At the time the 2cd Amendment was written

[Tigerace117]

You infer what was not implied.

I infer what you danced around. There is zero other reason to bring up the families of government personnel.

 

[Tigerace117]

In your imaginary world.


Where were you during the last election? It was the Hillary crowd that melted down.

Oh really? The posts I linked were “imaginary”?

The Trump cult hysterically shrieked that the election was “rigged” for months up until the actual election....and even after Trump won.

 

[DebateChallenge]

Oh really? The posts I linked were “imaginary”?

You base your conclusion on posts by one member, and you take the posts out of context.

The Trump cult hysterically shrieked that the election was “rigged” for months up until the actual election....and even after Trump won.

The Trump Crowd did the shrieking? I will show you shrieking. I will show you impressions of spoiled five year olds hysterically screaming at the thought of their favorite toys being taken away.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Im1SgtM4q1Q

 

[Tigerace117]

You base your conclusion on posts by one member, and you take the posts out of context.


The Trump Crowd did the shrieking? I will show you shrieking. I will show you impressions of spoiled five year olds hysterically screaming at the thought of their favorite toys being taken away.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Im1SgtM4q1Q

They‘ve got nothing on gun obsessives‘ tantrums. Oh, and unlike gun obsessives, they don’t routinely threaten to commit mass murder if people disagree with them.

 

[TurtleDude]

They‘ve got nothing on gun obsessives‘ tantrums. Oh, and unlike gun obsessives, they don’t routinely threaten to commit mass murder if people disagree with them.

you're lying again. "gun obsessives"= a leftist who doesn't like the fact that gun advocates vote against socialist and collectivist politicians

 

[Tigerace117]

you're lying again. "gun obsessives"= a leftist who doesn't like the fact that gun advocates vote against socialist and collectivist politicians

No, gun obsessives are overwhelmingly on the far right, and often conduct or attempt terrorist attacks in their attempt to fight against “collectivism”.....which is why the thought of murdering the families of government personnel appeals so much to you lot

 

[TurtleDude]

No, gun obsessives are overwhelmingly on the far right, and often conduct or attempt terrorist attacks in their attempt to fight against “collectivism”.....which is why the thought of murdering the families of government personnel appeals so much to you lot

more mindless bullshit. you consider anyone who opposes the Democrat party schemes to restrict honest folks gun rights to be "gun obsessives. But then again, you have admitted serious fascist proclivities in the past-such as preventing adults from watching historically relevant movies because they might cause people to become "klansmen" or "Nazis"

 

[DebateChallenge]

They‘ve got nothing on gun obsessives‘ tantrums. Oh, and unlike gun obsessives, they don’t routinely threaten to commit mass murder if people disagree with them.

Show me a source that backs up your claim, and this time, try to find something more reliable besides one person's posts the you take out of context.

 

[Rucker61]

I infer what you danced around. There is zero other reason to bring up the families of government personnel.

If the government isn't planning on how to protect families in times of revolution, then they are not taking due diligence. In Intelligence, you prepare for capabilities, not intentions. All guerilla warfare campaigns have targeted the families of the government. Preparation is key.

 

[Rucker61]

No, gun obsessives are overwhelmingly on the far right, and often conduct or attempt terrorist attacks in their attempt to fight against “collectivism”.....which is why the thought of murdering the families of government personnel appeals so much to you lot

It's not what we would do; it's certainly what terrorists would do. Are you familiar with the three stages of revolution?

 

[Tigerace117]

more mindless bullshit. you consider anyone who opposes the Democrat party schemes to restrict honest folks gun rights to be "gun obsessives. But then again, you have admitted serious fascist proclivities in the past-such as preventing adults from watching historically relevant movies because they might cause people to become "klansmen" or "Nazis"

No, if I was a fascist I’d be storming into legislative buildings in Michigan with guns to whine about the lockdown. Or hysterically shrieking about “statists“ while hoarding guns like a squirrel does acorns. “Honest folks” don’t openly declare their intent to conduct terrorism and treason against the United States the second someone they disagree with does......anything.

 

[Tigerace117]

It's not what we would do; it's certainly what terrorists would do. Are you familiar with the three stages of revolution?

“The terrorists“ and the “2nd Amendment advocates“ are the same people.

 

[Tigerace117]

If the government isn't planning on how to protect families in times of revolution, then they are not taking due diligence. In Intelligence, you prepare for capabilities, not intentions. All guerilla warfare campaigns have targeted the families of the government. Preparation is key.

People who openly plan to murder the families of government personnel should not be allowed to operate openly. It’s really that simple.

 

[Tigerace117]

Show me a source that backs up your claim, and this time, try to find something more reliable besides one person's posts the you take out of context.

The context is the fact that “2nd amendment advocates” are happy to engage in terrorism.

Haven‘t been paying attention to the news huh? Every other week nowadays there’s a new run-in between honest Americans and far right militia thugs.

 

[DebateChallenge]

The context is the fact that “2nd amendment advocates” are happy to engage in terrorism.

Haven‘t been paying attention to the news huh? Every other week nowadays there’s a new run-in between honest Americans and far right militia thugs.

As I said, only in your imaginary world.

 

[TurtleDude]

No, if I was a fascist I’d be storming into legislative buildings in Michigan with guns to whine about the lockdown. Or hysterically shrieking about “statists“ while hoarding guns like a squirrel does acorns. “Honest folks” don’t openly declare their intent to conduct terrorism and treason against the United States the second someone they disagree with does......anything.

fascists aren't the ones protesting overreaching government.. Fascists aren't private citizens hoarding guns. You clearly haven't a clue what you are talking about

 

[TurtleDude]

“The terrorists“ and the “2nd Amendment advocates“ are the same people.

More complete bullshit. Most of the people causing death and destruction are Democrat supporters

 

[Uncensored2008]

How so possibly, when the Second Amendment it self uses the word "regulated?"

You have to understand English.

"Well Regulated" = "Well Armed."

 

[Uncensored2008]

False equivalence.

Back in the days of muzzle loading muskets, they were the highest level of weapons technology at the time. The soldiers who faced the American militia forces were armed basically the same.

Meanwhile, weapons technology is ALWAYS advancing, as those rebels and red coats clearly weren't restricted to blunderbusses, crossbows, slings, etc..

Trying to argue that as technology advances and military forces have "more dangerous weapons" as against 2A rights is actually an argument FOR allowing citizens the same basic levels of access as the military forces they might have to "revolt" against.

There will ALWAYS be a tiny minority of people who will use their rights to commit crimes and harms, hence the issue with law enforcement and the need for a Judiciary.

However, that is also no argument to try to limit 2A rights by arguing Now is not the same as Back Then.

In fact Kentucky Rifles were superior to the smoot bore muskets the British Army used - with a 1.6 twist, they were vastly more accurate.

 

[Exquisitor]

You have to understand English.

"Well Regulated" = "Well Armed."

Doubtful.

Well regulated means they rise in the morning for calisthenics and know how to march in formation.

Well regulated to me means to have passed a class in Mental Health and Gun Safety.

Well regulated, so that no one will make careless threatening statements.

Well regulated, so that in an emergency the militia will know how to follow proper protocols and orders.

 

[TurtleDude]

Doubtful.

Well regulated means they rise in the morning for calisthenics and know how to march in formation.

Well regulated to me means to have passed a class in Mental Health and Gun Safety.

Well regulated, so that no one will make careless threatening statements.

Well regulated, so that in an emergency the militia will know how to follow proper protocols and orders.

yes, you have constantly proven you don't understand the second amendment, the bill of rights, or the entire foundation upon which the constitution is based. The term well regulated meant a militia that was able to function properly when called up. It is not a term that intended to convey additional powers to the federal government, as you try to imply. It also have nothing to do with the federal government 'regulating' the militia

 

[Exquisitor]

yes, you have constantly proven you don't understand the second amendment, the bill of rights, or the entire foundation upon which the constitution is based. The term well regulated meant a militia that was able to function properly when called up. It is not a term that intended to convey additional powers to the federal government, as you try to imply. It also have nothing to do with the federal government 'regulating' the militia

No reason the Federal Government can't regulate the Militia..

 

[Exquisitor]

yes, you have constantly proven you don't understand the second amendment, the bill of rights, or the entire foundation upon which the constitution is based. The term well regulated meant a militia that was able to function properly when called up. It is not a term that intended to convey additional powers to the federal government, as you try to imply. It also have nothing to do with the federal government 'regulating' the militia

See TurtleDude, my idea of regulation is this: in order to vote, you need the gun buyer's sticker on the back of your driver's license.

 

[TurtleDude]

See TurtleDude, my idea of regulation is this: in order to vote, you need the gun buyer's sticker on the back of your driver's license.

that is silly and unconstitutional

 

[TurtleDude]

No reason the Federal Government can't regulate the Militia..

they can=when people are on active duty-just as a court can sequester a jury. Congress cannot regulate your arms when you are merely a potential militia member just as the court cannot sequester private citizens before they are part of a grand or petit jury