9
   

THE LIE THAT IS LIBERAL

 
 
oralloy
 
  -4  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2016 01:44 pm
@Leadfoot,
Leadfoot wrote:
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Medieval townhalls had a "R├╝stkammer" (armoury), where the weapons were stored.

This is where the gun control interpretation of the second amendment starts.

The Founding Fathers were way ahead of them. The Second Amendment specifies the right to KEEP arms as well as the right to bear them.


Leadfoot wrote:
The rest of it goes: It really only gives the government the right to arm its own troops!

The Second Amendment might be construed to apply to militiamen (should any exist), but it cannot apply to any standing army.

If the anti-gunners want the government to set up a militia, and then apply the Second Amendment only to that militia, that would mean that anyone who joins the militia would have the right to own all sorts of military weaponry, and the right to keep it all in their own home.

And the Ninth Amendment would step in and protect the rights of non-militiamen to have guns for self-defense.
oralloy
 
  -4  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2016 01:45 pm
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:
Your homicide rate is through the roof because you live in a society awash with guns and trigger happy police.

This is incorrect. Our homicide rate is through the roof because we have a lot of highly impoverished areas where people have no hope.

If they didn't have guns, they would be hacking each other to pieces with knives.


izzythepush wrote:
I'd actually have some, (not much, but some,) respect if you were honest and said that you thought the killings were a price worth paying for your need to own a gun.

If it were actually true that guns were the cause of all that killing, it would indeed be worth the price to continue carrying guns.

Need is completely the wrong word for it though. As free people, we CHOOSE to own guns.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  4  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2016 01:46 pm
@oralloy,
Well, medieval history certainly is different to what you know from video games.
oralloy
 
  -4  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2016 01:46 pm
@joefromchicago,
joefromchicago wrote:
If the truth of a fact is relevant to your argument, then the falsity of that fact would likewise be relevant. You can't say "I'm right because this is true, but even if it's not true, it doesn't matter." If its falsity doesn't matter, its truth doesn't matter either.

I concur that lack of relevance would mean that it doesn't matter whether it was true or false. But I'm not saying "I'm right because that point is true." I initially didn't address that point at all, and focused instead on the points that I saw as relevant.

But Parados raised the issue again and complained about me ignoring it. I figured he believes that the point is relevant, so I thought I should ask why he thinks so.

Maybe he sees some relevance that I don't currently perceive. If he provides a convincing argument that the point is relevant, then it *will* matter whether it is true or not.

Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2016 01:48 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
Leadfoot wrote:
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Medieval townhalls had a "R├╝stkammer" (armoury), where the weapons were stored.

This is where the gun control interpretation of the second amendment starts.

The Founding Fathers were way ahead of them.
No doubt: they lived some hundred years later.
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2016 01:49 pm
@farmerman,
Not sure what you mean FM.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2016 01:54 pm
Anyone coming here who hopes to convert the regulars to conservatism will be sorely disappointed

Anyone who can't take the **** conservatives get here, should get out.

0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -4  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2016 01:56 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Well, medieval history certainly is different to what you know from video games.

I concur that "medieval history" and "what I know from video games" are two different things.

I am unsure of the relevance?
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -4  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2016 02:03 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:
oralloy wrote:
The Founding Fathers were way ahead of them.

No doubt: they lived some hundred years later.

You misunderstand. "Them" refers to the gun control movement of today.

The Founding Fathers were way ahead of today's gun control movement.

"Way ahead of them" is an American idiom. The Founding Fathers perceived what people would do in the future to try to undermine the Second Amendment, and they acted ahead of time to prevent it from succeeding.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  5  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2016 05:32 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
Luckily though there is plenty of other evidence that I am right. Note the court rulings quoted in Post: # 6,270,884 for example.

I have noted it and it says absolutely nothing to support your contention that the English bill of rights granted all citizens the right to have a gun.
parados
 
  6  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2016 05:36 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
More importantly, even in the unlikely event that this is true, I do not see how it could possibly relevant.


So you are now saying this statement by you isn't relevant to your argument?
oralloy wrote:

These restrictions were loosened in later centuries as the right to keep and bear arms was created in the English Bill of Rights.


Quote:

How are they relevant to this discussion?

Unless you want to argue that your claim has no bearing on your argument it would be highly relevant.

Quote:
The interpretation of the right that is used by every single court of law in every single country that was ever a part of the British Empire, is hardly my own creation.

Except the ruling you quoted (Rex v Dewhurst) says absolutely nothing about the English Bill of Rights granting any rights to own or carry a gun.
giujohn
 
  -3  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2016 07:29 pm
Quote:
He needs to believe that more guns equals safety. he has to believe that societies with fewer guns are more violent.


No wonder you want to talk about universities after I blew you out of the water after making the above ridiculous statement. I noticed that you have absolutely no counter to my proof that you don't know what the hell you're talking about other than to comment on the state of Georgia's Universitys
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  7  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2016 05:57 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
I initially didn't address that point at all, and focused instead on the points that I saw as relevant.

But Parados raised the issue again and complained about me ignoring it.

That's not true. You raised the English Bill of Rights first, before Parados responded to anything you wrote in this thread. Here's what you wrote:

oralloy wrote:
The right was created in 1689.


And you subsequently referred to the English Bill of Rights several times thereafter. So the point is clearly relevant to your argument. Indeed, when Parados asked you if you were referring to the English Bill of Rights as the source of the right to bear arms, you said:

oralloy wrote:
Of course I am.


In response, Parados correctly noted that the right created in 1689 was quite limited, to the point that it could hardly be called a "right" at all. That's when you said it didn't matter if he was correct. But it most certainly does matter. If Parados is correct, then your entire argument falls apart, since you are basing the American right to bear arms on the English Bill of Rights. If the EBR didn't create the right, though, there was no common-law right to be transferred to the US in 1776.

Your response to Parados, then, amounts to: "I'm not convinced that you're criticism of my position is right, but even if it is, it doesn't matter, because I'm still right." Can you see why that might not be a convincing argument?
giujohn
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2016 08:59 am
I find parados to be consistently wrong... but at least he's consistent.
farmerman
 
  6  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2016 09:09 am
@giujohn,
face it, you disagree with his facts. Cant do anything bout facts unless they are proven wrong. So far youre battin zero.
giujohn
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2016 09:49 am
@farmerman,
I proved him wrong on several occasions. Those are the facts.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2016 09:55 am
@giujohn,
You don't know what a fact is. Or when you've lost an argument. You lost to Parados a very long time ago.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2016 09:58 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

O wow, some study from Georgia. Everyone knows that's where all the good universities are.

Your homicide rate is through the roof because you live in a society awash with guns and trigger happy police. I'd actually have some, (not much, but some,) respect if you were honest and said that you thought the killings were a price worth paying for your need to own a gun.

Instead you peddle a load of old bollocks because you can't handle the truth. I live in Britain, I know I don't live in a violent society. So take your horseshit sandwich elsewhere.


HEY IZZY...( and all the rest of you idiots who want to take guns away from the law-abiding)

How did you like that woman in

GEORGIA

who blew away one of the scumbags that invaded her home??

That was a great example of gun control... She went up against three armed **** heads and killed one of them and sent the other two running... She controlled her gun expertly.

Good thing she wasn't living in Britain huh?

Don't you just love irony?


izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2016 10:01 am
@giujohn,
Hey Gooey. I'm not bloody interested. You're a fascist, a racist and a bigot, and I'm done wasting time on someone I find completely disgusting.


giujohn
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2016 10:02 am
@izzythepush,
Hahahaha hahahaha hahahaha... that's what I thought.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 08/05/2020 at 11:11:14