Page 28 of 29 FirstFirst ... 1826272829 LastLast
Results 271 to 280 of 288

Thread: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law

  1. #271
    Sage
    poweRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    35,066

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    You only think that because you do not agree with what the Second Amendment very clearly, explicitly, and unambiguously says, in the clearest and strongest language found anywhere in the Constitution.
    Not even close. The framers' arguments on this made it rather clear that it isn't close to the interpretation that is portrayed today where everyone should be a standing army unto themselves.

    The well regulated militias were to replace the need for a standing army as per Thomas Jefferson. That short little amendment always seems to get trimmed down to the "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" and completely ignore the "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" part.

    Then to get the constitution ratified they had to solidify the vote of Virginia where Patrick Henry demanded that southern states' slave patrols not be hindered by the federal government so that they could quell any slave uprising. Slave patrols where seen as the security for a free "state" which is why it says "a free state" and not "a free country". Because slave patrols were regulated at the state level and a "free country" in the constitution would be grounds for a emancipation movement.

    At the ratifying convention in Virginia in 1788, Henry laid it out:

    "Let me here call your attention to that part [Article 1, Section 8 of the proposed Constitution] which gives the Congress power to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States. . . .

    "By this, sir, you see that their control over our last and best defence is unlimited. If they neglect or refuse to discipline or arm our militia, they will be useless: the states can do neither . . . this power being exclusively given to Congress. The power of appointing officers over men not disciplined or armed is ridiculous; so that this pretended little remains of power left to the states may, at the pleasure of Congress, be rendered nugatory."

    "If the country be invaded, a state may go to war, but cannot suppress [slave] insurrections [under this new Constitution]. If there should happen an insurrection of slaves, the country cannot be said to be invaded. They cannot, therefore, suppress it without the interposition of Congress . . . . Congress, and Congress only [under this new Constitution], can call forth the militia."

    Big BIG difference in original intent and what is interpreted today.
    Last edited by poweRob; 06-19-14 at 01:29 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    The sad fact is that having a pedophile win is better than having a Democrat in office. I'm all for a solution where a Republican gets in that isn't Moore.

  2. #272
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law

    Quote Originally Posted by poweRob View Post
    Not even close. The framers' arguments on this made it rather clear that it isn't close to the interpretation that is portrayed today where everyone should be a standing army unto themselves.

    The well regulated militias were to replace the need for a standing army.
    If you somehow do not understand that the language of the Second Amendment clearly asserts a right (not a “privilege”) of the people, and that government is forbidden from infringing this right, then the writings of the great men who authored it are more than enough to make it clear what they meant.

    You're simply wrong, period, as is anyone else who argues that government has even the faintest vestige of any authority to interfere in any way with any free American's right to keep and bear arms.
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  3. #273
    Sage
    poweRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    35,066

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    If you somehow do not understand that the language of the Second Amendment clearly asserts a right (not a “privilege”) of the people, and that government is forbidden from infringing this right, then the writings of the great men who authored it are more than enough to make it clear what they meant.

    You're simply wrong, period, as is anyone else who argues that government has even the faintest vestige of any authority to interfere in any way with any free American's right to keep and bear arms.
    I edited my post to point out the framer's argument.

    as to your post... it is a right of a well regulated militia to preserve the state in place of a standing army. It is a privilege otherwise.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    The sad fact is that having a pedophile win is better than having a Democrat in office. I'm all for a solution where a Republican gets in that isn't Moore.

  4. #274
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law

    Quote Originally Posted by poweRob View Post
    I edited my post to point out the framer's argument.

    as to your post... it is a right of a well regulated militia to preserve the state in place of a standing army. It is a privilege otherwise.
    That is not what the Second Amendment says, nor is it how any honest, rational person would “interpret” it.

    I get that you do not believe the people should have a right to keep and bear arms; that you think it should be a privilege, and that the government should have the authority to impose “reasonable” restrictions on this privilege. But the Second Amendment clearly states otherwise, and additional writings by the great men who authored the Constitution make their intent absolutely clear.

    There is no amount of wishful thinking, nor of willful dishonesty on your part, that will change what the Second Amendment says or what it means. Only another properly-ratified amendment to the Constitution can do that.
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  5. #275
    Sage
    poweRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    35,066

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    That is not what the Second Amendment says, nor is it how any honest, rational person would “interpret” it.

    I get that you do not believe the people should have a right to keep and bear arms; that you think it should be a privilege, and that the government should have the authority to impose “reasonable” restrictions on this privilege. But the Second Amendment clearly states otherwise, and additional writings by the great men who authored the Constitution make their intent absolutely clear.

    There is no amount of wishful thinking, nor of willful dishonesty on your part, that will change what the Second Amendment says or what it means. Only another properly-ratified amendment to the Constitution can do that.
    So you think quoting the framers' exact arguments on the 2nd amendment is being irrational and dishonest? That's a freegin' hoot. It certainly shows that one of us that is not me, is being intellectually dishonest as hell.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    The sad fact is that having a pedophile win is better than having a Democrat in office. I'm all for a solution where a Republican gets in that isn't Moore.

  6. #276
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law

    Quote Originally Posted by poweRob View Post
    So you think quoting the framers' exact arguments on the 2nd amendment is being irrational and dishonest? That's a freegin' hoot. It certainly shows that one of us that is not me, is being intellectually dishonest as hell.
    Taking a few cherry-picked quotes out of context, and twisting them to appear to mean something very much contrary to what they really mean, does not constitute “quoting the framers' exact arguments”. And yes, what you are deceptively calling by this false description is blatantly irrational and dishonest. But then you are trying to defend a position that cannot possibly be defended by any means other than the exact sort of dishonesty in which you are willfully engaging; and there is no reason for me to expect any different of you, or any gun control advocate.
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  7. #277
    Sage
    poweRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    35,066

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    Taking a few cherry-picked quotes out of context, and twisting them to appear to mean something very much contrary to what they really mean, does not constitute “quoting the framers' exact arguments”. And yes, what you are deceptively calling by this false description is blatantly irrational and dishonest. But then you are trying to defend a position that cannot possibly be defended by any means other than the exact sort of dishonesty in which you are willfully engaging; and there is no reason for me to expect any different of you, or any gun control advocate.
    I'm all ears for you to put Patrick Henry into context then.

    Out of context my ass. I gave you paragraphs of direct quotes. I didn't cut and paste snippets then frame it in a different way. What an insane dodge. You simply don't like what Patrick Henry said because it doesn't fit into your narrative. Sorry history rebukes your ideology but that's just the way it goes.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    The sad fact is that having a pedophile win is better than having a Democrat in office. I'm all for a solution where a Republican gets in that isn't Moore.

  8. #278
    Sage
    Arbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    07-12-16 @ 01:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,395
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law

    Quote Originally Posted by poweRob View Post
    Owning a gun isn't a right. It's a privilege.
    I guess if you redefine words perhaps. But based on every definition available currently, you are 180 degrees off.
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  9. #279
    Sage
    Arbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    07-12-16 @ 01:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,395
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law

    Quote Originally Posted by poweRob View Post
    So you think quoting the framers' exact arguments on the 2nd amendment is being irrational and dishonest? That's a freegin' hoot. It certainly shows that one of us that is not me, is being intellectually dishonest as hell.
    You picked ONE person, and cherry picked him because you believe it supports your view. That you picked Patrick Henry makes sense to a point. But of course, it is still cherry picking.
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  10. #280
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,048

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law

    I see this in the same way as taking out a credit card for someone else and then letting them off with the credit card. You just don't do it.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

Page 28 of 29 FirstFirst ... 1826272829 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •