View Poll Results: Would you support more restrictions on guns if they had the potential to save lives?

Voters
204. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    87 42.65%
  • No

    102 50.00%
  • Others

    15 7.35%
Page 115 of 171 FirstFirst ... 1565105113114115116117125165 ... LastLast
Results 1,141 to 1,150 of 1703

Thread: Gun Control

  1. #1141
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,666

    Re: Gun Control

    I think we are all waiting for the anti gun advocates to prove that the founders intended the federal government to have the power to impose silly restrictions on the citizenry's ability to keep and bear arms

    what is more likely?

    that the commerce clause was intended to allow infringements on our rights

    or that

    anti gun extremists twist the language of the constitution because they KNOW the plain meaning is a prophylactic against their silly attempts to hassle honest gun owners?

  2. #1142
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,666

    Re: Gun Control

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    I have no idea what you are talking about. They gave plenty of powers to COngress in the Constitution which apply to this issue. Plenty of them.

    We have been through this before and you know darn well about Article I, Section 8.
    yeah I know the leftwing's carte blanch delegation of power

    but the patron saint of the ever expanding federal government had to use the commerce clause and "affecting interstate commerce" to hassle those wishing to own machine guns

    that alone proves I am right

  3. #1143
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:39 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,853

    Re: Gun Control

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    yeah I know the leftwing's carte blanch delegation of power

    but the patron saint of the ever expanding federal government had to use the commerce clause and "affecting interstate commerce" to hassle those wishing to own machine guns

    that alone proves I am right
    It alone proves that there is language there which proves you wrong. First you claim there is not language then you carp and moan about the language that is there that was used to do what you claim cannot be done because there is no language to do it.


    Make up your mind so we know what position you are taking here.

    You might not like Article I , Section 8 - but thats really irrelevant to what reality is. It is part of the Constitution and if you do not like it - that is your right but it is irrelevant.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  4. #1144
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    01-27-15 @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,247

    Re: Gun Control

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    I have already presented you with the evidence.

    Are you laboring under the delusion the the men who wrote the Constitution were not also men of their time and place and what applied to all other people of their day somehow and someway did not apply to them?

    Are you laboring under the delusion that the most common of word meanings somehow someway escaped them in favor of some obscure meaning which was LITTLE USED at the time?

    It appears that if you want to pretend that
    1- the most common usages of a word were not indeed used by the founders, and
    2- they employed the use of word meaning that were LITTLE USED at the time in some sort of alternative linguistic reality divorced from the rest of the nation

    then the responsibility is totally and completely upon you to show the exception to the rule. Otherwise you are attempting to flip the script and that is not how things work.

    You want to pretend that the normal usage of terms in that era of history was not applicable to the men who wrote the document, by all means do so.
    You can wave your hands all you want, but at the time one of the valid definitions of the word infringe was to hinder. If you would like to substantiate your ridiculous theory that infringe means to completely deny, then please offer your evidence that this was the intention of the founders.

  5. #1145
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:39 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,853

    Re: Gun Control

    Quote Originally Posted by Federalist View Post
    You can wave your hands all you want, but at the time one of the valid definitions of the word infringe was to hinder. If you would like to substantiate your ridiculous theory that infringe means to completely deny, then please offer your evidence that this was the intention of the founders.
    LITTLE USED. Do you know what that means?

    But let us look at the entire definition and not merely one word in an obscure and little used meaning and see why your obsession with that one word HINDER is the perfect example of intellectual fraud.

    Focusing on the word HINDER as the key word in the definition of the word INFRINGE only is valid if one intentionally ignores the complete and utter finality of the most common used term at the time - definition #1 with its definitive words.

    1. To break, as contracts; to violate, either positively by contravention, or negatively by non-fulfillment or neglect of performance. A prince or a private person infringes an agreement or covenant by neglecting to perform its conditions, as well as by doing what is stipulated not to be done.
    And then only if one compounds that error of intellectual fraud by then ignoring the second most common usage of the term at the time - #2 with its definitive words.


    2. To break; to violate; to transgress; to neglect to fulfill or obey; as, to infringe a law.
    And then only if one even further decides to become even ore egregious in their commission of intellectual fraud and ignore the first half of the term that precedes the word HINDER which is TO DESTROY.


    3. To destroy or hinder; as, to infringe efficacy. [Little used.]
    And then to compound this grand felony of high intellectual fraud, one must conveniently ignore the phrase placed in the brackets after that definition #3

    [Little used.]


    Now explain again why you focus on the 5% of several definitions and ignore the other and ignore the fact that it is clearly labeled as LITTLE USED.

    And then explains to us how the founders were men apart from the rest of the society they lived in and were independent of common usage and actually employed an alternate system of word meanings which focused on the obscure and ignored the most common and clear of meanings?

    And then explain to all of us how in something as vitally important as an amendment to the Constitution the founders would knowingly and willingly use an obscure and little used meaning of a word that had the very opposite meaning to almost everyone else at the time?

    Please do.
    Last edited by haymarket; 12-25-12 at 02:29 PM.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  6. #1146
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: Gun Control

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    LITTLE USED. Do you know what that means?
    Yep, it means it is Used, even if only rarely. It means that it can apply.

    Little used does not equate to not used.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  7. #1147
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    01-27-15 @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,247

    Re: Gun Control

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Now explain again why you focus on the 5% of several definitions and ignore the other and ignore the fact that it is clearly labeled as LITTLE USED.

    And then explains to us how the founders were men apart from the rest of the society they lived in and were independent of common usage and actually employed an alternate system of word meanings which focused on the obscure and ignored the most common and clear of meanings?

    And then explain to all of us how in something as vitally important as an amendment to the Constitution the founders would knowingly and willingly use an obscure and little used meaning of a word that had the very opposite meaning to almost everyone else at the time?

    Please do.
    I focus on that definition because that is the one that is applicable, which is also why the founders chose to use that word.

    You can rant all you want, but infringe means to hinder. You presented the definition, not me.

    But feel free to present any court decision or any constitutional scholar who can corroborate your ludicrous definition of the term. Until you do, you are merely spouting your own opinion, which, for all intents and purposes, is meaningless and unimportant.
    Last edited by Federalist; 12-25-12 at 03:25 PM.

  8. #1148
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:39 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,853

    Re: Gun Control

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    Yep, it means it is Used, even if only rarely. It means that it can apply.

    Little used does not equate to not used.
    So now all you have to do is to provide ample verifiable evidence that the founders intentionally and purposely passed up the conventional and widely used meaning in favor of an obscure and little used meaning and knowingly used that even though it gave the opposite take on their intent.

    I wish you luck with that.

    Of course, it brings up the more obvious question as to why you and others would willingly focus on that tiny little part of a little used definition and pass up the greater 95% of the larger definition.

    Can you explain why you would do that?
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  9. #1149
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:39 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,853

    Re: Gun Control

    Quote Originally Posted by Federalist View Post
    I focus on that definition because that is the one that is applicable, which is also why the founders chose to use that word.
    No - it is the one which is little used.

    Now all you have to do is show us that the founders intentionally and purposely ignored the far more common use of the term INFRINGED that was known to the people of its time and commonly used in favor of an obscure and little used meaning which totally changes the meaning of the commonly used term.

    Lotsa luck with that.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  10. #1150
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: Gun Control

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    So now all you have to do is to provide ample verifiable evidence that the founders intentionally and purposely passed up the conventional and widely used meaning in favor of an obscure and little used meaning and knowingly used that even though it gave the opposite take on their intent.

    I wish you luck with that.

    Of course, it brings up the more obvious question as to why you and others would willingly focus on that tiny little part of a little used definition and pass up the greater 95% of the larger definition.

    Can you explain why you would do that?
    I don't have to "prove" anything. But context can tell a lot of what is meant by a particular word.

    At the time of the writing of the Constitution, the US and the framers just finishes, successfully, a revolution. They also knew that we were both militarily weak and our ability to defend the nation was based upon a militia concept where all adult male citizens participated with privately owned firearms. Any Infringement, by whatever definition you want to use, would weaken the Nations ability to defend itself.

    So in context with the times and conditions at the time of the writing of the Constitution, the Founding fathers clearly intended "shall not be infringed" to mean it shall not be changed in anyway whatsoever that would weaken the peoples ability to act effectively as a militia when needed.

    I also don't believe that our founding fathers ever intended that the "militia" concept would be taken away from the citizens.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

Posting Permissions

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