Home | Community | Message Board

Sporeworks
Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract, Kratom Powder For Sale   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #951185 - 10/10/02 10:14 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

writing Moderator had nothing to do with my decision of what to write.

Yeah, it was all just coincidence wasn't it. You write nothing on topic for a month, then I mention the moderator and you write two posts on topic in succession.

Fear clearly concentrates your mind.

btw, quick word of advice - probably best not to brag about how much you enjoy cluttering up the board with idiotic one-line off topic posts.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: Xlea321]
    #951519 - 10/11/02 12:54 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Believe what you want Albie, a quick search of my posts will bear me out. But since you don't take the time to read I don't imagine you'll bother. Keep on being a legend in your own mind if that's what gets you off.

Funny how you still haven't answered Evolvings post.... but then, we knew you had neither the brains or the balls.

Frankly... the whole point of responding to your posts was to try and encourage you to think. Since you appear to be incapable of that simplest of functions I have no wish to waste any more of my time.

As a parting word, I did provide you with cases showing courts that have backed the "people" having the right to gun ownership. All since Miller, which obviously you haven't read. Since they don't match the opinion you have tucked away in that little pea brain of yours you'll never even bother to check them but that's OK. I mean, you've made it this far without an original thought... why start now? After all, coming from a country that can't defend itself on its own, and where personal self defense gets you a stiffer jail term than the one you're defending yourself against, what else could we have expected?

Normally I don't call people here "dumb shits", but in your case I will.

Oh No!!! Moderators!!! I hurt Als feelings! Want to spank me?


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Edited by luvdemshrooms (10/11/02 12:55 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #951740 - 10/11/02 04:21 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

I have no wish to waste any more of my time.

Thank god for that. You have been wasting everybodys time.

All since Miller, which obviously you haven't read.

Utter lying nonsense. There is no federal court that has EVER backed the NRA's interpretation of the second amendment. The government and supreme court consider the argument so exhaustivley proved against the NRA that they do not even see any point in considering it anymore. It has been proven time and time again for the last 100 years that the second amendment does NOT provide citizens the right to own guns. This is beyond doubt.

Moderators!!! I hurt Als feelings! Want to spank me?

You've never hurt anyones feelings, just wasted board bandwidth. Hopefully you will live up to your word and shut up now.

Cheers.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: Xlea321]
    #952104 - 10/11/02 07:35 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

In reply to:

As I've pointed out there is no court in the land who will support the NRA's interpretation of the second amendment.



As luvdeshrooms pointed out you are wrong.

In reply to:

It isn't "my assertion" - it's common law. What is your difficulty in understanding this?



Still unable to respond to my points, eh? The constitution is not a common law document, it is the charter of the U.S. government. It states specifically what powers are delegated to the federal government and to what branches.

Are you too naive to see the foolishness of citing government edicts for it's re-interpretation of the government's charter? Have you no sense of history and the inertial tendency of all governments to take power from their citizens? When a government changes the interpretation of it's charter to benefit the government's hold on power, don't you find that in the least bit alarming? It is foolish and naive rationalizations such as your own which allow people such as Adolph Hitler to legally seize power. Quit hiding behind the skirts of those who would abrogate our rights and provide evidence as I requested. What is your difficulty understanding my request? Is English not you primary language? Here I'll try it again so we can all see how a simple little mind cannot comprehend a simple request...

Please address the following directly to illustrate that the original intent of the founders of the United States, the authors of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and the ratifiers of the Constitution agree with your interpretation of the Second Amendment:
Please provide any quotes (and your sources) from the founding fathers, the people who wrote and signed the constitution as to their intentions and the purpose of the 2nd amendment. Also provide any quotes (and your sources) from the founding fathers as to the meaning of the term 'militia' as they used it in the 2nd amendment.



--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: Evolving]
    #952271 - 10/11/02 08:29 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

As luvdeshrooms pointed out you are wrong.

:grin:

Yep, you get your facts from luvdem. Some idiot on a shroom board. I'll get mine from the supreme court and every legal expert who has studied this for the last 100 years.

Still unable to respond to my points, eh?

What points?  The courts and the government say you are wrong, you say you are right. What is there to argue?

Have you no sense of history and the inertial tendency of all governments to take power from their citizens?

By this I presume you are finally admitting the government and courts don't agree with the NRA.

Here's a little info for you to read, it's a little more reliable than luvdem:

The best indication of what any law, including a Constitutional provision, means, is what the courts say it means. Our federal courts, including the Supreme Court, have spoken plainly and unanimously on the meaning of the Second Amendment. It is astonishing that no-one knows this. Even most books on either side of the issue fail to cover court decisions. The legal meaning of the Second Amendment tends to get lost in the hype. The pro-gun forces especially would like to ignore that there is any contemporary jurisprudence on the topic. Most NRA members probably don't know that the organization always bases its litigation on constitutional grounds such as overbreadth and vagueness--it never argues that a gun control law offends the Second Amendment, because it knows that, under the present state of the law, it would lose.

Before I tell you what the courts have said, lets dispose of another issue. Pro-gun tracts exhaustively examine-- sometimes for hundreds of pages--statements made by figures such as Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, George Washington, Tom Paine, etc. Assuming for the sake of argument that some of the Founders solidly believed in an individual right to bear arms against an oppressive government--it may be so--why does constitutional analysis not stop at the Founders' intentions?

The answer is quite simple: this is not the way American law works. Though there are conservative thinkers, including some law professors, who think original intent is the only thing that counts, they are a tiny minority in a crowd of lawyers, politicians, judges and citizens who think that the Constitution is a living document. Legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin put it best: the Constitution is a story being written collectively by each generation of judges. Each judge has a responsibility to respect the characters and plot left her by her predecessors, but brings the story up to date in terms of plot and character development. This is how we interpret the First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments; freedom of speech, as in the recent CDA decision, is constantly being extended to media of which the Founders never dreamed.

Pro-gun forces certainly believe that 20th century Second Amendment jurisprudence is dead wrong, just as I believe that court decisions upholding the constitutionality of the Communications Act of 1934 are dead wrong. What we are both saying is that the courts, in a given instance, wrote the wrong story. We are entitled to our opinions. The perniciousness of the pro-gun forces, particularly the NRA, is not that they disagree with the courts, but that they lie to their members and to the public about what the law says. The success of the NRA and similar organizations in their disinformation campaign is evident in the fact that so many otherwise reasonable citizens believe that the Second Amendment, despite its reference to the militia, guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms. No-one knows that the highest federal courts in the land have consistently held that the Second Amendment is only a right held by the states against the federal government.




--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: Xlea321]
    #952341 - 10/11/02 08:50 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Evolving wrote:
"Still unable to respond to my points, eh?"

Alex123 wrote:
"What points?"

You have got to be the most ignorant person I have ever encountered. Can't you read? Again, here it is....

Please address the following directly to illustrate that the original intent of the founders of the United States, the authors of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and the ratifiers of the Constitution agree with your interpretation of the Second Amendment:
Please provide any quotes (and your sources) from the founding fathers, the people who wrote and signed the constitution as to their intentions and the purpose of the 2nd amendment. Also provide any quotes (and your sources) from the founding fathers as to the meaning of the term 'militia' as they used it in the 2nd amendment.


You see the bolded statements above? Those are in English, they are specific. Why can't you address them directly, is that extra chromosome getting in the way?


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: Evolving]
    #952744 - 10/11/02 11:11 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

You have got to be the most ignorant person I have ever encountered.

Thank you dear. The mushrooms really have done you a lot of good havn't they.

Can't you read?

Are you completly stupid? Did you read the above post that explained in clear language why your question was irrelevant? Or did you just skip over it in your haste to write it again? Your moronic "question" is completly irrelevant to reality . Can you understand that idiot? The law is clear that the second amendment does not support individual gun ownership. Indulging your NRA masturbatory fantasies isn't going to change that.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: Evolving]
    #952752 - 10/11/02 11:15 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

As you didn't bother to read it last time, here it is again:

The best indication of what any law, including a Constitutional provision, means, is what the courts say it means. Our federal courts, including the Supreme Court, have spoken plainly and unanimously on the meaning of the Second Amendment. It is astonishing that no-one knows this. Even most books on either side of the issue fail to cover court decisions. The legal meaning of the Second Amendment tends to get lost in the hype. The pro-gun forces especially would like to ignore that there is any contemporary jurisprudence on the topic. Most NRA members probably don't know that the organization always bases its litigation on constitutional grounds such as overbreadth and vagueness--it never argues that a gun control law offends the Second Amendment, because it knows that, under the present state of the law, it would lose.

Before I tell you what the courts have said, lets dispose of another issue. Pro-gun tracts exhaustively examine-- sometimes for hundreds of pages--statements made by figures such as Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, George Washington, Tom Paine, etc. Assuming for the sake of argument that some of the Founders solidly believed in an individual right to bear arms against an oppressive government--it may be so--why does constitutional analysis not stop at the Founders' intentions?

The answer is quite simple: this is not the way American law works. Though there are conservative thinkers, including some law professors, who think original intent is the only thing that counts, they are a tiny minority in a crowd of lawyers, politicians, judges and citizens who think that the Constitution is a living document. Legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin put it best: the Constitution is a story being written collectively by each generation of judges. Each judge has a responsibility to respect the characters and plot left her by her predecessors, but brings the story up to date in terms of plot and character development. This is how we interpret the First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments; freedom of speech, as in the recent CDA decision, is constantly being extended to media of which the Founders never dreamed.

Pro-gun forces certainly believe that 20th century Second Amendment jurisprudence is dead wrong, just as I believe that court decisions upholding the constitutionality of the Communications Act of 1934 are dead wrong. What we are both saying is that the courts, in a given instance, wrote the wrong story. We are entitled to our opinions. The perniciousness of the pro-gun forces, particularly the NRA, is not that they disagree with the courts, but that they lie to their members and to the public about what the law says. The success of the NRA and similar organizations in their disinformation campaign is evident in the fact that so many otherwise reasonable citizens believe that the Second Amendment, despite its reference to the militia, guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms. No-one knows that the highest federal courts in the land have consistently held that the Second Amendment is only a right held by the states against the federal government.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: Xlea321]
    #952875 - 10/11/02 05:24 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

In reply to:

Are you completly stupid? Did you read the above post that explained in clear language why your question was irrelevant? Or did you just skip over it in your haste to write it again? Your moronic "question" is completly irrelevant to reality . Can you understand that idiot? The law is clear that the second amendment does not support individual gun ownership. Indulging your NRA masturbatory fantasies isn't going to change that.



What's the matter Alex, got caught with your pants down? Unable to provide a direct response? ARE YOU EVER ABLE TO PROVIDE A DIRECT RESPONSE? Are you that unintelligent that you don't know the meaning of my request?

In typical fashion, you refuse to address the issue someone else brings up and then ask a question expecting the other person to drop their query. Alex, you are so transparent that a blind man could see through you.

I read what you cut and pasted from your socialist sources, that in no way provides a response to my original request. Apparently you are so simple minded as to think your evasions are an answer? They are not.

You have not given as direct response to my request because you cannot, you do not have the facts that are required. Do some research Alex, and get back to us with a direct response, your dunce cap is getting larger... or is it that your brain is shrinking?

Please address the following directly to illustrate that the original intent of the founders of the United States, the authors of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and the ratifiers of the Constitution agree with your interpretation of the Second Amendment:
Please provide any quotes (and your sources) from the founding fathers, the people who wrote and signed the constitution as to their intentions and the purpose of the 2nd amendment. Also provide any quotes (and your sources) from the founding fathers as to the meaning of the term 'militia' as they used it in the 2nd amendment.



--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: Evolving]
    #952914 - 10/11/02 05:39 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Here it is again. This time READ IT. You're making yourself look even more stupid than usual (and that's going some!)

The best indication of what any law, including a Constitutional provision, means, is what the courts say it means. Our federal courts, including the Supreme Court, have spoken plainly and unanimously on the meaning of the Second Amendment. It is astonishing that no-one knows this. Even most books on either side of the issue fail to cover court decisions. The legal meaning of the Second Amendment tends to get lost in the hype. The pro-gun forces especially would like to ignore that there is any contemporary jurisprudence on the topic. Most NRA members probably don't know that the organization always bases its litigation on constitutional grounds such as overbreadth and vagueness--it never argues that a gun control law offends the Second Amendment, because it knows that, under the present state of the law, it would lose.

Before I tell you what the courts have said, lets dispose of another issue. Pro-gun tracts exhaustively examine-- sometimes for hundreds of pages--statements made by figures such as Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, George Washington, Tom Paine, etc. Assuming for the sake of argument that some of the Founders solidly believed in an individual right to bear arms against an oppressive government--it may be so--why does constitutional analysis not stop at the Founders' intentions?

The answer is quite simple: this is not the way American law works. Though there are conservative thinkers, including some law professors, who think original intent is the only thing that counts, they are a tiny minority in a crowd of lawyers, politicians, judges and citizens who think that the Constitution is a living document. Legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin put it best: the Constitution is a story being written collectively by each generation of judges. Each judge has a responsibility to respect the characters and plot left her by her predecessors, but brings the story up to date in terms of plot and character development. This is how we interpret the First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments; freedom of speech, as in the recent CDA decision, is constantly being extended to media of which the Founders never dreamed.

Pro-gun forces certainly believe that 20th century Second Amendment jurisprudence is dead wrong, just as I believe that court decisions upholding the constitutionality of the Communications Act of 1934 are dead wrong. What we are both saying is that the courts, in a given instance, wrote the wrong story. We are entitled to our opinions. The perniciousness of the pro-gun forces, particularly the NRA, is not that they disagree with the courts, but that they lie to their members and to the public about what the law says. The success of the NRA and similar organizations in their disinformation campaign is evident in the fact that so many otherwise reasonable citizens believe that the Second Amendment, despite its reference to the militia, guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms. No-one knows that the highest federal courts in the land have consistently held that the Second Amendment is only a right held by the states against the federal government.



--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: Evolving]
    #952924 - 10/11/02 05:43 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

get back to us

"Us?"

Is that you and that little mouse in your pocket?  :grin:


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: Xlea321]
    #952962 - 10/11/02 06:02 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Reading comprehension, look at the following phrase I used, "Please provide any quotes (and your sources) from the founding fathers." Alex, you have provided nothing, absolutely nothing from the founders of this country that support your contention. Heresay doesn't count. Some key words for you to mull over, "quotes," "original intent."

Now, maybe you should take off that dunce cap, it appears that it's too tight on your little skull and you're not getting proper blood flow to that mass of mush you call a brain. Try again, this time give the proper answer.

Please address the following directly to illustrate that the original intent of the founders of the United States, the authors of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and the ratifiers of the Constitution agree with your interpretation of the Second Amendment:
Please provide any quotes (and your sources) from the founding fathers, the people who wrote and signed the constitution as to their intentions and the purpose of the 2nd amendment. Also provide any quotes (and your sources) from the founding fathers as to the meaning of the term 'militia' as they used it in the 2nd amendment.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinejohnnyfive
Burning withCircles!
Registered: 07/02/02
Posts: 886
Loc: Hell
Last seen: 17 years, 4 months
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: Evolving]
    #952992 - 10/11/02 06:21 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

In referance to the sniper killings, (although i think there something strange about this case, but im not going to get in to that).

I can tell you why everything is going to shit; how and why people have no moral.

Prohibition

"If we can take a non-violent citizen and turn him in to a violent criminal, we can certainly take a criminal and turn him in to a terrorist" - bill maher

What this referes to is that the sorce of the corruption is that you take something that isn't inherinty a crime, and turn it in to a crime, and with time this can corrupt, and demoralize the people. Why do you think we ended alcohol prohibition? The goverment couldn't handle the explosion in crime. There are some other things that play in this too, but too much to type!


--------------------
And the gameshow host rings the buzzer (brrnnntt) oh and now you get a face full of face!


Edited by johnnyfive (10/11/02 06:25 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: Evolving]
    #954227 - 10/12/02 03:15 AM (18 years, 11 months ago)

nothing from the founders of this country that support your contention.

Once again, it isn't "my contention". It is the contention of the government, the supreme court and every legal expert for the last 100 years.

Please tell me what relevance your question has to anything and why time should be wasted addressing it.

Once again, try and comprehend:

The best indication of what any law, including a Constitutional provision, means, is what the courts say it means. Our federal courts, including the Supreme Court, have spoken plainly and unanimously on the meaning of the Second Amendment. It is astonishing that no-one knows this. Even most books on either side of the issue fail to cover court decisions. The legal meaning of the Second Amendment tends to get lost in the hype. The pro-gun forces especially would like to ignore that there is any contemporary jurisprudence on the topic. Most NRA members probably don't know that the organization always bases its litigation on constitutional grounds such as overbreadth and vagueness--it never argues that a gun control law offends the Second Amendment, because it knows that, under the present state of the law, it would lose.

Before I tell you what the courts have said, lets dispose of another issue. Pro-gun tracts exhaustively examine-- sometimes for hundreds of pages--statements made by figures such as Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, George Washington, Tom Paine, etc. Assuming for the sake of argument that some of the Founders solidly believed in an individual right to bear arms against an oppressive government--it may be so--why does constitutional analysis not stop at the Founders' intentions?

The answer is quite simple: this is not the way American law works. Though there are conservative thinkers, including some law professors, who think original intent is the only thing that counts, they are a tiny minority in a crowd of lawyers, politicians, judges and citizens who think that the Constitution is a living document. Legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin put it best: the Constitution is a story being written collectively by each generation of judges. Each judge has a responsibility to respect the characters and plot left her by her predecessors, but brings the story up to date in terms of plot and character development. This is how we interpret the First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments; freedom of speech, as in the recent CDA decision, is constantly being extended to media of which the Founders never dreamed.

Pro-gun forces certainly believe that 20th century Second Amendment jurisprudence is dead wrong, just as I believe that court decisions upholding the constitutionality of the Communications Act of 1934 are dead wrong. What we are both saying is that the courts, in a given instance, wrote the wrong story. We are entitled to our opinions. The perniciousness of the pro-gun forces, particularly the NRA, is not that they disagree with the courts, but that they lie to their members and to the public about what the law says. The success of the NRA and similar organizations in their disinformation campaign is evident in the fact that so many otherwise reasonable citizens believe that the Second Amendment, despite its reference to the militia, guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms. No-one knows that the highest federal courts in the land have consistently held that the Second Amendment is only a right held by the states against the federal government.



--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: Xlea321]
    #956702 - 10/13/02 12:40 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Alex, you get an 'F' in reading comprehension. Your schooling has failed you.

Here, I'll break it down for you. Try to put the pieces together and quit dodging.

Please address the following directly...

to illustrate that the original intent...

of the founders of the United States, the authors of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and the ratifiers of the Constitution agree with your interpretation of the Second Amendment:

Please provide any quotes (and your sources)...

from the founding fathers, the people who wrote and signed the constitution...

as to their intentions and the purpose of the 2nd amendment.

Also provide any quotes (and your sources) from the founding fathers...

as to the meaning of the term 'militia' as they used it in the 2nd amendment.


If you cannot provide the information that I have explicitly requested, you will have demonstrated that we should remove internet access from all special education classes. Now empty out your drool bucket and ask the facilitator for some help.... go on... don't be afraid, they're only facts that I am asking for. Do you know what facts are? Ask the nice lady sitting at the desk...

No Alex, not evasions...

No Alex, not hearsay...

No Alex, not opinion...

No Alex, not regurgiated equivocations...

that's right my little leftists robot, FACTS, QUOTES, FROM THE SOURCE...

GET IT?


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Edited by Evolving (10/13/02 01:20 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: Evolving]
    #956767 - 10/13/02 01:26 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

I don't know where you get your patience dealing with the mentally challenged. Alex is obviously incompetent and as such unable to understand even the most simple of questions. Hell, he can't even comprehend a word as easy to understand as "people". Even his ability to look up court decisions is missing. Were it not so he would have looked up some that were posted for him. I wonder if his parents are as mentally challenged as he seems to be?

Good luck Evolving, perhaps he'll answer some day. I doubt it though as then he'd have to admit that he's wrong.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: Evolving]
    #957175 - 10/13/02 04:35 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Evolving, you need to go out and get laid man. Don't take yourself so seriously.

You too luvdem.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinejohnnyfive
Burning withCircles!
Registered: 07/02/02
Posts: 886
Loc: Hell
Last seen: 17 years, 4 months
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: Xlea321]
    #958010 - 10/13/02 10:18 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Didn't timothy McViegh bomb the federal building cus he was pissed that the goverment is pushing more and more gun control?


--------------------
And the gameshow host rings the buzzer (brrnnntt) oh and now you get a face full of face!


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: johnnyfive]
    #958179 - 10/13/02 11:21 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Actually his beef had to do with the murder of innocent women and children who didn't subscribe to one of the government approved religions. (They were a small church of Seventh Day Adventists)

But ya' know, that episode just goes to show you that the government is the only group to be trusted with firearms, who else could have wiped those freaks out?


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinemr freedom
enthusiast
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 232
Last seen: 16 years, 4 months
Re: Thank god for gun ownership... [Re: Xlea321]
    #960944 - 10/14/02 10:21 PM (18 years, 11 months ago)

Ok, I read it but not the three times you posted it. My reading comprehension seems to be greater than yours so it was not neccesary.

In all of your agruments, against the definition of the terms in the second amendment, and your subsequent attempts at furthering your stance with the supreme courts decisions, you failed, miserably I might add, to examine the one, fundamental, fact that all "legal experts" fail to recognize.

In this country, any law can be ignored if the jury says so. We have trial by jury for a reason, to have a hammer to knock in the heads of those that would eliminate our right to defend ourselves. At any time, and it has occured in the past in this nation, a jury may simple let a defendant go; even if that defendant is guilty as hell.

If "we the people" decide that gun laws are becoming rediculous to the extreme it only remains to bring the case before the people and settle it there. The supreme court can stuff it at that point; the PEOPLE have spoken.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract, Kratom Powder For Sale   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Thank goodness the U.K. banned private guns.
( 1 2 3 all )
luvdemshrooms 3,637 40 11/24/02 02:48 PM
by Viveka
* article about gun policy Anonymous 540 3 09/29/03 10:30 AM
by Anonymous
* Guns
( 1 2 all )
mr_kite 3,211 22 10/26/02 03:57 PM
by Innvertigo
* gun control
( 1 2 3 4 ... 11 12 all )
Anonymous 13,862 223 10/08/03 02:45 AM
by Rose
* For You Gun Haters
( 1 2 3 4 ... 10 11 all )
Sinistar 13,182 211 02/09/03 07:18 AM
by Evolving
* The False Promise of Gun Control
( 1 2 all )
Anonymous 3,429 23 04/16/03 07:53 PM
by pattern
* GUNS
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Anonymous 4,442 66 03/08/03 11:33 PM
by Anonymous
* Gun Control
( 1 2 3 all )
Andytweed 3,329 44 01/29/03 05:35 AM
by RandalFlagg

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
5,287 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 5 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic | ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2021 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.037 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 17 queries.