Who's Right?

[MR Redneck]

Again, I am not restricting anything. Where have I argued restricting the 2A? Try to retain what you read. For example, I didn't go to Baylor. I informed you my son is a student at Baylor. I am an MBA from the University of Southern California.

You always do! Such as open carry.

 

[APatriot]

You always do! Such as open carry.

Again, retention is a problem for you. This is fun though.

I argue the 2A alone does not support OC; that the political infrastructure, rather than the courts, is where the emphasis should be for those who wish to OC.

I have had fun but it is bedtime. Class is over. Good night folks.

 

[MR Redneck]

Again, retention is a problem for you. This is fun though.

I argue the 2A alone does not support OC; that the political infrastructure, rather than the courts, is where the emphasis should be for those who wish to OC.

I have had fun but it is bedtime. Class is over. Good night folks.

Ok man??!!? If the 2nd amendment doesnt support Open Carry , then the 2nd amendment doesnt support Concealed Carry either. Now that we have determined the word " bear" means nothing, go put your guns under lock and key.
Now we need to determine that the word " keep" doesnt mean you can have them at all...
Let me call Mr. McDonald and notify him a patriot is working on his rights agian. The word keep wont mean " KEEP" by the end of tonight!
Lets call all the lesbians and tell them they cant vote because their not a man, and they dont want to be a woman!
Lets call all the people who have mixed parents of black and white and tell them they cant ride on the front of a bus because they might not be defined under the civil rights act!

Do you get the point now? When you try hard enough to edit something good, you will.
For me, the answers are simply and they dont have to be defined by one subject.
People who want to restrict the rights of freedom will have to work harder to prove their point than someone who accepts what freedom realy is.
A true Patriot doesnt question the meaning of freedom nor will he provide opposition to something that will never harm anyone.

 

[APatriot]

LOL, USC. That explains his debate style...



... you mean that McDonald case that you forgot about earlier?

What? Check out my thread about the Chicago Gun Ranges under Politics. I originated the thread 12/15!!

 

[APatriot]

Ok man??!!? If the 2nd amendment doesnt support Open Carry , then the 2nd amendment doesnt support Concealed Carry either. Now that we have determined the word " bear" means nothing, go put your guns under lock and key.
Now we need to determine that the word " keep" doesnt mean you can have them at all...
Let me call Mr. McDonald and notify him a patriot is working on his rights agian. The word keep wont mean " KEEP" by the end of tonight!
Lets call all the lesbians and tell them they cant vote because their not a man, and they dont want to be a woman!
Lets call all the people who have mixed parents of black and white and tell them they cant ride on the front of a bus because they might not be defined under the civil rights act!

Do you get the point now? When you try hard enough to edit something good, you will.
For me, the answers are simply and they dont have to be defined by one subject.
People who want to restrict the rights of freedom will have to work harder to prove their point than someone who accepts what freedom realy is.
A true Patriot doesnt question the meaning of freedom nor will he provide opposition to something that will never harm anyone.

Again, the 2A doesn't specifically mention either, but instead resorts to the general terms of "bearing" and "keeping" arms, which has been shown to purport a variety of definitions from the "enlightened" as well as those "in the dark".

Again, the fact CC is legal, then in fact I am "bearing" arms. Your other "spew" is nonsense. I don't want to be mean, but I am rapidly coming to the conclusion you are not very astute based on your "banter" of generalities and comments which lack context and points of argument. In other words, not only do you lack context, but also "sourcing" for your "banter", but you are not alone in regard to the latter. In fact, I am still waiting now for about a month for some "sourcing" to back up the claim a poster made as to the TNM being a domestic terrorist organization.

 

[MR Redneck]

Again, the 2A doesn't specifically mention either, but instead resorts to the general terms of "bearing" and "keeping" arms, which has been shown to purport a variety of definitions from the "enlightened" as well as those "in the dark".

Again, the fact CC is legal, then in fact I am "bearing" arms. Your other "spew" is nonsense. I don't want to be mean, but I am rapidly coming to the conclusion you are not very astute based on your "banter" of generalities and comments which lack context and points of argument. In other words, not only do you lack context, but also "sourcing" for your "banter", but you are not alone in regard to the latter. In fact, I am still waiting now for about a month for some "sourcing" to back up the claim a poster made as to the TNM being a domestic terrorist organization.

You just keep saying the same crap over and over. I really hate to say it, gut I think your crazy.
Why are you asking me about the TNM? I never said they were terrorist, it was the forum Cops! I simply called their ideas Stupid and ignorant.

 

[APatriot]

You just keep saying the same crap over and over. I really hate to say it, gut I think your crazy.
Why are you asking me about the TNM? I never said they were terrorist, it was the forum Cops! I simply called their ideas Stupid and ignorant.

 

[M. Sage]

What? Check out my thread about the Chicago Gun Ranges under Politics. I originated the thread 12/15!!

"What?" You're going to act like you didn't say this!?

Again Students, there has been absolutely no definitive resolution by the courts of just what right the Second Amendment protects. The 2A bars federal action, and does not extend to the states. The SCOTUS has only "affirmed" individual protection only in the context of the maintenance of a militia or other such public force.

The quote is flat-out incorrect in the face of McDonald and Heller. And you say "what?"...

I have to agree with MrRedneck in regards to your mental stability...

 

[APatriot]

"What?" You're going to act like you didn't say this!?



The quote is flat-out incorrect in the face of McDonald and Heller. And you say "what?"...

I have to agree with MrRedneck in regards to your mental stability...

Oh quit acting foolish. I have clarified my position in other posts and you know it. You simply got "owned" in regard to the argument. Don't take it personal.

 

[MR Redneck]

Oh quit acting foolish. I have clarified my position in other posts and you know it. You simply got "owned" in regard to the argument. Don't take it personal.

Owned? Exactly what argument has you clarified enough that makes you think you " Owned" somebody.
Was it your dumbass argument that Texas needs to secede from the Union because of the violence in Mexico? Or what it your argument that the 2A doesnt establish the methods for states to follow, " Something you have not proved BTW"...
You have a lot of opinions that I simply dont agree with because you have no proof. If you did, I might understand and agree. In relation to the thread topic, I once again invite you to understand the meaning behind the origional meaning of the second amendment. Study what the authors of the 2nd Amendment said and you will find the reason it was established and the way it was suppose to be used. A man with your education "should" be able to understand that.

 

[APatriot]

Owned? Exactly what argument has you clarified enough that makes you think you " Owned" somebody.
Was it your dumbass argument that Texas needs to secede from the Union because of the violence in Mexico? Or what it your argument that the 2A doesnt establish the methods for states to follow, " Something you have not proved BTW"...
You have a lot of opinions that I simply dont agree with because you have no proof. If you did, I might understand and agree. In relation to the thread topic, I once again invite you to understand the meaning behind the origional meaning of the second amendment. Study what the authors of the 2nd Amendment said and you will find the reason it was established and the way it was suppose to be used. A man with your education "should" be able to understand that.

You obviously are not astute enough to even recognize I have answered your argument about the 2A ad nauseum. If you don't agree so be it. I frankly don't care.

 

[MR Redneck]

You obviously are not astute enough to even recognize I have answered your argument about the 2A ad nauseum. If you don't agree so be it. I frankly don't care.

You never answer nothin. All you do is voice Liberal Ideas.

 

[APatriot]

You never answer nothin. All you do is voice Liberal Ideas.

I have been called many things, but those who know me the best - "liberal" isn't one of them.

 

[M. Sage]

Oh quit acting foolish. I have clarified my position in other posts and you know it. You simply got "owned" in regard to the argument. Don't take it personal.

You clarified your position after having it pointed out that you were wrong. And then you went on claiming that you were right all along.

 

[MR Redneck]

You clarified your position after having it pointed out that you were wrong. And then you went on claiming that you were right all along.

Thats what I said.
All That = Liberal

 

[APatriot]

You clarified your position after having it pointed out that you were wrong. And then you went on claiming that you were right all along.

Spin it my friend.

 

[APatriot]

Thats what I said.
All That = Liberal

No, I am a Communist, A die-hard Progressive, a follower of Obama AND a member of the Texas Nationalist Movement.....lmao

 

[MR Redneck]

No, I am a Communist, A die-hard Progressive, a follower of Obama AND a member of the Texas Nationalist Movement.....lmao

Do all those TNM people know your a liberal?

 

[APatriot]

Do all those TNM people know your a liberal?

No, but let's keep it a secret just between you and I.

Side Note: Google difference between "your" and "you're". Thanks.

 

[Texas1911]

The Second Amendment applies DIRECTLY to states, and the states CANNOT make law against it. That is what the original founders wanted, and outlined. The 10th Amendment allows all other aspects of freedom to be dictated by the states, those enumerated in the Constitution, like the 1st and 2nd, are written in stone and cannot legally be trespassed upon.

The right to bear arms is dictated in the 2nd Amendment. I don't give a flying shit what some guy 200 years later thinks, the founding fathers intended for the American populous to be armed, and to bear those arms. Bearing is a simple term that dictates you are carrying a load, in this case, a firearm. Engineering calls for a load bearing wall ... meaning a wall that bears a load. It's quite simple, but people continuously obstruct the obvious because it suits their particular agenda.

I got news for those people ... that's not how the United States has worked. Just because States have gotten away with "reasonable restrictions" does not mean the root and basis of the Constitution cannot be misconstrued to obstruct law abiding citizens from bearing arms.

Perhaps the people in this country are too weak to accept freedom. We're too scared to have anything new for fear of unrest. To think that this country was rooted in such radical social change from the beginning yet we have succumb to rampant weakness and political rape.

Did you defend the Constitution ... or simply your version of it?