Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
That was before our federal Constitution. Our Founding Fathers specifically put this in our federal Constitution:Complete bullshit revision of history.Not a substitution. I merely showed you that that PEOPLE have the right to bear arms, not the militia.Your substitution is a fallacy. Criminals of the People do not have a right to keep and bear Arms.No, the militia is the people. The people need to be armed so the militia can be formed. The PEOPLE have the right to bear arms, not the militia.
Well regulated militia of the whole and entire People (of which even You speak) have literal recourse to our Second Amendment when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.
The right to bear arms is the right to be in the militia.
Imagine the militia having the right to be in the militia.
Minute Men had to purchase and maintain their own firearms to be ready for militia service when needed, which was their duty.
The right of people to keep those firearms was secured and guaranteed in the bill of rights and the authority withheld from the new federal government so the people would accept the new constitution.
Read the fucking federalist papers, for fuck's sake.
Right wing conservatism is a fallacy: politically, economically, and patriotically.If it weren't for fallacy, right wingers would have no arguments at all.While you attack the messenger, you have lost the message in the meantime. Well regulated does not mean what you think it means.Wow, you really did skip English grammar and punctuation. Even more amusing is that you seem to relish boasting about your ignorance. Well, whatever floats your boat!
Says the guy with only ad hominems instead of valid arguments.
As you know, I provided concrete facts. You ignore it because you have your own agenda.
I am sorry you choose to ignore English and grammar the years you were in school. You knew how to talk, so what difference did the funny marks on the page make. That's your problem, no one elses.
The Federalist Papers were a rationalization used to push the acceptance of the Constitution to a skeptical public (mainly NY)...which ultimately failed since the number of NY delegates who were anti-Federalist ended up to be twice the number of Federalists.Read the fucking federalist papers, for fuck's sake.
Yet NY ratified the Constitution, so the Papers purpose worked.The Federalist Papers were a rationalization used to push the acceptance of the Constitution to a skeptical public (mainly NY)...which ultimately failed since the number of NY delegates who were anti-Federalist ended up to be twice the number of Federalists.Read the fucking federalist papers, for fuck's sake.
It was propaganda...not law
NY ratified in SPITE of them.Yet NY ratified the Constitution, so the Papers purpose worked.
It shows intent of the founders.The Federalist Papers were a rationalization used to push the acceptance of the Constitution to a skeptical public (mainly NY)...which ultimately failed since the number of NY delegates who were anti-Federalist ended up to be twice the number of Federalists.Read the fucking federalist papers, for fuck's sake.
It was propaganda...not law
It required unanimous consent.NY ratified in SPITE of them.Yet NY ratified the Constitution, so the Papers purpose worked.
The Constitution already HAD 9 states so NY was simply acknowledging a fact.
Such is the claim.It shows intent of the founders.
Wrong as usualIt required unanimous consent.
That was before our federal Constitution. Our Founding Fathers specifically put this in our federal Constitution:Complete bullshit revision of history.Not a substitution. I merely showed you that that PEOPLE have the right to bear arms, not the militia.Your substitution is a fallacy. Criminals of the People do not have a right to keep and bear Arms.No, the militia is the people. The people need to be armed so the militia can be formed. The PEOPLE have the right to bear arms, not the militia.
Well regulated militia of the whole and entire People (of which even You speak) have literal recourse to our Second Amendment when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.
The right to bear arms is the right to be in the militia.
Imagine the militia having the right to be in the militia.
Minute Men had to purchase and maintain their own firearms to be ready for militia service when needed, which was their duty.
The right of people to keep those firearms was secured and guaranteed in the bill of rights and the authority withheld from the new federal government so the people would accept the new constitution.
Read the fucking federalist papers, for fuck's sake.
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
Only to corrupt idiots.Trying to live modern life according to the Constitution is much like trying to live modern life according to the Bible. Both are subject to vast interpretation.
Article 1 Section 8 Clause 15 or 16Where does it state that?
That was before our federal Constitution. Our Founding Fathers specifically put this in our federal Constitution:Complete bullshit revision of history.Not a substitution. I merely showed you that that PEOPLE have the right to bear arms, not the militia.Your substitution is a fallacy. Criminals of the People do not have a right to keep and bear Arms.No, the militia is the people. The people need to be armed so the militia can be formed. The PEOPLE have the right to bear arms, not the militia.
Well regulated militia of the whole and entire People (of which even You speak) have literal recourse to our Second Amendment when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.
The right to bear arms is the right to be in the militia.
Imagine the militia having the right to be in the militia.
Minute Men had to purchase and maintain their own firearms to be ready for militia service when needed, which was their duty.
The right of people to keep those firearms was secured and guaranteed in the bill of rights and the authority withheld from the new federal government so the people would accept the new constitution.
Read the fucking federalist papers, for fuck's sake.
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
Right wing conservatism is a fallacy: politically, economically, and patriotically.If it weren't for fallacy, right wingers would have no arguments at all.While you attack the messenger, you have lost the message in the meantime. Well regulated does not mean what you think it means.Wow, you really did skip English grammar and punctuation. Even more amusing is that you seem to relish boasting about your ignorance. Well, whatever floats your boat!
Says the guy with only ad hominems instead of valid arguments.
As you know, I provided concrete facts. You ignore it because you have your own agenda.
I am sorry you choose to ignore English and grammar the years you were in school. You knew how to talk, so what difference did the funny marks on the page make. That's your problem, no one elses.
Article 1 Section 8 Clause 15 or 16Where does it state that?
Right wingers have a problem being legal to express law. They merely prefer to practice the abomination of hypocrisy in border threads.The Federalist Papers were a rationalization used to push the acceptance of the Constitution to a skeptical public (mainly NY)...which ultimately failed since the number of NY delegates who were anti-Federalist ended up to be twice the number of Federalists.Read the fucking federalist papers, for fuck's sake.
It was propaganda...not law
There is no appeal to ignorance of (Constitutional) law. Only right wingers never get it.That was before our federal Constitution. Our Founding Fathers specifically put this in our federal Constitution:Complete bullshit revision of history.Not a substitution. I merely showed you that that PEOPLE have the right to bear arms, not the militia.Your substitution is a fallacy. Criminals of the People do not have a right to keep and bear Arms.No, the militia is the people. The people need to be armed so the militia can be formed. The PEOPLE have the right to bear arms, not the militia.
Well regulated militia of the whole and entire People (of which even You speak) have literal recourse to our Second Amendment when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.
The right to bear arms is the right to be in the militia.
Imagine the militia having the right to be in the militia.
Minute Men had to purchase and maintain their own firearms to be ready for militia service when needed, which was their duty.
The right of people to keep those firearms was secured and guaranteed in the bill of rights and the authority withheld from the new federal government so the people would accept the new constitution.
Read the fucking federalist papers, for fuck's sake.
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
Where does it state that?
There is no appeal to ignorance of express law.That was before our federal Constitution. Our Founding Fathers specifically put this in our federal Constitution:Complete bullshit revision of history.Not a substitution. I merely showed you that that PEOPLE have the right to bear arms, not the militia.Your substitution is a fallacy. Criminals of the People do not have a right to keep and bear Arms.No, the militia is the people. The people need to be armed so the militia can be formed. The PEOPLE have the right to bear arms, not the militia.
Well regulated militia of the whole and entire People (of which even You speak) have literal recourse to our Second Amendment when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.
The right to bear arms is the right to be in the militia.
Imagine the militia having the right to be in the militia.
Minute Men had to purchase and maintain their own firearms to be ready for militia service when needed, which was their duty.
The right of people to keep those firearms was secured and guaranteed in the bill of rights and the authority withheld from the new federal government so the people would accept the new constitution.
Read the fucking federalist papers, for fuck's sake.
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
Except that the federal use of calling up the organized militia for national defense is only a small part of what the militia is for. An armed population is for state defense and disasters, municipal defense, disasters, and posses, and for individual home protection. The federal use may never even happen in an average lifetime. The personal defense use will happen many times n an ordinary lifetime.
Argumentum ad hominem is a fallacy. You need a valid argument for rebuttal.Wow, you really did skip English grammar and punctuation. Even more amusing is that you seem to relish boasting about your ignorance. Well, whatever floats your boat!
Says the guy with only ad hominems instead of valid arguments.
How is this an "ad hominem" argument?
Yes, it is when you merely claim your unsubstantiated opinion without supporting it with a valid argument.Argumentum ad hominem is a fallacy. You need a valid argument for rebuttal.Wow, you really did skip English grammar and punctuation. Even more amusing is that you seem to relish boasting about your ignorance. Well, whatever floats your boat!
Says the guy with only ad hominems instead of valid arguments.
How is this an "ad hominem" argument?
The English language, grammar and punctuation is NOT a valid argument? You really did skip grammar and punctuation in school, didn't you? But now you profess to be an authority on the English language? Really?
