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

[haymarket]

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

oh its plenty deniable

REagan wasn't motivated to ban guns

One must note that you want to talk about things which CANNOT be conclusively proven like motivation and intent and purpose and inspiration rather than actual hard cold actions which speak for themselves and are undeniable as concrete facts of history.

That says a great deal about your inability to deny those same facts of history.

 

[TurtleDude]

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

One must note that you want to talk about things which CANNOT be conclusively proven like motivation and intent and purpose and inspiration rather than actual hard cold actions which speak for themselves and are undeniable as concrete facts of history.

That says a great deal about your inability to deny those same facts of history.

yes we can

for anyone who was actually following that bill, it was widely known and reported that REAGAN had publicly said he was going to sign into law the McLure-Volker Firearms Owner Protection Act

that is why Hughes and Rangel conspired to violate the rules and ignore the vote, to try to derail the bill

so that is more evidence as to the specious nature of the silly arguments you advance

 

[haymarket]

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

yes we can

for anyone who was actually following that bill, it was widely known and reported that REAGAN had publicly said he was going to sign into law the McLure-Volker Firearms Owner Protection Act

that is why Hughes and Rangel conspired to violate the rules and ignore the vote, to try to derail the bill

so that is more evidence as to the specious nature of the silly arguments you advance

President Reagan had the power to veto the bill. He did NOT do so. Instead, he SIGNED the bill into law.

That action dwarfs any phony pretense or inane rationalizations about motivation or intent or purpose or inspiration or any other waffling to try and get around what President Reagan actually did.

 

[TurtleDude]

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

President Reagan had the power to veto the bill. He did NOT do so. Instead, he SIGNED the bill into law.

That action dwarfs any phony pretense or inane rationalizations about motivation or intent or purpose or inspiration or any other waffling to try and get around what President Reagan actually did.

you have been told dozens of times why Reagan signed the bill despite the machinations of dishonest Democrats

 

[haymarket]

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

you have been told dozens of times why Reagan signed the bill despite the machinations of dishonest Democrats

I read your sorrowful tale of what you believe because you want to believe it. Such rationalizations and excuses are irrelevant next to the action itself.

 

[AmericanSpartan]

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

Sounds like an argument to make in your lawsuit. Or better yet - an argument that your side should have made to President Ronald Reagan before he signed the bill.

I am always amazed at the secret and arcane knowledge the far right seems to unearth like Indiana Jones finding a relic in a dark cave - telling us that constitutional amendments are not real or laws on the books were never really passed.

coming from people who say 2nd Amendment does not protect the right to keep and bear arms, or rights do not exist I will laugh long and hard...

 

[haymarket]

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

coming from people who say 2nd Amendment does not protect the right to keep and bear arms, or rights do not exist I will laugh long and hard...

You must be laughing in the mirror.

 

[AmericanSpartan]

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

Perhaps because no such pre-existingright has ever been shown to exist in the real world. Even your ally Turtle has admitted that. So why do you cling to that willful belief when you cannot produce any evidence of it?

The Supreme Court agrees with me.

D.C. vs. Heller, the Supreme Court said the Second Amendment “codified a pre-existing right. The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it “shall not be infringed ... this is not a right granted by the Constitution” (p. 19).

 

[AmericanSpartan]

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

You must be laughing in the mirror.

Coming from you I find that funny..

 

[haymarket]

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

The Supreme Court agrees with me.

D.C. vs. Heller, the Supreme Court said the Second Amendment “codified a pre-existing right. The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it “shall not be infringed ... this is not a right granted by the Constitution” (p. 19).

One group of believers stating that they believe that a different group were also believers DOES NOT make a right retroactive over two centuries ago that did not exist then and did not protect anyone.

I only wish that it were that easy to change history because you believe like Gertie did in ET.

 

[haymarket]

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

Coming from you I find that funny..

I was right. You are laughing in the mirror.

 

[AmericanSpartan]

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

I was right. You are laughing in the mirror.

so you can not make a point about limiting the civil rights of other Americans, but you about laughing in the mirror?...

 

[TurtleDude]

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

I read your sorrowful tale of what you believe because you want to believe it. Such rationalizations and excuses are irrelevant next to the action itself.

any clue what this silliness iso about

and I see he cannot counter my facts so he ignores facts

 

[TurtleDude]

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

One group of believers stating that they believe that a different group were also believers DOES NOT make a right retroactive over two centuries ago that did not exist then and did not protect anyone.

I only wish that it were that easy to change history because you believe like Gertie did in ET.

but yet you believe FDR could retroactively pretend that the commerce clause was a grant of power to the federal government for gun control

 

[AmericanSpartan]

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

but yet you believe FDR could retroactively pretend that the commerce clause was a grant of power to the federal government for gun control

The crippled Marxist scumbag, I really do hope in some other time line he dead, or lost in the election.

 

[haymarket]

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

so you can not make a point about limiting the civil rights of other Americans, but you about laughing in the mirror?...

I already made the point about your use of the stolen term civil rights.

 

[haymarket]

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

but yet you believe FDR could retroactively pretend that the commerce clause was a grant of power to the federal government for gun control

Are you not aware that different courts can see the facts differently in different cases presented at different times?

 

[haymarket]

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

any clue what this silliness iso about

and I see he cannot counter my facts so he ignores facts

No i do not. Your post makes no sense to me at all since the so called 'facts' do not support your claims.

 

[TurtleDude]

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

I already made the point about your use of the stolen term civil rights.

sorry but civil rights are not just stuff Democrat pretend they are the sole champions for

 

[TurtleDude]

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

Are you not aware that different courts can see the facts differently in different cases presented at different times?

sure, dishonest justices *****whipped by a would be dictator are likely to reject precedent and obvious intent of the founders when those controlling devices limit the desires of their puppet master

 

[haymarket]

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

sorry but civil rights are not just stuff Democrat pretend they are the sole champions for

Of course its not as its also another term the radical right has stolen and attempted to pervert to advance their own extremist agenda.

 

[haymarket]

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

sure, dishonest justices *****whipped by a would be dictator are likely to reject precedent and obvious intent of the founders when those controlling devices limit the desires of their puppet master

The historical record says otherwise as personified by the biography and words of Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes.

 

[TurtleDude]

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

The historical record says otherwise as personified by the biography and words of Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes.

yeah, the gullible think *****whipped justices who change course completely did so for honest reasons

 

[TurtleDude]

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

Of course its not as its also another term the radical right has stolen and attempted to pervert to advance their own extremist agenda.

the only extremists we see here are statist collectivists pretending that the bill of rights are based on a lie

 

[haymarket]

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

yeah, the gullible think *****whipped justices who change course completely did so for honest reasons

Read the Hughes biography and get educated to the workings of the Court on the decisions you hate, They totally flush and crush, trash and smash, the silly claims that you make here about FDR and the Court.