Page 8 of 20 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 191
  1. #71  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,428
    Peter has admitted here that we do indeed have the right to bear arms, yet some how where this right is given and in the same sentence it says these rights shall not be infringed he is saying this infringement is pertaining to others rights. This makes no sense of logic and can't even be twisted away from it's context.
    No we don't have the right to unlawfully murder another which is upheld in other parts of the constitution, even so I can't even get that meaning from infringe in the sentence and context it is given.
    It couldn't possibly mean that the citizen does not have the right to infringe on the governments ability to have a militia or it would have been added to the part of the statement concerning the militia.
    Does peter think this is a typo?
    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  
     

  2. #72  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,428
    Quote Originally Posted by PeterS View Post
    The Supreme Court upheld the right to bear arms with respect to self-defense. It didn't elminate the right to regulation...
    What does it mean when it says our right to bear arms shall not be infringed?
    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  
     

  3. #73  
    Timed Out
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    272
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockntractor View Post
    You need to just go back to DU peter, everyone here has heard all of your tired talking points ad nauseum.
    We can hear this crap anytime of day by just tuning into network news, you echo the ministry of propaganda.
    I didn't know reading the Second Amendment in it's entirety was a "talking point." Good to know...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #74  
    Timed Out
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    272
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockntractor View Post
    What does it mean when it says our right to bear arms shall not be infringed?
    I already addressed it. You still haven't stated why you won't address my question. There are two principle clauses that, as written, are dependent on each other.

    Why are you ignoring the first?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #75  
    Timed Out
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    272
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockntractor View Post
    Peter has admitted here that we do indeed have the right to bear arms, yet some how where this right is given and in the same sentence it says these rights shall not be infringed he is saying this infringement is pertaining to others rights. This makes no sense of logic and can't even be twisted away from it's context.
    No we don't have the right to unlawfully murder another which is upheld in other parts of the constitution, even so I can't even get that meaning from infringe in the sentence and context it is given.
    It couldn't possibly mean that the citizen does not have the right to infringe on the governments ability to have a militia or it would have been added to the part of the statement concerning the militia.
    Does peter think this is a typo?
    Do you have a right to a nuclear bomb. Yes or no?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #76  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,428
    Quote Originally Posted by PeterS View Post
    Do you have a right to a nuclear bomb. Yes or no?
    A nuclear bomb is not within the realm of a personal weapon for protection, i assume you are just going to enter the absurd from here on out, it is pointless discussing anything with a complete idiot.
    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  
     

  7. #77  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,428
    Quote Originally Posted by PeterS View Post
    I already addressed it. You still haven't stated why you won't address my question. There are two principle clauses that, as written, are dependent on each other.

    Why are you ignoring the first?
    I didn't, it is absurd for every member to have to come on and explain each part in duplicate, the states have the right to form militias and individuals have the right to protect themselves, it is meaningless and a waste of time for anyone to engage you, it is one sided. we are just providing you another medium to spout progressive talking points.
    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  
     

  8. #78  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,428
    Quote Originally Posted by PeterS View Post
    Do you have a right to a nuclear bomb. Yes or no?
    What does it mean when it says our right to bear arms shall not be infringed?
    You have dodged spun and done everything but answer the specific question.
    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  
     

  9. #79  
    Timed Out
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    272
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockntractor View Post
    I didn't, it is absurd for every member to have to come on and explain each part in duplicate, the states have the right to form militias and individuals have the right to protect themselves, it is meaningless and a waste of time for anyone to engage you, it is one sided. we are just providing you another medium to spout progressive talking points.
    I gave you the definition straight out of the dictionary. If you are unhappy with that...well that is really your problem. The founders didn't throw in words and punctuation simply for the fun of it. There is a reason for the words "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State" preceeding "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

    States militia were intended to be the principle means of protecting this county--a free-standing army was to be limited to periods of war (Read Article 1 Section 8). To infringe on that right would jeoperdise the freedom of this country and freedom was the central premise of the founding of this county.

    As for talking points I don't see which ones I am using?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #80  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,428
    peter it is almost impossible for me to believe that people such as your self have been stupid enough to allow themselves to be brain washed away from the clear logical meaning of words and the Constitution.
    It has never in the past all the way to the founding ever been interpreted in the manner in which you try to do so. History is proof of it.
    If your intention and the intention of the communist trash you have sold your soul to is to subvert the Constitution why don't you just do it in the lawful manner prescribed, such as a constitutional convention or constitutional amendments, it would be much better than the dishonest treasonous path that you are following.
    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  
     

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
  •