Make the case on why new machine guns should be [W:456, 841, 899]

[TurtleDude]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

Specious assertion? I have no idea what that even means in this context.

Are you really asking me to prove that an elected official votes for a law knowing that is it constitutional? That is beyond ridiculous as the opposite would be pure insanity - a elected representative voting for a law despite being convinced it is unconstitutional.

Asking me to engage in such folly is contrary to all debate procedures - not to mention simply absurd.

Unless YOU can come up with hard evidence that congressmen voted for a law they knew was unconstitutional - it is more than rational and reasonable for anyone to assume that a congressman votes for a law believing it is constitutional. To believe otherwise is simply irrational and foolish without evidence to support such a belief.

Good point-your assertion that a vote means the voter has determined the law is constitutional IS RIDICULOUS

 

[haymarket]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

Good point-your assertion that a vote means the voter has determined the law is constitutional IS RIDICULOUS

NO. That is a basic given that every Congressman who votes to support something believes it is constitutional. My comment to you was that is ridiculous and absurd for you to ask me to prove such a thing. Go back and read again.

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

NO. That is a basic given that every Congressman who votes to support something believes it is constitutional. My comment to you was that is ridiculous and absurd for you to ask me to prove such a thing. Go back and read again.

This is how debate works

you claim that every turd in office or who has been in office and who votes against our rights believes their vote was constitutional

I say its time for you to prove your assertion

 

[haymarket]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

This is how debate works

you claim that every turd in office or who has been in office and who votes against our rights believes their vote was constitutional

I say its time for you to prove your assertion

Actually - that is NOT how debate works. Nobody in debate is asked to prove the basic obvious assumption that any reasonable and rational person makes - in this case that a person who votes for something believes it is constitutional.


Asking me to engage in such folly is contrary to all debate procedures - not to mention simply absurd.

Unless YOU can come up with hard evidence that congressmen voted for a law they knew was unconstitutional - it is more than rational and reasonable for anyone to assume that a congressman votes for a law believing it is constitutional. To believe otherwise is simply irrational and foolish without evidence to support such a belief.

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

Actually - that is NOT how debate works. Nobody in debate is asked to prove the basic obvious assumption that any reasonable and rational person makes - in this case that a person who votes for something believes it is constitutional.

big assumption there and I reject that claim as being "obvious"

 

[haymarket]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

big assumption there and I reject that claim as being "obvious"

What you reject because it destroys your fragile claim is of no relevance as it is based on the absurdity that a legislator would knowingly and willingly violate both their oath of office and the Constitution they swear to uphold in their actions - and that includes casting their vote.

Every Congressman and every state legislator that I am aware of takes an Oath of Office in which they swear to protect the US Constitution. So for you to pretend that this absurd question of yours is relevant assumes that a legislator would intentionally violate their oath of office by voting for something that they know is against the Constitution.

That is the very high bar that YOU will have to meet if you want to pursue this line of argument.

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

Every Congressman and every state legislator that I am aware of takes an Oath of Office in which they swear to protect the US Constitution. So for you to pretend that this absurd question of yours is relevant assumes that a legislator would intentionally violate their oath of office by voting for something that they know is against the Constitution.

That is the very high bar that YOU will have to meet if you want to pursue this line of argument.

I guess that is the difference between us. You actually believe they respect the constitution and their oath

 

[haymarket]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

I guess that is the difference between us. You actually believe they respect the constitution and their oath

Until proven otherwise, I believe in that quaintly old fashioned American idea of presumption of innocence.

 

[Crimefree]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

What you reject because it destroys your fragile claim is of no relevance as it is based on the absurdity that a legislator would knowingly and willingly violate both their oath of office and the Constitution they swear to uphold in their actions - and that includes casting their vote.

Every Congressman and every state legislator that I am aware of takes an Oath of Office in which they swear to protect the US Constitution. So for you to pretend that this absurd question of yours is relevant assumes that a legislator would intentionally violate their oath of office by voting for something that they know is against the Constitution.

That is the very high bar that YOU will have to meet if you want to pursue this line of argument.

Your are promoting absolute rubbish again, just like you tried with the Canadian police and you are well aware that politicians, congressmen and president are as dirty as the they can get away with. The record is full of their known crimes and records of unpunished and fully unexposed crimes. I asked you previously how many people has government illegally killed and you have yet to answer. Are you saying it is zero now and pretending government is above usurping citizens rights? Such a claim will label you as liar.

The only lilly white people you needs concern yourself with is the participants who drafted the constitution and recognised government were inherently CORRUPT. They are and proof is not hard to find.

 

[Crimefree]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

Until proven otherwise, I believe in that quaintly old fashioned American idea of presumption of innocence.

The very fact the founding fathers recognised they were scumbags and needed hobbling is sufficient. Do you have any evidence to suggest the constitution was drafted because politicians are above reproach?

 

[Crimefree]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

No - their voting record shows I am correct.

What does a voting record represent?

 

[Crimefree]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

Your question was answered with quoted evidence. Here is more


The Second Amendment says that the American people have the right to keep and bear arms. The duly elected representatives of the American people may exercise their Constitutional powers to enact legislation controlling and regulating firearms so long as they do not create an environment where the people cannot exercise their right.


That is is. Pure and simple.

You have not explained how the 2A allows its terms to be infringed. You know what infringed means I taught you. Have you now forgotten again?

Your are regurgitating unadulterated crap again. You posted this **** before and it was trampled, shredded, trashed and flushed. It is saturated with the brown stuff you used to create it.

You are obviously playing stupid to prove some idiotic point like you are smart or something, you get 10 out of 10 for authenticity.

I asked

Please quote from the constitution how you derive that rubbish.

You have dodged about like a headless chicken sprouting utter and complete rubbish that others have the same BELIEF as well. I am not interested in what others have done or believe. YOU MADE THIS CLAIM. HOW DO YOU ARRIVE AT YOUR STATED CONCLUSION. Explain how the 2A equals what you CLAIMED it does.

Either you can do this or you cannot which is it?

 

[haymarket]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

Your are promoting absolute rubbish again, just like you tried with the Canadian police and you are well aware that politicians, congressmen and president are as dirty as the they can get away with. The record is full of their known crimes and records of unpunished and fully unexposed crimes. I asked you previously how many people has government illegally killed and you have yet to answer. Are you saying it is zero now and pretending government is above usurping citizens rights? Such a claim will label you as liar.

The only lilly white people you needs concern yourself with is the participants who drafted the constitution and recognised government were inherently CORRUPT. They are and proof is not hard to find.

Now all you have to do is present your evidence of your claims, your allegations and your charges and then explain how it disproves what I have stated.

 

[haymarket]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

The very fact the founding fathers recognised they were scumbags and needed hobbling is sufficient. Do you have any evidence to suggest the constitution was drafted because politicians are above reproach?

I have no idea where you are getting this. What exact statement that I made do you take issue with?

 

[haymarket]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

What does a voting record represent?

It is the public record of their votes on behalf of the people they represent.

 

[haymarket]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

You have not explained how the 2A allows its terms to be infringed. You know what infringed means I taught you.

Tell me again as I do not remember your particular version of what you want to think the Second Amendment means.

 

[Crimefree]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

Now all you have to do is present your evidence of your claims, your allegations and your charges and then explain how it disproves what I have stated.

Right after you produce the goods you are attempting to deflect from again as requested oh slithery one. Lets clear up your bull first since it was requested first and is still outstanding, Then I will address anything that is not now clarified and determined as rubbish.

Do you think people do not notice your inability to answer for what you claim and you can avoid being labelled a liar by continuous deflection and avoidance while whining about deserved attacks and feigned persecution.

Who pays you for the rubbish you write to attempt to disrupt valid opposition to gun control and promote the supremacy of citizen employed government?

 

[haymarket]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

Right after you produce the goods you are attempting to deflect from again as requested oh slithery one. Lets clear up your bull first since it was requested first and is still outstanding, Then I will address anything that is not now clarified and determined as rubbish.

Do you think people do not notice your inability to answer for what you claim and you can avoid being labelled a liar by continuous deflection and avoidance while whining about deserved attacks and feigned persecution.

Who pays you for the rubbish you write to attempt to disrupt valid opposition to gun control and promote the supremacy of citizen employed government?

Other than the vitriolic personal attack, I see nothing discussing any issue here.

 

[Crimefree]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

Tell me again as I do not remember your particular version of what you want to think the Second Amendment means.

I don't think it means anything other than what it says. Did you not read my original response?

Consult a dictionary at a library not the one you have. It is written in plain English not convoluted lawyer speak and requires no court interpretations. The constitution can be understood by anyone and it was written to be that way. Explain which word requires a court interpretation?

The very fact you need court interpretations suggests you are attempting to change clear meanings into something else and you demonstrated that dishonesty adequately and still have not show how you derived the rubbish you sprouted.

 

[Crimefree]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

Other than the vitriolic personal attack, I see nothing discussing any issue here.

Other than feigned persecution, mud slinging and squirming I see nothing but avoidance here.

Your point was fully addressed and it is not my fault the English language is so difficult for you to understand that it takes six posts and you are no closer to validating the rubbish you posted. I'll just call it another Haymarket LIE.

I have been more than patient but refuse to entertain further your deliberate and understandable avoidance of showing you lied to try and fool people and mislead them. This is now at an end. Do not use this proven lie again. Your interpretation of the 2nd is a complete lie.

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

Until proven otherwise, I believe in that quaintly old fashioned American idea of presumption of innocence.

I wish you would extend that belief to people who want to own firearms

 

[haymarket]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

Other than feigned persecution, mud slinging and squirming I see nothing but avoidance here.

Your point was fully addressed and it is not my fault the English language is so difficult for you to understand that it takes six posts and you are no closer to validating the rubbish you posted. I'll just call it another Haymarket LIE.

I have been more than patient but refuse to entertain further your deliberate and understandable avoidance of showing you lied to try and fool people and mislead them. This is now at an end. Do not use this proven lie again. Your interpretation of the 2nd is a complete lie.

Again, I see the attack against me but see no discussion of any issue that I need reply to.

 

[haymarket]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

I wish you would extend that belief to people who want to own firearms

What crime have they been accused of?

 

[Zyphlin]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

Again, I see the attack against me but see no discussion of any issue that I need reply to.

Moderator's Warning:

Then in the future I'd suggest you simply not reply, rather than making a non-topical baiting response such as this. If you, or anyone else, feels someone is "attacking" you personally then report it and/or ignore it. Responding in this fashion however is baiting and needs to cease

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: Make the case on why new machine guns should be banned

What crime have they been accused of?

being unfit to exercise their pre-existing and constitutionally recognized rights without government permission