Fat Liberal Bastard Planned Mass Murder

[PeterS]

peter you are back into absurd again, put down the bong.

Assult weapons are no match for our military and this is largly due to conservatives insistance on having a ever more powerful military. You are the one who has rendered the second amendment meaningless not me...

[Rockntractor]

Assult weapons are no match for our military and this is largly due to conservatives insistance on having a ever more powerful military. You are the one who has rendered the second amendment meaningless not me...

What specifically was "infringe" referring too?

[Rockntractor]

Do you like pie peter, pie is good.

[Apache]

Peter. Why are you wasting all these words?



Just say; I don't understand/like the Second Amendment, and be done with it. Simple really
...

[JB]

Oh I think you know exactly what I am talking about..."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."

There are two principle clauses that construct the meaning of the sentance. That you choose to ignore first shows that you choose to be intellectually dishonest about what the founders meant and is a reflection on your character not my on my grammer...

The Second Amendment's Prefatory Clause

Supreme Court of the United States
District of Columbia et al v. Heller
26 June 2008

"The [Second] Amendment's prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause's text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms."

"The Court reasoned that the Amendment's prefatory clause, i.e., '[a] well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,' announced the Amendment's purpose, but did not limit or expand the scope of the operative clause, i.e., 'the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.' Moreover, the prefatory clause's history comported with the Court's interpretation, because the prefatory clause stemmed from the Anti-Federalists' concern that the federal government would disarm the people..."

I think we're done here.

[Zathras]

And you know this how? What keeps them from buying from legal sources such as gun shows?

Why would they go to legal sources when they can get them cheaper on the streets and with less hassle in the black market.

[Zathras]

How so. Do you really think a bunch of rigtht-wing nut jobs, totally unregulated and out of control, could defeat our military? It would seem the "ignorant fucktard" is you...

You sound just like the loyalists in America who supported the English Crown during the revolutionary war, you know that?

[Zathras]

I didn't know reading the Second Amendment in it's entirety was a "talking point." Good to know...

Nope, but you using tired arguments from your leftist handlers certainly is.

[Apache]

The Second Amendment's Prefatory Clause

Supreme Court of the United States
District of Columbia et al v. Heller
26 June 2008

"The [Second] Amendment's prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause's text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms."

"The Court reasoned that the Amendment's prefatory clause, i.e., '[a] well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,' announced the Amendment's purpose, but did not limit or expand the scope of the operative clause, i.e., 'the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.' Moreover, the prefatory clause's history comported with the Court's interpretation, because the prefatory clause stemmed from the Anti-Federalists' concern that the federal government would disarm the people..."

I think we're done here.

See just like the Bible, the Left loves to take the Constitution out of context, to say something it doesn't mean....

It's funny, ten amendments make up the Bill of Rights. Yet, to the Left, only nine of those are for individual persons...go figure

[Rockntractor]

See just like the Bible, the Left loves to take the Constitution out of context, to say something it doesn't mean....

It's funny, ten amendments make up the Bill of Rights. Yet, to the Left, only nine of those are for individual persons...go figure

They are running the country, please someone help me wake up!