Total Posts:23|Showing Posts:1-23
Jump to topic:

The 2A, does it include modern weaponry?

Maccabee
Posts: 1,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 12:04:59 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
YES!!!!! It's pretty obvious when you think about it.

https://m.youtube.com...
Scripture, facts, stats, and logic is how I argue

Evolutionism is a religion, not science

When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.

"If guns are the cause of crimes then aren't matches the cause of arson?" D. Boys

"If the death penalty is government sanctioned killing then isn't inprisonment is government sanction kidnapping?" D. B

"Why do you trust the government with machine guns but not honest citizens?" D. B

All those who are pro-death (abortion) is already born
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 12:08:57 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
The right of the people to keep and bear arms obviously includes nuclear weapons and tanks. Otherwise, how will the citizens be able to overthrow the tyrannical gubmint?
Maccabee
Posts: 1,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 12:10:52 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/12/2016 12:08:57 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms obviously includes nuclear weapons and tanks. Otherwise, how will the citizens be able to overthrow the tyrannical gubmint?

That was fast. Did you even see the video? Anyway they had privately owned cannons back then when the amendment was written.
Scripture, facts, stats, and logic is how I argue

Evolutionism is a religion, not science

When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.

"If guns are the cause of crimes then aren't matches the cause of arson?" D. Boys

"If the death penalty is government sanctioned killing then isn't inprisonment is government sanction kidnapping?" D. B

"Why do you trust the government with machine guns but not honest citizens?" D. B

All those who are pro-death (abortion) is already born
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 12:15:33 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/12/2016 12:10:52 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:08:57 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms obviously includes nuclear weapons and tanks. Otherwise, how will the citizens be able to overthrow the tyrannical gubmint?

That was fast. Did you even see the video? Anyway they had privately owned cannons back then when the amendment was written.

Yeah, which is why today we should get to have privately owned nukes.
Maccabee
Posts: 1,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 12:27:02 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/12/2016 12:15:33 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:10:52 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:08:57 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms obviously includes nuclear weapons and tanks. Otherwise, how will the citizens be able to overthrow the tyrannical gubmint?

That was fast. Did you even see the video? Anyway they had privately owned cannons back then when the amendment was written.

Yeah, which is why today we should get to have privately owned nukes.

Actually, we already do. Private companies dealing with nuclear makes a byproduct that can be used in nukes. They just don't put it in missles.
Scripture, facts, stats, and logic is how I argue

Evolutionism is a religion, not science

When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.

"If guns are the cause of crimes then aren't matches the cause of arson?" D. Boys

"If the death penalty is government sanctioned killing then isn't inprisonment is government sanction kidnapping?" D. B

"Why do you trust the government with machine guns but not honest citizens?" D. B

All those who are pro-death (abortion) is already born
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 12:28:32 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/12/2016 12:27:02 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:15:33 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:10:52 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:08:57 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms obviously includes nuclear weapons and tanks. Otherwise, how will the citizens be able to overthrow the tyrannical gubmint?

That was fast. Did you even see the video? Anyway they had privately owned cannons back then when the amendment was written.

Yeah, which is why today we should get to have privately owned nukes.

Actually, we already do. Private companies dealing with nuclear makes a byproduct that can be used in nukes. They just don't put it in missles.

Oh really? So where can I legally buy a nuclear missile? I need one to defend myself against the overreach of the gubmint. Or to nuke non-white neighborhoods out of self-defense, either one.
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 12:38:31 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/12/2016 12:28:32 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:27:02 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:15:33 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:10:52 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:08:57 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms obviously includes nuclear weapons and tanks. Otherwise, how will the citizens be able to overthrow the tyrannical gubmint?

That was fast. Did you even see the video? Anyway they had privately owned cannons back then when the amendment was written.

Yeah, which is why today we should get to have privately owned nukes.

Actually, we already do. Private companies dealing with nuclear makes a byproduct that can be used in nukes. They just don't put it in missles.

Oh really? So where can I legally buy a nuclear missile? I need one to defend myself against the overreach of the gubmint. Or to nuke non-white neighborhoods out of self-defense, either one.

Why even bring up race... Race has nothing to do with this topic whatsoever
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 12:41:06 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/12/2016 12:38:31 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:28:32 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:27:02 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:15:33 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:10:52 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:08:57 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms obviously includes nuclear weapons and tanks. Otherwise, how will the citizens be able to overthrow the tyrannical gubmint?

That was fast. Did you even see the video? Anyway they had privately owned cannons back then when the amendment was written.

Yeah, which is why today we should get to have privately owned nukes.

Actually, we already do. Private companies dealing with nuclear makes a byproduct that can be used in nukes. They just don't put it in missles.

Oh really? So where can I legally buy a nuclear missile? I need one to defend myself against the overreach of the gubmint. Or to nuke non-white neighborhoods out of self-defense, either one.

Why even bring up race... Race has nothing to do with this topic whatsoever

http://www.washingtontimes.com...
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 12:42:35 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/12/2016 12:41:06 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:38:31 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:28:32 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:27:02 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:15:33 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:10:52 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:08:57 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms obviously includes nuclear weapons and tanks. Otherwise, how will the citizens be able to overthrow the tyrannical gubmint?

That was fast. Did you even see the video? Anyway they had privately owned cannons back then when the amendment was written.

Yeah, which is why today we should get to have privately owned nukes.

Actually, we already do. Private companies dealing with nuclear makes a byproduct that can be used in nukes. They just don't put it in missles.

Oh really? So where can I legally buy a nuclear missile? I need one to defend myself against the overreach of the gubmint. Or to nuke non-white neighborhoods out of self-defense, either one.

Why even bring up race... Race has nothing to do with this topic whatsoever

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

http://www.slate.com...
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 12:49:52 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/12/2016 12:41:06 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:38:31 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:28:32 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:27:02 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:15:33 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:10:52 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:08:57 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms obviously includes nuclear weapons and tanks. Otherwise, how will the citizens be able to overthrow the tyrannical gubmint?

That was fast. Did you even see the video? Anyway they had privately owned cannons back then when the amendment was written.

Yeah, which is why today we should get to have privately owned nukes.

Actually, we already do. Private companies dealing with nuclear makes a byproduct that can be used in nukes. They just don't put it in missles.

Oh really? So where can I legally buy a nuclear missile? I need one to defend myself against the overreach of the gubmint. Or to nuke non-white neighborhoods out of self-defense, either one.

Why even bring up race... Race has nothing to do with this topic whatsoever

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

Here's some quotes from your article that you failed to read, moron.

"Noting an increase in the last five years in the number of permits to allow people to carry concealed weapons, Mr. Workman said he"s seen anecdotal evidence that gun ownership is increasing among minorities, including blacks, Hispanics and women."

"While symbolic racism, which is a subtle but modern measure of anti-black racism, was associated with higher rates of gun ownership, researchers also attempted to identify signs of overt racism, which did not appear to have any correlation to gun ownership."

"One person can read this and say gun owners are racists " and that"s not what it says," said John Hudak, gun policy researcher with the Brookings Institution. "It says racists are gun owners."
Maccabee
Posts: 1,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 2:13:41 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/12/2016 12:28:32 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:27:02 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:15:33 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:10:52 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:08:57 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms obviously includes nuclear weapons and tanks. Otherwise, how will the citizens be able to overthrow the tyrannical gubmint?

That was fast. Did you even see the video? Anyway they had privately owned cannons back then when the amendment was written.

Yeah, which is why today we should get to have privately owned nukes.

Actually, we already do. Private companies dealing with nuclear makes a byproduct that can be used in nukes. They just don't put it in missles.

Oh really? So where can I legally buy a nuclear missile? I need one to defend myself against the overreach of the gubmint. Or to nuke non-white neighborhoods out of self-defense, either one.
I think this explains it.

http://brainshavings.com...
Scripture, facts, stats, and logic is how I argue

Evolutionism is a religion, not science

When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.

"If guns are the cause of crimes then aren't matches the cause of arson?" D. Boys

"If the death penalty is government sanctioned killing then isn't inprisonment is government sanction kidnapping?" D. B

"Why do you trust the government with machine guns but not honest citizens?" D. B

All those who are pro-death (abortion) is already born
Fly
Posts: 2,045
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 3:18:35 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/12/2016 12:04:59 AM, Maccabee wrote:
YES!!!!! It's pretty obvious when you think about it.

https://m.youtube.com...

It most likely did, up until the Militia Act of 1903. The purpose of the 2A was for the protection of the states and the nation against enemies both foreign and domestic-- part of the armed forces oath, for those who don't already know. Particularly in the early stages of the nation, citizens were expected to be trained, equipped, and proficient enough to be summoned reliably in times of state or national emergency. If one looks at the Militia Clause of the Constitution, one will see how this setup, ensured by the 2A, was to be partially overseen by Congress.

The Militia Act of 1903 created the National Guard organization throughout the states, which then performed this "citizen soldier" function. Then add in the monumental expansion of US military power during WWII, and one realizes that both the active armed forces and the Army and Air National Guards are well up to the task of protecting the union against foreign and domestic enemies.

Now, the 2A is viewed by the Supreme Court as ensuring one's right to self defense, not national defense.
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 3:53:13 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/12/2016 12:42:35 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:41:06 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:38:31 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:28:32 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:27:02 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:15:33 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:10:52 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:08:57 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms obviously includes nuclear weapons and tanks. Otherwise, how will the citizens be able to overthrow the tyrannical gubmint?

That was fast. Did you even see the video? Anyway they had privately owned cannons back then when the amendment was written.

Yeah, which is why today we should get to have privately owned nukes.

Actually, we already do. Private companies dealing with nuclear makes a byproduct that can be used in nukes. They just don't put it in missles.

Oh really? So where can I legally buy a nuclear missile? I need one to defend myself against the overreach of the gubmint. Or to nuke non-white neighborhoods out of self-defense, either one.

Why even bring up race... Race has nothing to do with this topic whatsoever

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

http://www.slate.com...

Excellent, you've found another example of two things that are somehow correlated. Warm weather causes both ice cream sales and crime to rise. So do you think it's a callous disregard for human life that makes a person more likely to be a racist and a gun enthusiast? Or is it just plain stupidity? In light of this interaction with you, my money is on the latter.
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 4:05:29 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/12/2016 12:49:52 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:41:06 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:38:31 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:28:32 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:27:02 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:15:33 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:10:52 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:08:57 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms obviously includes nuclear weapons and tanks. Otherwise, how will the citizens be able to overthrow the tyrannical gubmint?

That was fast. Did you even see the video? Anyway they had privately owned cannons back then when the amendment was written.

Yeah, which is why today we should get to have privately owned nukes.

Actually, we already do. Private companies dealing with nuclear makes a byproduct that can be used in nukes. They just don't put it in missles.

Oh really? So where can I legally buy a nuclear missile? I need one to defend myself against the overreach of the gubmint. Or to nuke non-white neighborhoods out of self-defense, either one.

Why even bring up race... Race has nothing to do with this topic whatsoever

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

Here's some quotes from your article that you failed to read, moron.

"Noting an increase in the last five years in the number of permits to allow people to carry concealed weapons, Mr. Workman said he"s seen anecdotal evidence that gun ownership is increasing among minorities, including blacks, Hispanics and women."
Ok, well I have anecdotal evidence that conservatives' IQ levels are plummeting. Meaningless.
"While symbolic racism, which is a subtle but modern measure of anti-black racism, was associated with higher rates of gun ownership, researchers also attempted to identify signs of overt racism, which did not appear to have any correlation to gun ownership."
Ah, so they're subtle but not overt racists. My favorite kind.
"One person can read this and say gun owners are racists " and that"s not what it says," said John Hudak, gun policy researcher with the Brookings Institution. "It says racists are gun owners."
I don't know why you are quoting this part of the article. I didn't say "gun owners are racists." In my initial comment, I satirized a large and extremely vocal subset of the "I WANT MAH GUNZ" crowd. If you find yourself wanting to defend scumbags like Jason Van Dyke, then you are one of them. If you're not, great. Either way you're still wrong about the 2nd amendment though.

So, moron, next time you want to tell me what I have or haven't read, do us all a favor and stuff it.
Maccabee
Posts: 1,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 4:09:58 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
Just to end this whole racist card I'm black. Now we can get on topic. Any more talk about gun owners being racist and I will call you a racist.
Scripture, facts, stats, and logic is how I argue

Evolutionism is a religion, not science

When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.

"If guns are the cause of crimes then aren't matches the cause of arson?" D. Boys

"If the death penalty is government sanctioned killing then isn't inprisonment is government sanction kidnapping?" D. B

"Why do you trust the government with machine guns but not honest citizens?" D. B

All those who are pro-death (abortion) is already born
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 4:15:22 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/12/2016 2:13:41 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:28:32 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:27:02 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:15:33 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:10:52 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:08:57 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms obviously includes nuclear weapons and tanks. Otherwise, how will the citizens be able to overthrow the tyrannical gubmint?

That was fast. Did you even see the video? Anyway they had privately owned cannons back then when the amendment was written.

Yeah, which is why today we should get to have privately owned nukes.

Actually, we already do. Private companies dealing with nuclear makes a byproduct that can be used in nukes. They just don't put it in missles.

Oh really? So where can I legally buy a nuclear missile? I need one to defend myself against the overreach of the gubmint. Or to nuke non-white neighborhoods out of self-defense, either one.
I think this explains it.

http://brainshavings.com...

So what's the difference between what this guy is advocating, and let's say, outlawing hate speech? According to Constitutional traditionalists, you either have a right or you don't. Free speech, or no right to free speech. Right to bear arms, or no right to bear arms. Once you start qualifying what kinds of speech are free, or what types of arms are too dangerous to allow, you lose the whole "it's a right" argument. At that point it's a privilege that can be regulated, similar to driving a car.
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 4:20:15 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/12/2016 4:09:58 AM, Maccabee wrote:
Just to end this whole racist card I'm black. Now we can get on topic. Any more talk about gun owners being racist and I will call you a racist.

First of all, you're not black. Second of all, stop playing the "race card" card. There is no "race card" and you would know that if you were actually black. Shooting down any discussion of the real problems that racism causes by yelling "Race card!" is ignorant at best and malicious at worst.
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 4:31:34 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/12/2016 3:53:13 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:42:35 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:41:06 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:38:31 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:28:32 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:27:02 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:15:33 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:10:52 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:08:57 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms obviously includes nuclear weapons and tanks. Otherwise, how will the citizens be able to overthrow the tyrannical gubmint?

That was fast. Did you even see the video? Anyway they had privately owned cannons back then when the amendment was written.

Yeah, which is why today we should get to have privately owned nukes.

Actually, we already do. Private companies dealing with nuclear makes a byproduct that can be used in nukes. They just don't put it in missles.

Oh really? So where can I legally buy a nuclear missile? I need one to defend myself against the overreach of the gubmint. Or to nuke non-white neighborhoods out of self-defense, either one.

Why even bring up race... Race has nothing to do with this topic whatsoever

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

http://www.slate.com...

Excellent, you've found another example of two things that are somehow correlated. Warm weather causes both ice cream sales and crime to rise. So do you think it's a callous disregard for human life that makes a person more likely to be a racist and a gun enthusiast? Or is it just plain stupidity? In light of this interaction with you, my money is on the latter.

AH so it only works with you're anti gun agenda. You clearly haven't taken a statistics class in your life, so here's the rule of thumb.

Correlation does not equal causation.
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 9:36:22 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/12/2016 4:05:29 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:49:52 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:41:06 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:38:31 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:28:32 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:27:02 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:15:33 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:10:52 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:08:57 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms obviously includes nuclear weapons and tanks. Otherwise, how will the citizens be able to overthrow the tyrannical gubmint?

That was fast. Did you even see the video? Anyway they had privately owned cannons back then when the amendment was written.

Yeah, which is why today we should get to have privately owned nukes.

Actually, we already do. Private companies dealing with nuclear makes a byproduct that can be used in nukes. They just don't put it in missles.

Oh really? So where can I legally buy a nuclear missile? I need one to defend myself against the overreach of the gubmint. Or to nuke non-white neighborhoods out of self-defense, either one.

Why even bring up race... Race has nothing to do with this topic whatsoever

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

Here's some quotes from your article that you failed to read, moron.

"Noting an increase in the last five years in the number of permits to allow people to carry concealed weapons, Mr. Workman said he"s seen anecdotal evidence that gun ownership is increasing among minorities, including blacks, Hispanics and women."
Ok, well I have anecdotal evidence that conservatives' IQ levels are plummeting. Meaningless.

"While symbolic racism, which is a subtle but modern measure of anti-black racism, was associated with higher rates of gun ownership, researchers also attempted to identify signs of overt racism, which did not appear to have any correlation to gun ownership."
Ah, so they're subtle but not overt racists. My favorite kind.
"Subtle" racism is what your kind call "microaggressions." AKA it's only racist if you miraculously interpret it to be racist. Overt racism is blatant, intentional racism.
"One person can read this and say gun owners are racists " and that"s not what it says," said John Hudak, gun policy researcher with the Brookings Institution. "It says racists are gun owners."
I don't know why you are quoting this part of the article. I didn't say "gun owners are racists." In my initial comment, I satirized a large and extremely vocal subset of the "I WANT MAH GUNZ" crowd. If you find yourself wanting to defend scumbags like Jason Van Dyke, then you are one of them. If you're not, great. Either way you're still wrong about the 2nd amendment though.
You clearly were making the point that white gun owners are racist and backed up with an article with the same agenda, despite the fact that the topic has absolutely nothing to do with race.
So, moron, next time you want to tell me what I have or haven't read, do us all a favor and stuff it.

Okay, I'll give you some credit. You read it after I commented.

And in what way am I wrong about the 2nd amendment?
Maccabee
Posts: 1,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 10:25:55 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/12/2016 4:20:15 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 4:09:58 AM, Maccabee wrote:
Just to end this whole racist card I'm black. Now we can get on topic. Any more talk about gun owners being racist and I will call you a racist.

First of all, you're not black. Second of all, stop playing the "race card" card. There is no "race card" and you would know that if you were actually black. Shooting down any discussion of the real problems that racism causes by yelling "Race card!" is ignorant at best and malicious at worst.

What do you mean by I'm not black? I know that I'm not literally black like charcoal but I'm certainly am brown. Also you're accusing gun owners as racist but they're not.
Scripture, facts, stats, and logic is how I argue

Evolutionism is a religion, not science

When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.

"If guns are the cause of crimes then aren't matches the cause of arson?" D. Boys

"If the death penalty is government sanctioned killing then isn't inprisonment is government sanction kidnapping?" D. B

"Why do you trust the government with machine guns but not honest citizens?" D. B

All those who are pro-death (abortion) is already born
Maccabee
Posts: 1,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 10:29:30 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/12/2016 4:15:22 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 2:13:41 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:28:32 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:27:02 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:15:33 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:10:52 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:08:57 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms obviously includes nuclear weapons and tanks. Otherwise, how will the citizens be able to overthrow the tyrannical gubmint?

That was fast. Did you even see the video? Anyway they had privately owned cannons back then when the amendment was written.

Yeah, which is why today we should get to have privately owned nukes.

Actually, we already do. Private companies dealing with nuclear makes a byproduct that can be used in nukes. They just don't put it in missles.

Oh really? So where can I legally buy a nuclear missile? I need one to defend myself against the overreach of the gubmint. Or to nuke non-white neighborhoods out of self-defense, either one.
I think this explains it.

http://brainshavings.com...

So what's the difference between what this guy is advocating, and let's say, outlawing hate speech? According to Constitutional traditionalists, you either have a right or you don't. Free speech, or no right to free speech. Right to bear arms, or no right to bear arms. Once you start qualifying what kinds of speech are free, or what types of arms are too dangerous to allow, you lose the whole "it's a right" argument. At that point it's a privilege that can be regulated, similar to driving a car.
Hate soeech as long as it doesn't call for violence is protected. I can say "blacks are the scum of the earth" and while as hatful that is its still protected. However if I say "kill all blacks" then I've stepped over the line and that's not protected.
Scripture, facts, stats, and logic is how I argue

Evolutionism is a religion, not science

When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.

"If guns are the cause of crimes then aren't matches the cause of arson?" D. Boys

"If the death penalty is government sanctioned killing then isn't inprisonment is government sanction kidnapping?" D. B

"Why do you trust the government with machine guns but not honest citizens?" D. B

All those who are pro-death (abortion) is already born
ford_prefect
Posts: 4,139
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2016 10:55:02 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/12/2016 4:31:34 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 4/12/2016 3:53:13 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:42:35 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:41:06 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:38:31 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:28:32 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:27:02 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:15:33 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:10:52 AM, Maccabee wrote:
At 4/12/2016 12:08:57 AM, ford_prefect wrote:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms obviously includes nuclear weapons and tanks. Otherwise, how will the citizens be able to overthrow the tyrannical gubmint?

That was fast. Did you even see the video? Anyway they had privately owned cannons back then when the amendment was written.

Yeah, which is why today we should get to have privately owned nukes.

Actually, we already do. Private companies dealing with nuclear makes a byproduct that can be used in nukes. They just don't put it in missles.

Oh really? So where can I legally buy a nuclear missile? I need one to defend myself against the overreach of the gubmint. Or to nuke non-white neighborhoods out of self-defense, either one.

Why even bring up race... Race has nothing to do with this topic whatsoever

http://www.washingtontimes.com...

http://www.slate.com...

Excellent, you've found another example of two things that are somehow correlated. Warm weather causes both ice cream sales and crime to rise. So do you think it's a callous disregard for human life that makes a person more likely to be a racist and a gun enthusiast? Or is it just plain stupidity? In light of this interaction with you, my money is on the latter.

AH so it only works with you're anti gun agenda. You clearly haven't taken a statistics class in your life, so here's the rule of thumb.

Lol nice try but I took Probability 301, Mathematical Statistics 302, and Econometrics two seventy-something as part of my Math Econ major in college.

Correlation does not equal causation.

. <==== The point

You