The current crop of left wing debaters is weak

[apeman]

I'm really not interested in reading through the documented arguments of Constitutional framers

This entire exchange -- and GCF's unwavering belief in his expertise in the face of so much evidence to the contrary -- gave me AIDS

[SuburbanFarmer]

I'm really not interested in reading through the documented arguments of Constitutional framers

That's a gem right there.

Quote the entire statement. You're playing the same context games that the Right bitched about with Dubya.

[SuburbanFarmer]

I'm really not interested in reading through the documented arguments of Constitutional framers

This entire exchange -- and GCF's unwavering belief in his expertise in the face of so much evidence to the contrary -- gave me AIDS

Never claimed expertise in anything. In fact, that was done by several other members in the discussion, but not by me.

[Fife]

Flip probably knows the word I'm trying to come up with..... what's the German term for "willful ignorance mixed with supercilious hubris?" Those krauts have a word for everything.

[Smitty-48]

Ah. So the intent of the Constitution is dictated by where the ideas came from? That could lead to some very interesting historical debates in SCOTUS. At least, it would be more interesting to listen to.

And I'm curious how many soldiers of the Continental Army remained on active duty once the war was over... where were they stationed, exactly?

The intent of the Second Amemdment is the right to bear arms in defense against a tyranny, same as it was in the English Bill of Rights, where the Founders took it from, for the same purpose. The state militia's were to defend the states, under command of the states, seperate from the army.

You see, the individual right to bear arms is to ensure that the population cannot be disarmed by a crown, the state militias provide them with a seperate state military, should they need to defend themselves from such a tyranny as an organized force.

...and now that that ability has been completely circumvented for a century, how long shall we keep tearing ourselves apart over it? None of my neighbors have an advanced SAM site in their backyard, and I can't even buy a WWI tank.

The British populace could claim the same level of freedom, as they continue to retain the right to keep swords. It's irrelevant, it's makes no sense, but sure - you're free, little fella.

The people were allowed to keep and bear arms, because

1 - Life was nearly impossible without them, in 18th century North America
2 - The states didn't have the means nor desire to maintain large armories, when they could count on citizens to just bring their own weaponry when called.
3 - It was a convenient nod to the idea of a future revolution, but was never a "hallowed principle" of the Constitution.

Again, "shall not be infringed" was out the window a century ago. Bill Gates is not allowed to purchase a missile launcher. John Travolta owns a fighter jet, but not with weapon mounts.

Just telling you where it comes from and what it is intended for, calm down. If you don't like it, don't live in the USA then, I mean, duh.

[SuburbanFarmer]

The intent of the Second Amemdment is the right to bear arms in defense against a tyranny, same as it was in the English Bill of Rights, where the Founders took it from, for the same purpose. The state militia's were to defend the states, under command of the states, seperate from the army.

You see, the individual right to bear arms is to ensure that the population cannot be disarmed by a crown, the state militias provide them with a seperate state military, should they need to defend themselves from such a tyranny as an organized force.

...and now that that ability has been completely circumvented for a century, how long shall we keep tearing ourselves apart over it? None of my neighbors have an advanced SAM site in their backyard, and I can't even buy a WWI tank.

The British populace could claim the same level of freedom, as they continue to retain the right to keep swords. It's irrelevant, it's makes no sense, but sure - you're free, little fella.

The people were allowed to keep and bear arms, because

1 - Life was nearly impossible without them, in 18th century North America
2 - The states didn't have the means nor desire to maintain large armories, when they could count on citizens to just bring their own weaponry when called.
3 - It was a convenient nod to the idea of a future revolution, but was never a "hallowed principle" of the Constitution.

Again, "shall not be infringed" was out the window a century ago. Bill Gates is not allowed to purchase a missile launcher. John Travolta owns a fighter jet, but not with weapon mounts.

Just telling you where it comes from and what it is intended for, calm down.

Sorry, I get all excited when you start using actual talking points. It looked like you'd be up for a real discussion.

[Smitty-48]

What's to discuss? The matter is settled, this is not a constitutional convention here, the Second Amendment is not up for discussion, I'm just telling you where it comes from and what it is, ultimately, intended for, no need to blather on hysterically about it. /shrugs

If you don't like it, move to Canada, that's where the American Loyalists live, who knew?

[apeman]

This entire exchange -- and GCF's unwavering belief in his expertise in the face of so much evidence to the contrary -- gave me AIDS

Never claimed expertise in anything. In fact, that was done by several other members in the discussion, but not by me.

So tiresome.

When confronted by multiple lawyers, history buffs, an explanatory video and actual reading material on the subject -- you conclude that your contrary position is correct.

But you know, you didn't claim expertise, just that everyone else is wrong, including the actual legal experts, and that you are correct.

[Ex-California]

I learned something from Dennis Prager today, and this is why the current crop of left wing debaters is weak everywhere

This acronym perfectly describes the way that all of the Left, not just the looney SJW left, stifles debate with hatred and accusations of thought crime

Sexist
Intolerant
Xenophobic

Homophobic
Islamophobic
Racist
Bigoted

SIX HIRB NIGGA

[Okeefenokee]

x