• 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!

Condi Rice stuns the view audience with story about 2nd Amendment

danielpalos said:
you have nothing but fallacy; got appeal to the majority instead of reason?
Click to expand...

Literally ALL you have been doing is smearing people as "right-wingers" who disagree with you about gun rights for a majority if not all of your posts in this thread.
 
danielpalos said:
Natural rights are in State Constitutions, not our Second Amendment.
Click to expand...

I repeat.

Our 2.A. is part of the Constitution and the Constitutional system within the U.S., what part of that do you not understand?
 
danielpalos said:
i think you don't know what you are talking about.
Click to expand...

Notwithstanding the fact that the post I responded to was essentially spam (it displayed no effort or very little effort put into proper sentence structure, and was a direct ad hominem), you furthermore fail to understand that libertarianism promotes individual rights and privacy rights, so that includes what people choose to own in their own private home. So, no, you are incorrect and I am in fact quite consistent in my libertarian views, regardless of what wing of the political spectrum I fall on. Go and get some education.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
Literally ALL you have been doing is smearing people as "right-wingers" who disagree with you about gun rights for a majority if not all of your posts in this thread.
Click to expand...

not at all; all i have been doing, is not resorting to fallacy, unlike the right wing. they never seem to know what they are talking about. natural rights, including the very specific one you are talking about, are in State Constitutions not our Second Amendment.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
Notwithstanding the fact that the post I responded to was essentially spam (it displayed no effort or very little effort put into proper sentence structure, and was a direct ad hominem), you furthermore fail to understand that libertarianism promotes individual rights and privacy rights, so that includes what people choose to own in their own private home. So, no, you are incorrect and I am in fact quite consistent in my libertarian views, regardless of what wing of the political spectrum I fall on. Go and get some education.
Click to expand...

dude; what State are you from?
 
danielpalos said:
no. there are no individual rights in our Second Amendment. The militia, the people and the security of a free State are all collective in nature.
Click to expand...

The people is every law abiding citizen. It's an individual right.
 
danielpalos said:
the express terms are plural not individual. only the right wing, has to appeal to ignorance.
Click to expand...

that's funny given you are constantly wrong, have admitted you have no legal training and what you say is contradicted by almost every major league legal scholar and all the supreme court holdings. In other words you are completely, totally and fully WRONG.
 
TurtleDude said:
that's funny given you are constantly wrong, have admitted you have no legal training and what you say is contradicted by almost every major league legal scholar and all the supreme court holdings. In other words you are completely, totally and fully WRONG.
Click to expand...

The terms are plural, not singular. Thus, express and intelligently designed, civil rights.

natural rights are not found in our Second Amendment; but in State Constitutions and available via Due Process.
 
danielpalos said:
The terms are plural, not singular. Thus, express and intelligently designed, civil rights.

natural rights are not found in our Second Amendment; but in State Constitutions and available via Due Process.
Click to expand...


the entire bill of rights is based upon the founders belief and recognition of natural rights.

so once again, you have managed to be completely wrong
 
TurtleDude said:
the entire bill of rights is based upon the founders belief and recognition of natural rights.

so once again, you have managed to be completely wrong
Click to expand...

right wing propaganda Because it is specifically about guns?

What happened to Dred Scott or the lgbt community.
 
danielpalos said:
right wing propaganda Because it is specifically about guns?

What happened to Dred Scott or the lgbt community.
Click to expand...

more failure of understanding on your part. Dred Scott was about bad judges, not the bill of rights
 
danielpalos said:
It is well regulated militia of the whole and entire People, that are declared Necessary; not the unorganized militia of the while and entire People.
Click to expand...

Dis you quote the Second Amendment earlier in the thread?
 
danielpalos said:
any quote of our Second Amendment, clearly states it is well regulated militia that are Necessary to the security of a free State. The Unorganized militia is nowhere declared Necessary.
Click to expand...

"Well regulated" is defined nowhere, but the power to arm, discipline and organize the militia is specifically granted to Congress in Article 1, Section 8. By default, any laws that Congress pass regarding the arms, discipline and organization of the militia create a "well regulated militia". You may disagree with the level of regulation, and if so, you should write your Congresscritter.
 
Maccabee said:
What security problems are you talking about? We are not currently being invaded.
Click to expand...

If you are familiar with the federal oath regarding protecting and defending the US Constitution, you know that it mentions "domestic" enemies and "foreign" enemies.

Call me a cynical bastard and you would be right, but the sad truth is that the domestic enemies of the Constitution are far more powerful and effective than the foreign enemies. In that regard, the security problems you refer to are not new, and are very real. In a perverse sense, we have been invaded many years ago, just to address your point.

Rice's parents used firearms to defend their homes and families, as was intended by the Second Amendment, and they were defending against potential domestic enemies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom