• 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!

My compromise.

TurtleDude said:
Can you mount a valid argument why the NFA or the Hughes Amendment is constitutional at a federal level
Click to expand...

It is YOUR job to argue that. SCOTUS does what SCOTUS will do, and you will comply, counselor.
 
jamesbyoung said:
It is YOUR job to argue that. SCOTUS does what SCOTUS will do, and you will comply, counselor.
Click to expand...

so if a case comes before the supreme court, and the issue is the constitutionality of say the Hughes amendment, and the pro freedom advocate notes that the commerce clause expansion was bogus-as the Court has held in the Obama Care case and the Lopez case, your argument will be that?

when I ask you to justify a bad ruling I am seeing if you actually have the understanding of the tenth, ninth and second amendment sufficient for you to do something that say-justifying the cases that involved say Dred Scott or the internment of honest Americans based on their heritage as well

ball's in your court
 
Maccabee said:
If you commit a crime, the state gives you a new DL stating that you're a prohibited person. It's how my state does it with sex offenders.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying it is a bad idea but it is a massive unfunded mandate. For instance you want every driver, maybe a hundred million people, to have a mental health exam every 5 years. That is massively expensive
 
jamesbyoung said:
It is YOUR job to argue that. SCOTUS does what SCOTUS will do, and you will comply, counselor.
Click to expand...

They have had 80 years to challenge the NFA....and never even came close
 
TurtleDude said:
so you don't think there is a constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
Click to expand...

Is that what is said? I said I would like to see mandatory retesting for drivers license and gun ownership.

Is asking you to register a gun and carry a gun license taking your right away?
 
Maccabee said:
Historically, private citizens had access to cannons and even battleships. If the founding fathers wanted to exclude those, they would've written it in the Constitution.
Click to expand...

They did not write any protections for those weapons in the Constitution.
 
Luther said:
I don't know.....


There was a lot of trying to fry the Viet Cong during the Vietnam war?

Oh my

You also forget to add all the division in our standing military right?
Click to expand...

Veit Nam is NOT the USA. If you think the police or military are going to join a right wing wet dream insurrection to battle the government which pays them - WOW!!!!! That is really cognitive dissonance. Simply is not going to happen.
 
haymarket said:
Veit Nam is NOT the USA. If you think the police or military are going to join a right wing wet dream insurrection to battle the government which pays them - WOW!!!!! That is really cognitive dissonance. Simply is not going to happen.
Click to expand...

Veit Nam is NOT the USA.
Click to expand...

Right, just our military fighting there


If you think the police or military are going to join a right wing wet dream insurrection to battle the government
Click to expand...

It's not a Right wing thing, it's an American thing

Oh my...
 
You righty and libertarian can ask all the questions you want, and Real America does not care.

There will never be an insurgency as some of you hope. None of you are in the league of real warriors like the Viets and Afghanis.

You will comply. Stop your dreaming.
 
charliebrown said:
Is that what is said? I said I would like to see mandatory retesting for drivers license and gun ownership.

Is asking you to register a gun and carry a gun license taking your right away?
Click to expand...

you don't seem to understand the concept of a negative restriction. Do you need to be employed by the press to have free speech?
 
jamesbyoung said:
You righty and libertarian can ask all the questions you want, and Real America does not care.

There will never be an insurgency as some of you hope. None of you are in the league of real warriors like the Viets and Afghanis.

You will comply. Stop your dreaming.
Click to expand...


Taking off his turban, they said, "is this man a Jew?"
'Cause they're working for the clampdown
They put up a poster saying: "We earn more than you
We're working for the clampdown
We will teach our twisted speech
To the young believers
We will train our blue-eyed men
To be young believers"

(Joe Strummer)

I was sort of expecting you to also say "You will LOVE BIG BROTHER"
 
jamesbyoung said:
You righty and libertarian can ask all the questions you want, and Real America does not care.

There will never be an insurgency as some of you hope. None of you are in the league of real warriors like the Viets and Afghanis.

You will comply. Stop your dreaming.
Click to expand...


Yeah, guys like you said that about the militias out there in Lexington and Concord area.

Then, the British had to high tale it man back to the safety of Boston!(LOL)

Yes, history just repeats itself
 
TurtleDude said:
Taking off his turban, they said, "is this man a Jew?"
'Cause they're working for the clampdown
They put up a poster saying: "We earn more than you
We're working for the clampdown
We will teach our twisted speech
To the young believers
We will train our blue-eyed men
To be young believers"

(Joe Strummer)

I was sort of expecting you to also say "You will LOVE BIG BROTHER"
Click to expand...

Expect what you want. Your points simply are not points. SCOTUS will do as SCOTUS does. That's the end of it.
 
jamesbyoung said:
Expect what you want. Your points simply are not points. SCOTUS will do as SCOTUS does. That's the end of it.
Click to expand...

that's true, but I am wondering if you can articulate a well reasoned argument why federal gun restrictions are actually in conformity with the second, ninth and tenth amendments
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom