Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 103

Thread: Ammunition Bill Signed into Law

  1. #81
    Sage
    jackalope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    08-08-14 @ 01:54 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,494

    Re: Ammunition Bill Signed into Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Hmm, looks like someones trying to win an oscar in the "Best obtuse act" category.

    People are in favor of states rights, as they are outlined in the constitution. Namely, the federal government only can extend its reach to the things the constitution states is under their umbrella, and beyond that is the states. However, the Constitution states which rights government, universally, can not touch....assembly, search and siezure, bare arms, etc. As such, being upset with a state trying to enact a law that potentially violates the 2nd amendment is not outside of the scope of "states' rights" but is actually directly in line with the philosophy as that philosophy is rooted within the constitution and from that same foundation we have the understanding that states should not be passing laws that violate the constitution, which those complaining about this generally feel.

    Sorry, I hope I didn't ruin your oscar bid.

    That was lame. What's the point of insulting me? I ain't the dramaqueen ...

  2. #82
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Ammunition Bill Signed into Law

    Quote Originally Posted by jackalope View Post
    You did? Since my response that you quoted was a response to someone else's question, I don't know what you're talking about. Besides, there's no difference. You register to buy a gun, I'll register to vote.
    I see you did -not- see my explanation. That's OK.
    Here you go:

    YOU said:

    Originally Posted by jackalope
    You must register to vote to exercise your right to vote, so registration is not an infringement.
    I responded:

    I said:

    Further, registering people who buy ammunition is no different than registering people that buy guns. This is a precondition to the exercise of the right that is not inherent to the right itself, and therefore an infringement.
    Registration determines where the person should cast his ballot and, when he attemps to cast a ballot, if said person is in the right place to cast that ballot; as both of those things are a necessary component of the right to vote, registration IS a a precondition inherent to that right - which is why registration is not an infringement.

    The same is -not- true for guns.

    http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaki...post1058303750

  3. #83
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,314

    Re: Ammunition Bill Signed into Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    This is willfull ignorance.
    Nowhere in the 'states rights' position is there an argument for states having the right to violate the US Constitution.
    I believe state constitutions usually also have a right to bear arms.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  4. #84
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,990

    Re: Ammunition Bill Signed into Law

    Quote Originally Posted by jackalope View Post
    That was lame. What's the point of insulting me? I ain't the dramaqueen ...
    Never said you were a drama queen, I was saying you were acting obtuse.

    Behind your extremely hyper partisan exterior that makes the bias of most of your posts evident, you seem reasonably intelligent. As such, I had few doubts that you knew damn well that a "states rights" person isn't outside of the norm in disagreeing with a state passing a law they feel violates the constitution. This of course then leads to the obvious understanding that you were just acting obtuse to make a typical hyper partisan attack comment rather than actually have an intelligent conversation with actual facts. I figured I'd at least humor you and play along, and explain to you why your idioticly hyper partisan comment was absolutely incorrect and based in anything but fact.

    You weren't a drama queen at all, you were just trying to spew out mindlessly hyper partisan attack garbage by acting obtuse about the view of "states rights"

  5. #85
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Ammunition Bill Signed into Law

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    I believe state constitutions usually also have a right to bear arms.
    Several do, several do not.

  6. #86
    User Just Plain Jim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central part of China
    Last Seen
    11-05-09 @ 09:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    96

    Re: Ammunition Bill Signed into Law

    When I was in high school about a gazzilion years ago, I found a book about lying with statistics, a small hard bound book no more then 60 pages. I thumbed through it and got a glimpse of how lying with stats affects policy and in this case, our freedom.

    One of the stats that is widely accepted as being true is the terrible number of children that are killed with guns. But the study never mentions that those children are up to age 24! The highest percentage of hand gun violence is done between the ages of 18 to 24 and most of that violence is done within their own age group and demographics. Yet when we hear children, we think Kindergarden and yet gun violence with children is vary rare, not unheard of but rare.

    The other assumed stat is that libs are against gun owndership and cons are not. That is only marginally true as the difference between both is only a single diget percentage wise.

    The other stat that is never mentioned is the states that have relaxed rules against carrying a concieled weapon. We'll hear about how many are killed because of relaxed rules, but we won't hear about the reduction of violent crime. While it is true murders of passion increase because of the availabilty of guns, it is also true that violent crime overall decreases.

    Lying with stats when it comes to partisan politics is a time honored tradition on both sides of issues.

    .


  7. #87
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,314

    Re: Ammunition Bill Signed into Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Several do, several do not.
    Only several? Remember during ratification that the 2nd Amendment was an amendment? The requirement for an amendment came back from state constitutional conventions. But I can't say how many, maybe you know.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  8. #88
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Ammunition Bill Signed into Law

    Quote Originally Posted by jackalope View Post
    I don't have a problem with CCTV, but some libs do. You're next statement is a direct violation of the 4th amendment (but that didn't stop the gov't under the Bush regime, see sneak and peek searches in Patriot Act), who says you have the right to buy ammo without showing ID? I don't see that anywhere. You gotta show ID to buy lots of stuff. You don't want to show ID, don't buy the stuff.
    Sins of the past do not excuse sins of the present. Yes, the Patriot Act went too far, and most (if not all) should be rescinded. But just because the government acted improperly in the past doesn't mean it gets to continue on that path in the future. This is more about showing an ID to buy it. This is about fingerprinting and databasing.

    How about every time you buy a 12 pack, you're fingerprinted, the data is sent to the police, and your habits and location and what you bought is databased? But you using hyperbole to suggest that it is nothing more than showing an ID is intellectually weak again. Please try to debate better.

    Quote Originally Posted by jackalope View Post
    Suggesting that something you don't like is tyranny and treason is intellectually weak.
    Awww, you so wanted to turn it around, but you can't. You have nothing to back up your claim. I had your hyperbole and deflect. I also have the right to secure my person, papers, and property against unreasonable search and seizure. Taking my finger prints and databasing my information is definitely a violation of that. Which is an act of tyranny and treason.

    What do you have to back up your claim? Anything? Or were you just trying to be cute and failed?
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  9. #89
    Sage
    jackalope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    08-08-14 @ 01:54 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,494

    Re: Ammunition Bill Signed into Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    I see you did -not- see my explanation. That's OK.
    Here you go:

    YOU said:



    I responded:

    I said:



    Registration determines where the person should cast his ballot and, when he attemps to cast a ballot, if said person is in the right place to cast that ballot; as both of those things are a necessary component of the right to vote, registration IS a a precondition inherent to that right - which is why registration is not an infringement.

    The same is -not- true for guns.

    http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaki...post1058303750

    I answered that. Registration to buy ammunition is not an infringement on the exercise of a right. Registration is required to exercise many rights. I gave the example of voting. TOJ gave a smart answer about the right to vote not actually being written in the constitution, that was interesting. However, the fact of needing to register doesn't infringe on that right. It also is not an unconstitutional infringement to require registration to own guns. The argument, on its face, is meritless. There are many rights which require registration to exercise. Besides, there is no constitutional right to buy ammunition in the Constitution. Many in the 1700s just made there own .

  10. #90
    Sage
    jackalope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    08-08-14 @ 01:54 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,494

    Re: Ammunition Bill Signed into Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Never said you were a drama queen, I was saying you were acting obtuse.

    Behind your extremely hyper partisan exterior that makes the bias of most of your posts evident, you seem reasonably intelligent. As such, I had few doubts that you knew damn well that a "states rights" person isn't outside of the norm in disagreeing with a state passing a law they feel violates the constitution. This of course then leads to the obvious understanding that you were just acting obtuse to make a typical hyper partisan attack comment rather than actually have an intelligent conversation with actual facts. I figured I'd at least humor you and play along, and explain to you why your idioticly hyper partisan comment was absolutely incorrect and based in anything but fact.

    You weren't a drama queen at all, you were just trying to spew out mindlessly hyper partisan attack garbage by acting obtuse about the view of "states rights"

    Your characterization of my posts as hyperpartisan is a reflection on you.

Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 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
  •