• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysvi[W:480]

Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

mrmacq said:
its a frickin tube which a projectile runs through propelled by escaping gasses
usually initiated by a trigger mechanism
the spent casing is then ejected
...sounds eerily similar enough to me
BUT
as I said
"lbut ets not quibble"
(which was suppose to read "but lets not quibble...yet here we are)
Click to expand...


I cannot help it if your knowledge of firearms and artillery is as deficient as your understanding of constitutional law
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

TurtleDude said:
your posts are becoming even less coherent. there should be no federal gun laws whatsoever since the federal government has no legitimate power in that area. Sorry, the use of the commerce clause was incredibly dishonest
Click to expand...

that was suppose to read...might as well try seceding
.
why the constant insults regards my posting style?
you know its not going to change it, right?
how come its only incoherent to those that lean right
ive never had this complaint from your dems
...just curious
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

mrmacq said:
that was suppose to read...might as well try seceding
.
why the constant insults regards my posting style?
you know its not going to change it, right?
how come its only incoherent to those that lean right
ive never had this complaint from your dems
...just curious
Click to expand...

it seems that evasion is a common trait in the posts of anti gunners. what are you talking about?

where was the federal government properly given a power to regulate firearms
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

mrmacq said:
.
so you should be allowed to sell to whomever you choose
and screw the general population if it happens to fall into the "wrong" hands
the gang banger out for payback
the psychotic wanting to do in your next prez
or the confused youth bent on payback for deemed wrongs (topic of this thread)
so long as it doesn't inconvenience you
.
ya know...registration/background checks would (while not being all that strenuous) alleviate a lot of the problems youre having down there
but I get it
that's their responsibility
Click to expand...

The topic of this thread has nothing to do with gun sales, background checks or registration at all. None of that would prevent the legal ownership of the gun (ab)used.
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

Moderator's Warning:
The topic of the thread is not each other. Return to it.
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

Police investigators have concluded, despite witness accounts, that the teacher who tried to intervene did not have physical contact with Jaylen Fryberg and that he died "entirely by his own hand." http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/28/u...g-claims-another-victim-gia-soriano.html?_r=0

One victim, the shooter's cousin Nate, is doing well. I don't know about the other cousin, but the girl known as "Shay" is not breathing on her own, I don't think. Her cousin posted on FB that she's "hooked up to a machine." All the victims were shot from behind--executed.
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysvi...

stonewall50 said:
Not subject to judicial review. So not only are you proposing something wholly unconstitutional, but also that the court can't review it??? Dear lord. This is hilarious. And if it is doing something illegal you can't shut it down...only the part that did the illegal thing.
Click to expand...

Relax. The Founders didn't give the Supreme Court any power of judicial review. This bill just prevents their tampering with the laws Congress passes just like the Founders intended.

stonewall50 said:
Reeducation CAMPS!!!!??!!!! You might as well be creating internment camps. Seriously? Did you even read this anti freedom bill?
Click to expand...

I wrote it but, to be perfectly clear, it isn't even close to being a bill. It's just my dream.
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

mrmacq said:
.
"a well REGULATED militia..."
...rather intellectually lazy and silly wouldn't you say?
Click to expand...
Do you understand what that phrase meant?
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

Boo Radley said:
Thanks for the laugh J.
Click to expand...

Thank you for confirming my prediction of your dismissal.

But I'm not anti gun and don't oppose self defense.
Click to expand...

Good to know, however that makes your post that I replied to confusing...

I object to the belief that the founding fathers would have been stagnant.
Click to expand...

I don't believe for one second that they would have remained "stagnant" either...However, I think if they were alive to see what has become of their principles they would have absolutely thought that we have given up our liberty for tyranny.

They too would have changed and reconsidered.
Click to expand...

"Reconsidered" Interesting....So by that I assume that you let that slip that we on the conservative side of the long standing argument are correct in you mind that we offer a closer interpretation of the founders intent.

How they would have eventually fell on the issue is hard to say.
Click to expand...

I think that is your wish, but if wishes were fishes we'd be in the ocean.

Because even protection is different today than it was then.
Click to expand...

That's not the only thing that was different.
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysvi...

Joe Steel said:
Relax. The Founders didn't give the Supreme Court any power of judicial review. This bill just prevents their tampering with the laws Congress passes just like the Founders intended.
Click to expand...

And yet they DO have the power of judicial review so they can make sure things are constitutional. Are you saying that not allowing someone to review a bill and check it for constitutional validity is a good thing?

I wrote it but, to be perfectly clear, it isn't even close to being a bill. It's just my dream.
Click to expand...

Sad. Truly sad then. Thank God it will never be proposed.

"Reeducation camps." Dear lord.
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

TurtleDude said:
complete lie. your understanding of the constitution is apparently deficient. show me where in the constitution itself that power was honestly and distinctly granted the federal government

well regulated meant a militia in working order. it says nothing about regulating small arms
Click to expand...

No, not a lie. And something doesn't have to be direct. There are indirect powers as well. If you want I'll link something to explain that.
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

j-mac said:
Thank you for confirming my prediction of your dismissal.
Click to expand...

Well, nothing speacial about predicting dismissal of what should be dismissed.

Good to know, however that makes your post that I replied to confusing...
Click to expand...

That's due to black and white thinking and not having trouble with poor reasoning as long as it agrees with your position.


I don't believe for one second that they would have remained "stagnant" either...However, I think if they were alive to see what has become of their principles they would have absolutely thought that we have given up our liberty for tyranny.
Click to expand...

I don't think they'd be as prone to exaggeration and hyperbole, but more practical. So, I think they'd oppose many of those screaming tyranny.


"Reconsidered" Interesting....So by that I assume that you let that slip that we on the conservative side of the long standing argument are correct in you mind that we offer a closer interpretation of the founders intent.
Click to expand...

I think you make an unsound leap here. I clearly meant they would change with the times, a living example of a living document.


I think that is your wish, but if wishes were fishes we'd be in the ocean.
Click to expand...

No, I didn't use the word wish. I think history would have effected them as it did others. They would not have been stagnant, but would have made many of the same adjustments. But I stated factually, that it's hard to be certain.

That's not the only thing that was different.
Click to expand...

True. There are many things different, making guns less important today. Many (an overwhelming majority) of us live our lives gun free and no worse for it.
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

Boo Radley said:
No, not a lie. And something doesn't have to be direct. There are indirect powers as well. If you want I'll link something to explain that.
Click to expand...

LOL that is really silly. Look, everyone understands FDR wanted to pander to people and he wanted to ban machine guns to prove he was doing SOMETHING about bootleggers and his AG told him he couldn't ban them outright so they imposed a prohibitive tax on such weapons and pretended that "commerce among the several states" allowed such idiocy and his pet monkeys on the court ignored the tenth amendment violations and upheld the law claiming that sawn off shotguns were not militia weapons .

but to claim that gun control was actually an indirect power is blatantly dishonest
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

TurtleDude said:
LOL that is really silly. Look, everyone understands FDR wanted to pander to people and he wanted to ban machine guns to prove he was doing SOMETHING about bootleggers and his AG told him he couldn't ban them outright so they imposed a prohibitive tax on such weapons and pretended that "commerce among the several states" allowed such idiocy and his pet monkeys on the court ignored the tenth amendment violations and upheld the law claiming that sawn off shotguns were not militia weapons .

but to claim that gun control was actually an indirect power is blatantly dishonest
Click to expand...

No it isn't and it was done long before FDR.
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

Boo Radley said:
No it isn't and it was done long before FDR.
Click to expand...

oh really-tell me where federal gun control was enacted prior to FDR
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

TurtleDude said:
oh really-tell me where federal gun control was enacted prior to FDR
Click to expand...

Towns didn't permit firearms in town for example.

By the 1880s many in the west were fed up with gun violence. Gun control, they contended, was absolutely essential, and the remedy advocated usually was usually no less than a total ban on pistol-packing.

Gun control in the Old West

When you entered a frontier town, you were legally required to leave your guns at the stables on the outskirts of town or drop them off with the sheriff, who would give you a token in exchange.

Did the Wild West Have More Gun Control Than We Do Today? | Adam Winkler
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

Boo Radley said:
Towns didn't permit firearms in town for example.

By the 1880s many in the west were fed up with gun violence. Gun control, they contended, was absolutely essential, and the remedy advocated usually was usually no less than a total ban on pistol-packing.

Gun control in the Old West

When you entered a frontier town, you were legally required to leave your guns at the stables on the outskirts of town or drop them off with the sheriff, who would give you a token in exchange.

Did the Wild West Have More Gun Control Than We Do Today?*|*Adam Winkler
Click to expand...

why do anti gun posts have such a difficult time understanding the difference between federal action (which until McDonald, was the only action the 2A prohibited) and state action which was only limited by the state's own constitution?
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

TurtleDude said:
why do anti gun posts have such a difficult time understanding the difference between federal action (which until McDonald, was the only action the 2A prohibited) and state action which was only limited by the state's own constitution?
Click to expand...

I understand it completely but find it a distinction without a difference. The fact is it was still regulated and the courts have upheld regulation. Again and again. When will you understand you've lost that one? ;)

Oh, BTW, the fact that FDR addressed a real problem with the shootings of the 20's doesn't invalidate his actions. It's the kind of things leaders do. Addressing a problem is less pandering than pretending it didn't exist.
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

Boo Radley said:
I understand it completely but find it a distinction without a difference. The fact is it was still regulated and the courts have upheld regulation. Again and again. When will you understand you've lost that one? ;)

Oh, BTW, the fact that FDR addressed a real problem with the shootings of the 20's doesn't invalidate his actions. It's the kind of things leaders do. Addressing a problem is less pandering than pretending it didn't exist.
Click to expand...

sorry but if you don't understand the concept of federalism and the entire foundation upon which the founders created a federal government of specific and limited powers, you cannot really be in a position to really discuss the second amendment.

FDR did not have the proper power to "address that problem" TO those of us who actually respect the limits placed on the federal government, his actions are bogus

to those who think the government has any power it wants as long as it does what they want, the analysis will be different. The states had the proper power to actually deal with armed bootleggers. It was already illegal to murder people with any sort of gun
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

Boo Radley said:
No, not a lie. And something doesn't have to be direct. There are indirect powers as well. If you want I'll link something to explain that.
Click to expand...
I will read your evidence. Please show me, from the debates on the Constitution, that the framers intended to replace one monarchical tyrant with others of their choosing.
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

TurtleDude said:
sorry but if you don't understand the concept of federalism and the entire foundation upon which the founders created a federal government of specific and limited powers, you cannot really be in a position to really discuss the second amendment.

FDR did not have the proper power to "address that problem" TO those of us who actually respect the limits placed on the federal government, his actions are bogus

to those who think the government has any power it wants as long as it does what they want, the analysis will be different. The states had the proper power to actually deal with armed bootleggers. It was already illegal to murder people with any sort of gun
Click to expand...

I understand it, but if your issue is freedom to own guns, you logically would be upset no matter who banned them. You would not argue that guns can't be banned, that it's a protected right. If you acknowledge states can ban them, then get ready for states banning them. ;)
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

Misterveritis said:
I will read your evidence. Please show me, from the debates on the Constitution, that the framers intended to replace one monarchical tyrant with others of their choosing.
Click to expand...

In argument circles, that would be called a strawman argument. Show me where I said anything about having a tyrant at all.
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

Boo Radley said:
I understand it, but if your issue is freedom to own guns, you logically would be upset no matter who banned them. You would not argue that guns can't be banned, that it's a protected right. If you acknowledge states can ban them, then get ready for states banning them. ;)
Click to expand...

actually again you are wrong. if a state bans guns, we free citizens can move to one that does not. Its why I moved out of the City of Cincinnati when they passed stupid gun ordinances that harassed gun owners. federal harassments are essentially unconstitutional
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

TurtleDude said:
actually again you are wrong. if a state bans guns, we free citizens can move to one that does not. Its why I moved out of the City of Cincinnati when they passed stupid gun ordinances that harassed gun owners. federal harassments are essentially unconstitutional
Click to expand...

Well, you could move to Canada as well, so no not so much. And it is even possible every state could ban them. Then what? No, I don't buy it. Either you believe in the right or you don't.
 
Re: Breaking: Investigators are responding to reported school shooting in Marysville,

Boo Radley said:
Well, you could move to Canada as well, so no not so much. And it is even possible every state could ban them. Then what? No, I don't buy it. Either you believe in the right or you don't.
Click to expand...

I deal with reality.

I believe in the constitution. and most states could not ban guns due to their own constitutions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom