The definitive guide to the 2nd Amendment

[danielpalos]

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia

So? They can arm the militia.

But.

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788

Explain that, dan.

Otherwise, you lose.

That means, the subject of Arms is socialized, not privatized for the Militia, if we have to quibble instead of appeal to ignorance and make excuses.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

That means, the subject of Arms is socialized, not privatized for the Militia, if we have to quibble instead of appeal to ignorance and make excuses

So, Sam Adams intended that arms are socialized by his statement?

You have GOT to be kidding me.

You are nothing more than a fucking troll.

 

[Pop23]

That means, the subject of Arms is socialized, not privatized for the Militia, if we have to quibble instead of appeal to ignorance and make excuses

So, Sam Adams intended that arms are socialized by his statement?

You have GOT to be kidding me.

You are nothing more than a fucking troll.

Oh, he's much more than that, he's an ignorant and annoying fucking troll.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

That means, the subject of Arms is socialized, not privatized for the Militia, if we have to quibble instead of appeal to ignorance and make excuses

So, Sam Adams intended that arms are socialized by his statement?

You have GOT to be kidding me.

You are nothing more than a fucking troll.

Oh, he's much more than that, he's an ignorant and annoying fucking troll.

He does nothing but throw out fallacy arguments claiming fallacy arguments.


Fallacies of danpalos:

Argument by Gibberish

(also known as: bafflement, argument by [prestigious] jargon)

Description: When incomprehensible jargon or plain incoherent gibberish is used to give the appearance of a strong argument, in place of evidence or valid reasons to accept the argument.

The more common form of this argument is when the person making the argument defaults to highly technical jargon or details not directly related to the argument, then restates the conclusion.


Argument by Repetition

argumentum ad nauseam

(also known as: argument from nagging, proof by assertion)

Description: Repeating an argument or a premise over and over again in place of better supporting evidence.


Argument by Selective Reading

Description: When a series of arguments or claims is made and the opponent acts as if the weakest argument was the best one made. This is a form of cherry picking and very similar to the selective attention fallacy.

Argument from Fallacy

argumentum ad logicam

(also known as: disproof by fallacy, argument to logic, fallacy fallacy, fallacist's fallacy, bad reasons fallacy [form of])

Description: Concluding that the truth value of an argument is false based on the fact that the argument contains a fallacy.

Avoiding the Issue

(also known as: avoiding the question [form of], missing the point, straying off the subject, digressing, distraction [form of])

Description: When an arguer responds to an argument by not addressing the points of the argument. Unlike the strawman fallacy, avoiding the issue does not create an unrelated argument to divert attention, it simply avoids the argument.


Circular Definition

Description: A circular definition is defining a term by using the term in the definition. Ironically, that definition is partly guilty by my use of the term “definition” in the definition. Okay, I am using definition way too much. Damn! I just did it again.

Circular Reasoning
circulus in demonstrando

(also known as: paradoxical thinking, circular argument, circular cause and consequence, reasoning in a circle)

Description: A type of reasoning in which the proposition is supported by the premises, which is supported by the proposition, creating a circle in reasoning where no useful information is being shared. This fallacy is often quite humorous.

 

[hadit]

That means, the subject of Arms is socialized, not privatized for the Militia, if we have to quibble instead of appeal to ignorance and make excuses

So, Sam Adams intended that arms are socialized by his statement?

You have GOT to be kidding me.

You are nothing more than a fucking troll.

Oh, he's much more than that, he's an ignorant and annoying fucking troll.

And totally impervious to reason or fact.

 

[danielpalos]

That means, the subject of Arms is socialized, not privatized for the Militia, if we have to quibble instead of appeal to ignorance and make excuses

So, Sam Adams intended that arms are socialized by his statement?

You have GOT to be kidding me.

You are nothing more than a fucking troll.

The subject of Arms is declared socialized, every time the right is too dumb to understand our Second Amendment.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The subject of Arms is declared socialized, every time the right is too dumb to understand our Second Amendment.

"...the right of the people...shall NOT be infringed."

 

[hadit]

That means, the subject of Arms is socialized, not privatized for the Militia, if we have to quibble instead of appeal to ignorance and make excuses

So, Sam Adams intended that arms are socialized by his statement?

You have GOT to be kidding me.

You are nothing more than a fucking troll.

The subject of Arms is declared socialized, every time the right is too dumb to understand our Second Amendment.

So it doesn't mean what it says. It means what you want it to mean.

 

[danielpalos]

The subject of Arms is declared socialized, every time the right is too dumb to understand our Second Amendment.

"...the right of the people...shall NOT be infringed."

Paragraph (2) of DC v Heller supports my contention and not yours.

 

[danielpalos]

That means, the subject of Arms is socialized, not privatized for the Militia, if we have to quibble instead of appeal to ignorance and make excuses

So, Sam Adams intended that arms are socialized by his statement?

You have GOT to be kidding me.

You are nothing more than a fucking troll.

The subject of Arms is declared socialized, every time the right is too dumb to understand our Second Amendment.

So it doesn't mean what it says. It means what you want it to mean.

Our Constitution clearly states Congress authority to call out the militia.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Our Constitution clearly states Congress authority to call out the militia.

Authority to "call out" the militia. I assume you mean call on the militia, and I agree.

Congress has NO authority to infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

 

[danielpalos]

Our Constitution clearly states Congress authority to call out the militia.

Authority to "call out" the militia. I assume you mean call on the militia, and I agree.

Congress has NO authority to infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Only well regulated militia are declared Necessary; not insurrectionists or rebels of the People.

 

[Pop23]

Our Constitution clearly states Congress authority to call out the militia.

Authority to "call out" the militia. I assume you mean call on the militia, and I agree.

Congress has NO authority to infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Only well regulated militia are declared Necessary; not insurrectionists or rebels of the People.

Nope

 

[danielpalos]

Our Constitution clearly states Congress authority to call out the militia.

Authority to "call out" the militia. I assume you mean call on the militia, and I agree.

Congress has NO authority to infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Only well regulated militia are declared Necessary; not insurrectionists or rebels of the People.

Nope

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

 

[Pop23]

Our Constitution clearly states Congress authority to call out the militia.

Authority to "call out" the militia. I assume you mean call on the militia, and I agree.

Congress has NO authority to infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Only well regulated militia are declared Necessary; not insurrectionists or rebels of the People.

Nope

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

And to put you nighty night

 

[hadit]

That means, the subject of Arms is socialized, not privatized for the Militia, if we have to quibble instead of appeal to ignorance and make excuses

So, Sam Adams intended that arms are socialized by his statement?

You have GOT to be kidding me.

You are nothing more than a fucking troll.

The subject of Arms is declared socialized, every time the right is too dumb to understand our Second Amendment.

So it doesn't mean what it says. It means what you want it to mean.

Our Constitution clearly states Congress authority to call out the militia.

It also clearly states the right of the PEOPLE to bear arms shall not be infringed..

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Only well regulated militia are declared Necessary

...to the security of a free state...
...and only the right of the people shall not be infringed...

 

[danielpalos]

That means, the subject of Arms is socialized, not privatized for the Militia, if we have to quibble instead of appeal to ignorance and make excuses

So, Sam Adams intended that arms are socialized by his statement?

You have GOT to be kidding me.

You are nothing more than a fucking troll.

The subject of Arms is declared socialized, every time the right is too dumb to understand our Second Amendment.

So it doesn't mean what it says. It means what you want it to mean.

Our Constitution clearly states Congress authority to call out the militia.

It also clearly states the right of the PEOPLE to bear arms shall not be infringed..

so what; well regulated militia of the People, are still People.

 

[danielpalos]

Only well regulated militia are declared Necessary

...to the security of a free state...
...and only the right of the people shall not be infringed...

only if you are well regulated and necessary to the security of a free State.

if you are merely engaged natural rights, you are subject to the Police power.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

only if you are well regulated and necessary to the security of a free State.

"A well-regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people shall not be infringed, unless necessary to the security of a free state."
You added that part, didn't you. Did you make that up yourself?


A well-regulated militia _____ _________ ___ ______ ________ __ _ _____ _______, ___ _____ of the people __ ____ ___ ____ ____ shall not be infringed.

Fill in the blanks, dan.