren't necessary and it doesn't matter are they legal or not!
Every problem can be solved without gun usage and in every case(except terrorist attack)police can solve it without deaths!

That is not the underlying social dilemma we are being presented with.

The problem is simply and merely, that gun lovers refuse to love their republic as much as they claim to love their guns.

“Men did not love Rome because she was great. She was great because they had loved her.”
― G.K. Chesterton

If only, we could goad, cajole, or enjoin gun lovers to get more serious about a really really serious relationship with their republic.

So you're implying that people who have a different idea of what the second amendment means don't love their 'country"..........?

You're kidding, right?

What different idea can you mean?

This is the only idea that matters:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Hate to tell ya this but that isn't the second amendment.......... Just thought you'd like to know.........

Hate to tell ya, but our Second Amendment is not a Constitution unto itself.

 

[Ringel05]

Guns aren't necessary and it doesn't matter are they legal or not!
Every problem can be solved without gun usage and in every case(except terrorist attack)police can solve it without deaths!

That is not the underlying social dilemma we are being presented with.

The problem is simply and merely, that gun lovers refuse to love their republic as much as they claim to love their guns.

“Men did not love Rome because she was great. She was great because they had loved her.”
― G.K. Chesterton

If only, we could goad, cajole, or enjoin gun lovers to get more serious about a really really serious relationship with their republic.

So you're implying that people who have a different idea of what the second amendment means don't love their 'country"..........?

You're kidding, right?

What different idea can you mean?

This is the only idea that matters:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Hate to tell ya this but that isn't the second amendment.......... Just thought you'd like to know.........

Hate to tell ya, but our Second Amendment is not a Constitution unto itself.

Wow! You figured that out all on your own??!!!! I'm impressed, surprised but impressed.

 

[danielpalos]

Our Second Amendment clearly states the Intent and Purpose for Only well regulated militias having literal recourse.

Nonsense.

"The people" unambiguously have the right. "Well regulated militias" are dependent upon that right not being infringed.

That's what the 2nd Amendment clearly states.

Only if you appeal to ignorance of the law and the Intent and Purpose clearly established.

Only the Body politic of a Militia is declared necessary to the security of a free State, not the People as Individuals.

The SCOTUS says you are a dumbass.

so what; they only have fallacy for their Cause.

So what, nit wit? They know a hell of a lot more about it than you. You think because you say a thing that that thing becomes true? It doesn't you are wrong.

They may know more about legal machinations in Their venue; but, I probably mustered with dictionary and thesauri militia more often than they did and am more well regulated as a result.