Page 14 of 20 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 191
  1. #131  
    Senior Member txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    7,960
    Quote Originally Posted by PeterS View Post
    So you think the military only has assult weapons. Jesus you are a fricking moron...
    You are the dumb assclown that said that some civilians with assault rifles would be no match for the military.

    Your own idiotic response confirmed which of us is the moron.
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #132  
    Senior Member txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    7,960
    Quote Originally Posted by PeterS View Post
    Read what I posted to O. Congress intended the militia to be the principle means of protecting the conuntry and the public (men) were to be the militia. It only follows that they should have any and all access to current technology. So no, munitions and artilary would not be excluded. Yet they are, why?
    They are? There are people who own and operate civil war artillery pieces.

    Hell there are private citizens that own Sherman tanks.

    Your strawman argument just went up in flames.





    An independent cluause is seperated by a colon, look at the First Amendment. The Second is sepereted by a comma making them two dependent clauses, each on the other.
    Wait a minute...you're basing your whole entire argument on the difference between a colon and a comma?

    Please tell me you're not resting your whole stupid theory on modern day versus Colonial punctuation.
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #133  
    Timed Out
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    272
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    Isn't Orange County pretty conservative? They named their airport after John Wayne!

    The Orange County conservatives, the northern California pot farmers and the gangs of LA would probably form quite an armed welcoming committe to any invaders from the east. Not to mention all the Navy installations in San Diego and military bases elsewhere in CA.
    How would the invading North Koreans get here...fly United?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #134  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    2,719
    Quote Originally Posted by PeterS View Post
    Read what I posted to O. Congress intended the militia to be the principle means of protecting the conuntry and the public (men) were to be the militia. It only follows that they should have any and all access to current technology. So no, munitions and artilary would not be excluded. Yet they are, why?
    It doesn't matter what Congress intended. It matters what the Founders intended, and their intent is utterly unambiguous: the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It is the strongest language used in the entire document.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterS View Post
    An independent cluause is seperated by a semi-colon, look at the First Amendment. The Second is sepereted by a comma making them two dependent clauses, each on the other.

    on edit, sorry I realize I should have provided it and I meant to say semi-colon in the above

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
    note how dependent clauses (those that belong together) are seperated by comas and the independent clauses (those that stand alone) are seperated are seperated by semicolons.
    You will not get very far with an argument about punctuation in the Constitution. You may as well argue about lower-case S looking like lower-case F. Even your own example contradicts itself (and you) in the first sentence.


    Note: "or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press" is not an independent clause.
    Olde-style, states' rights conservative. Ask if this concept confuses you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #135  
    Timed Out
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    272
    Quote Originally Posted by txradioguy View Post
    They are? There are people who own and operate civil war artillery pieces.

    Hell there are private citizens that own Sherman tanks.

    Your strawman argument just went up in flames.
    Boy, those will be real effective against an Abrams. And just how did they get them? Yeah, quite the strawman...


    Wait a minute...you're basing your whole entire argument on the difference between a colon and a comma?

    Please tell me you're not resting your whole stupid theory on modern day versus Colonial punctuation.
    No, the use of a semicolon and an comma. I misspoke.

    Do you honestly think the founders didn't understand the use of punctuation or how to construct a sentance. You've never read a single word they have written have you...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #136  
    Timed Out
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    272
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Wood View Post
    It doesn't matter what Congress intended. It matters what the Founders intended, and their intent is utterly unambiguous: the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It is the strongest language used in the entire document.
    The question is why? Why were the rights not to be infringed? Look at the first part of the sentance.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #137  
    Timed Out
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    272
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Wood View Post
    It doesn't matter what Congress intended. It matters what the Founders intended, and their intent is utterly unambiguous: the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It is the strongest language used in the entire document.

    You will not get very far with an argument about punctuation in the Constitution. You may as well argue about lower-case S looking like lower-case F. Even your own example contradicts itself (and you) in the first sentence.


    Note: "or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press" is not an independent clause.
    http://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/Semicolons.html
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #138  
    Timed Out
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    272
    Quote Originally Posted by txradioguy View Post
    You are the dumb assclown that said that some civilians with assault rifles would be no match for the military.

    Your own idiotic response confirmed which of us is the moron.
    So explain, 1) what would cause you to revolt, 3) How would you organize, 3) Whom would you attact?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #139  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,290
    Quote Originally Posted by PeterS View Post
    So explain, 1) what would cause you to revolt, 3) How would you organize, 3) Whom would you attact?
    stay on topic peter, answer the fucking questions put to you.
    The difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.
    http://i.imgur.com/FHvkMSE.jpg
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #140  
    Timed Out
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    272
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockntractor View Post
    stay on topic peter, answer the fucking questions put to you.
    An idiot with an assult rifle isn't going to match up to the military. To revolt you have to have a reason, a means to organize, an area to organize, a target to attact...else you have no frickiing use for an assult rifle. So explain how you are going to do this and whom you are going to attack? For example, are a group of you going to get in your Hum-vees, go down to your local state capital, and shoot it to hell. If so, why and where do you go next?

    This is very much the topic because this is why you say you need assult rifles...to protect yourself from evil government. I simply what to know why and how you plan to do it...
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •