True Interpretation of the 2nd Amendment

[Auld Phart]

By YOUR reading, men over the age of 45, and women of all ages, are exempt from the right to keep and bear arms.

By MY reading, they are not.

Why do you deny women, and men over 45, the right to keep and bear arms?

I don't. Domestic Tranquility and security of our free States is the concern of everyone in the State.

I don't.

You do.

every time you assert only the militia has the right to keep and bear arms

I assert no such Thing. I only bear True Witness to the Actual Terms of our Second Article of Amendment.

Only well regulated militia of the whole and entire People are declared Necessary.

don't like it; stay indoors.

I only bear True Witness to the Actual Terms of our Second Article of Amendment.

True witness?

you malign it with every post.

dear, you have to have an actual argument to support Your claim, or it is just another right wing appeal to ignorance, like usual.

dear, you have to have an actual argument to support Your claim,

WB and I have made actual arguments to back up our stance...


you keep parroting the same debunked claptrap and continue to troll.

 

[Auld Phart]

Good parrot.

shame that thought didn't end up in the 2nd.

instead, they gave the right to the people, not the militia

now, do you have a quote that actually ended up affecting the 2nd?

nothing but fallacy?

Here is what I am referring to:

All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

Why do you believe the whole and entire concept of natural and individual rights, does not cover this issue?

Why are you bouncing off walls?

the discussion is the 2nd Amendment, and the right guaranteed to the people to keep and bear arms.

The People and the Militia are Both, plural and collective, not Individual or singular.

A literal reading of our Constitution supports my contention and specifically not Your contention.

I asked days ago for you to post any evidence that the 2nd amendment is a collective right. Not surprisingly, you have not.

dude; what do You specifically believe we have been arguing these past several pages?

The People and the Militia are Both, plural and collective, not Individual or singular.

A literal reading of our Constitution supports my contention and specifically not Your contention.

look in any dictionary.

A literal reading of our Constitution

doesn't support any of your claims

 

[danielpalos]

I don't. Domestic Tranquility and security of our free States is the concern of everyone in the State.

I don't.

You do.

every time you assert only the militia has the right to keep and bear arms

I assert no such Thing. I only bear True Witness to the Actual Terms of our Second Article of Amendment.

Only well regulated militia of the whole and entire People are declared Necessary.

don't like it; stay indoors.

I only bear True Witness to the Actual Terms of our Second Article of Amendment.

True witness?

you malign it with every post.

dear, you have to have an actual argument to support Your claim, or it is just another right wing appeal to ignorance, like usual.

dear, you have to have an actual argument to support Your claim,

WB and I have made actual arguments to back up our stance...


you keep parroting the same debunked claptrap and continue to troll.

dear, you have nothing but fallacy or you would debunk my argument with a better argument, every time this comes up.

Why not simply cede the point and argument.

 

[WinterBorn]

Indeed it does. But, short of a constitutional amendment, there is no due process which overrules the 2nd amendment for the overall population.

lol. it says well regulated militia of the overall population is Necessary, and shall not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

That is most certainly NOT what it says. Please show me where "...when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union" appears in the 2nd amendment. It doesn't.

Natural and Individual rights are in State Constitutions, not our Second Amendment, specifically.

Unless the "natural and individual rights" have any bearing on the 2nd amendment, your post is completely irrelevant.

Thank you for admitting, natural and individual rights have no bearing on the Second Amendment.

both terms, militia and the people are plural, not singular or individual.

I have admitted nothing of the kind. The word "people", as I have said many times, is indeed plural. The right to keep and bear arms is for the people (more than one person).

 

[WinterBorn]

Good parrot.

shame that thought didn't end up in the 2nd.

instead, they gave the right to the people, not the militia

now, do you have a quote that actually ended up affecting the 2nd?

nothing but fallacy?

Here is what I am referring to:

All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

Why do you believe the whole and entire concept of natural and individual rights, does not cover this issue?

Why are you bouncing off walls?

the discussion is the 2nd Amendment, and the right guaranteed to the people to keep and bear arms.

The People and the Militia are Both, plural and collective, not Individual or singular.

A literal reading of our Constitution supports my contention and specifically not Your contention.

I asked days ago for you to post any evidence that the 2nd amendment is a collective right. Not surprisingly, you have not.

dude; what do You specifically believe we have been arguing these past several pages?

The People and the Militia are Both, plural and collective, not Individual or singular.

A literal reading of our Constitution supports my contention and specifically not Your contention.

look in any dictionary.

No, it does not. Your claim that "people" is both plural AND collective is pure nonsense. Plural? Of course. The right is guaranteed for more than one person. But there is nothing to back up your claim that it is a collective right. That is why I asked you for any evidence to backup your claim. Simply saying it over and over does not change that.

 

[danielpalos]

lol. it says well regulated militia of the overall population is Necessary, and shall not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

That is most certainly NOT what it says. Please show me where "...when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union" appears in the 2nd amendment. It doesn't.

Natural and Individual rights are in State Constitutions, not our Second Amendment, specifically.

Unless the "natural and individual rights" have any bearing on the 2nd amendment, your post is completely irrelevant.

Thank you for admitting, natural and individual rights have no bearing on the Second Amendment.

both terms, militia and the people are plural, not singular or individual.

I have admitted nothing of the kind. The word "people", as I have said many times, is indeed plural. The right to keep and bear arms is for the people (more than one person).

as distinct from the whole and entire concept of natural rights.

A militia is not about natural rights, but about enforcing the laws of the State or the Union.

 

[WinterBorn]

You do.

every time you assert only the militia has the right to keep and bear arms

I assert no such Thing. I only bear True Witness to the Actual Terms of our Second Article of Amendment.

Only well regulated militia of the whole and entire People are declared Necessary.

don't like it; stay indoors.

I only bear True Witness to the Actual Terms of our Second Article of Amendment.

True witness?

you malign it with every post.

dear, you have to have an actual argument to support Your claim, or it is just another right wing appeal to ignorance, like usual.

dear, you have to have an actual argument to support Your claim,

WB and I have made actual arguments to back up our stance...


you keep parroting the same debunked claptrap and continue to troll.

dear, you have nothing but fallacy or you would debunk my argument with a better argument, every time this comes up.

Why not simply cede the point and argument.

I have asked and asked for evidence to backup your claims. YOu have provided none at all.

I have tried to engage you in actual debate of facts. You simply make claims with no proof or evidence at all.

It grow tiresome. YOu have made to real argument. Making spurious claims is not an argument.

And your "this is why no one takes rightwingers seriously" or "...just another appeal to ignorance" are just fillers in your nonsensical arguments. When we post facts and you post unproven claims, it is not us who are appealing to ignorance.

 

[WinterBorn]

That is most certainly NOT what it says. Please show me where "...when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union" appears in the 2nd amendment. It doesn't.

Natural and Individual rights are in State Constitutions, not our Second Amendment, specifically.

Unless the "natural and individual rights" have any bearing on the 2nd amendment, your post is completely irrelevant.

Thank you for admitting, natural and individual rights have no bearing on the Second Amendment.

both terms, militia and the people are plural, not singular or individual.

I have admitted nothing of the kind. The word "people", as I have said many times, is indeed plural. The right to keep and bear arms is for the people (more than one person).

as distinct from the whole and entire concept of natural rights.

A militia is not about natural rights, but about enforcing the laws of the State or the Union.

And since they used "militia" in the first clause, and "people" in the second clause, it is obvious they intended for "the people" to have the right to keep and bear arms. The fact that the word "people" is plural simply means they wrote the 2nd amendment for the population.

 

[WinterBorn]

That is most certainly NOT what it says. Please show me where "...when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union" appears in the 2nd amendment. It doesn't.

Natural and Individual rights are in State Constitutions, not our Second Amendment, specifically.

Unless the "natural and individual rights" have any bearing on the 2nd amendment, your post is completely irrelevant.

Thank you for admitting, natural and individual rights have no bearing on the Second Amendment.

both terms, militia and the people are plural, not singular or individual.

I have admitted nothing of the kind. The word "people", as I have said many times, is indeed plural. The right to keep and bear arms is for the people (more than one person).

as distinct from the whole and entire concept of natural rights.

A militia is not about natural rights, but about enforcing the laws of the State or the Union.

Do you have a link saying that the militia is about enforcing the laws of the state or union? The references to "militia" in the US Constitution concern defending the nation from outside attacks.

 

[danielpalos]

I assert no such Thing. I only bear True Witness to the Actual Terms of our Second Article of Amendment.

Only well regulated militia of the whole and entire People are declared Necessary.

don't like it; stay indoors.

I only bear True Witness to the Actual Terms of our Second Article of Amendment.

True witness?

you malign it with every post.

dear, you have to have an actual argument to support Your claim, or it is just another right wing appeal to ignorance, like usual.

dear, you have to have an actual argument to support Your claim,

WB and I have made actual arguments to back up our stance...


you keep parroting the same debunked claptrap and continue to troll.

dear, you have nothing but fallacy or you would debunk my argument with a better argument, every time this comes up.

Why not simply cede the point and argument.

I have asked and asked for evidence to backup your claims. YOu have provided none at all.

I have tried to engage you in actual debate of facts. You simply make claims with no proof or evidence at all.

It grow tiresome. YOu have made to real argument. Making spurious claims is not an argument.

And your "this is why no one takes rightwingers seriously" or "...just another appeal to ignorance" are just fillers in your nonsensical arguments. When we post facts and you post unproven claims, it is not us who are appealing to ignorance.

dear, you have no facts, Only fallacy induced fantasy. anyone can clam Any Thing. why not support Your contentions with actual arguments; not merely, claims to alleged arguments in your favor.

 

[danielpalos]

Natural and Individual rights are in State Constitutions, not our Second Amendment, specifically.

Unless the "natural and individual rights" have any bearing on the 2nd amendment, your post is completely irrelevant.

Thank you for admitting, natural and individual rights have no bearing on the Second Amendment.

both terms, militia and the people are plural, not singular or individual.

I have admitted nothing of the kind. The word "people", as I have said many times, is indeed plural. The right to keep and bear arms is for the people (more than one person).

as distinct from the whole and entire concept of natural rights.

A militia is not about natural rights, but about enforcing the laws of the State or the Union.

And since they used "militia" in the first clause, and "people" in the second clause, it is obvious they intended for "the people" to have the right to keep and bear arms. The fact that the word "people" is plural simply means they wrote the 2nd amendment for the population.

You are the one who is appealing to ignorance of this legal fact under the common law:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

 

[danielpalos]

Natural and Individual rights are in State Constitutions, not our Second Amendment, specifically.

Unless the "natural and individual rights" have any bearing on the 2nd amendment, your post is completely irrelevant.

Thank you for admitting, natural and individual rights have no bearing on the Second Amendment.

both terms, militia and the people are plural, not singular or individual.

I have admitted nothing of the kind. The word "people", as I have said many times, is indeed plural. The right to keep and bear arms is for the people (more than one person).

as distinct from the whole and entire concept of natural rights.

A militia is not about natural rights, but about enforcing the laws of the State or the Union.

Do you have a link saying that the militia is about enforcing the laws of the state or union? The references to "militia" in the US Constitution concern defending the nation from outside attacks.

dear; this is also why, nobody on the left should Ever take the right wing at their Word; about any Thing serious:

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

Only story tellers don't need to be mindful of resorting to fallacy.

 

[Auld Phart]

dan, you need an avatar.

Try this one...

fits you to a t

 

[WinterBorn]

True witness?

you malign it with every post.

dear, you have to have an actual argument to support Your claim, or it is just another right wing appeal to ignorance, like usual.

dear, you have to have an actual argument to support Your claim,

WB and I have made actual arguments to back up our stance...


you keep parroting the same debunked claptrap and continue to troll.

dear, you have nothing but fallacy or you would debunk my argument with a better argument, every time this comes up.

Why not simply cede the point and argument.

I have asked and asked for evidence to backup your claims. YOu have provided none at all.

I have tried to engage you in actual debate of facts. You simply make claims with no proof or evidence at all.

It grow tiresome. YOu have made to real argument. Making spurious claims is not an argument.

And your "this is why no one takes rightwingers seriously" or "...just another appeal to ignorance" are just fillers in your nonsensical arguments. When we post facts and you post unproven claims, it is not us who are appealing to ignorance.

dear, you have no facts, Only fallacy induced fantasy. anyone can clam Any Thing. why not support Your contentions with actual arguments; not merely, claims to alleged arguments in your favor.

I have proven my claims. I claimed that the US Constitution cannot be overruled by a state constitution or state law. I provided proof in the Supremacy Clause and several examples of the US Constitution overruling state laws. You simply claimed otherwise, without an iota of evidence.

I contend that the "militia" mentioned in the 2nd amendment refers to citizen soldiers, armed and ready to step up when needed. I provided proof by citing examples of militia used during the times the 2nd amendment was written and during the war that had just ended at that time.

I have said that the word "people" in the 2nd amendment is indeed plural. Because it refers to the population of the nation. I have asked, repeatedly, for any evidence that the 2nd is a collective right, as you claim. You simply keep saying "look in the dictionary". But the first 10 amendments were written specifically to guarantee individual rights. That was stated in the writings of both Madison and Jefferson. So a "collective right" would not have been written into the Bill of Rights at all.

It is you, Dannyboy, that have been relying on fallacy and ignorance. But, like your claims that you are due "your turn" with a woman, whether she wants you or not, your grasp of what the US Constitution says is twisted.

Unless you can offer links or proof to support your claims, I am tired of you simply repeating the same thing over and over.

YOu have lost this argument over and over. Come up with proof or go back to discussing your perverse views on relationships.

 

[FireFly]

If anything, instead of abolishing the 2nd amendment
it should be EXPANDED to protect equal right to defense in ALL forms

You are talking some silly Nonsense.

You just don't get it do you, GUNS are BAD, they prevent the wealthy from taking control of the American Sheeple Live Stock, and all live stock at some point needs to be Culled, you can Cull animals if they can fight back, in other words, the American Sheeple have TEETH, the TEETH are the GUNS in America, so before we can begin the Culling, we must first pull the teeth.

No! - Just keep arming the crazies & they will cull the sheeple for you. This is why the first words state:"A well regulated"

 

[Auld Phart]

If anything, instead of abolishing the 2nd amendment
it should be EXPANDED to protect equal right to defense in ALL forms

You are talking some silly Nonsense.

You just don't get it do you, GUNS are BAD, they prevent the wealthy from taking control of the American Sheeple Live Stock, and all live stock at some point needs to be Culled, you can Cull animals if they can fight back, in other words, the American Sheeple have TEETH, the TEETH are the GUNS in America, so before we can begin the Culling, we must first pull the teeth.

No! - Just keep arming the crazies & they will cull the sheeple for you. This is why the first words state:"A well regulated"

This is why the first words state:"A well regulated"

Which is as far as far too many people get,

They somehow miss, ''The right of the People"

 

[FireFly]

If anything, instead of abolishing the 2nd amendment
it should be EXPANDED to protect equal right to defense in ALL forms

You are talking some silly Nonsense.

You just don't get it do you, GUNS are BAD, they prevent the wealthy from taking control of the American Sheeple Live Stock, and all live stock at some point needs to be Culled, you can Cull animals if they can fight back, in other words, the American Sheeple have TEETH, the TEETH are the GUNS in America, so before we can begin the Culling, we must first pull the teeth.

No! - Just keep arming the crazies & they will cull the sheeple for you. This is why the first words state:"A well regulated"

This is why the first words state:"A well regulated"

Which is as far as far too many people get,

They somehow miss, ''The right of the People"

You Lie! There are no regulations to CCW in St. Louis, MO yet it has the highest murder rate in the USA & the most police per resident in the USA!

 

[Auld Phart]

If anything, instead of abolishing the 2nd amendment
it should be EXPANDED to protect equal right to defense in ALL forms

You are talking some silly Nonsense.

You just don't get it do you, GUNS are BAD, they prevent the wealthy from taking control of the American Sheeple Live Stock, and all live stock at some point needs to be Culled, you can Cull animals if they can fight back, in other words, the American Sheeple have TEETH, the TEETH are the GUNS in America, so before we can begin the Culling, we must first pull the teeth.

No! - Just keep arming the crazies & they will cull the sheeple for you. This is why the first words state:"A well regulated"

This is why the first words state:"A well regulated"

Which is as far as far too many people get,

They somehow miss, ''The right of the People"

You Lie! There are no regulations to CCW in St. Louis, MO yet it has the highest murder rate in the USA & the most police per resident in the USA!

Where did I mention anything about CCW?

 

[FireFly]

If anything, instead of abolishing the 2nd amendment
it should be EXPANDED to protect equal right to defense in ALL forms

You are talking some silly Nonsense.

You just don't get it do you, GUNS are BAD, they prevent the wealthy from taking control of the American Sheeple Live Stock, and all live stock at some point needs to be Culled, you can Cull animals if they can fight back, in other words, the American Sheeple have TEETH, the TEETH are the GUNS in America, so before we can begin the Culling, we must first pull the teeth.

No! - Just keep arming the crazies & they will cull the sheeple for you. This is why the first words state:"A well regulated"

This is why the first words state:"A well regulated"

Which is as far as far too many people get,

They somehow miss, ''The right of the People"

You Lie! There are no regulations to CCW in St. Louis, MO yet it has the highest murder rate in the USA & the most police per resident in the USA!

Where did I mention anything about CCW?

You Lied claiming we are hung up on the first 3 words "A well regulated" & never get to "the right of the people" which is a total LIE!!!!! We are far to hung up on "people shall not be infringed" & have zero regulation on purchasing, owning, possessing, open or conceal carrying weapons.

 

[Auld Phart]

You are talking some silly Nonsense.

You just don't get it do you, GUNS are BAD, they prevent the wealthy from taking control of the American Sheeple Live Stock, and all live stock at some point needs to be Culled, you can Cull animals if they can fight back, in other words, the American Sheeple have TEETH, the TEETH are the GUNS in America, so before we can begin the Culling, we must first pull the teeth.

No! - Just keep arming the crazies & they will cull the sheeple for you. This is why the first words state:"A well regulated"

This is why the first words state:"A well regulated"

Which is as far as far too many people get,

They somehow miss, ''The right of the People"

You Lie! There are no regulations to CCW in St. Louis, MO yet it has the highest murder rate in the USA & the most police per resident in the USA!

Where did I mention anything about CCW?

You Lied claiming we are hung up on the first 3 words "A well regulated" & never get to "the right of the people" which is a total LIE!!!!! We are far to hung up on "people shall not be infringed" & have zero regulation on purchasing, owning, possessing, open or conceal carrying weapons.

This is why the first words state:"A well regulated"

Then why didn't you post more of the Second?