|
|
| Post Number: 21
|
CatKnight 
Jedi Republican
Group: Members
Posts: 3807
Joined: Dec. 2000
|
 |
Posted on: May 22 2002,04:55 |
|
   |
i will post the sources as soon as i get home. i didn't have time to look for them without my book marks here at work.
just noticed this:
taxman: "I'm pretty sure I didn't say you were wrong anywhere in my post"
beastie (referring to taxman): "I think he's saying you are wrong, and would find some bullshit even you know isn't true to back up your argument"
lol
Edited by CatKnight on Jan. 01 1970,01:00
--------------
[url=http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/d/b/dbl125/dfa.jpg]If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful that you can possibly imagine.[/url]
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 22
|
veistran
We don't listen to people that don't like us.
Group: Members
Posts: 967
Joined: May 2000
|
|
Posted on: May 22 2002,05:22 |
|
 |
| Quote (TheTaxMan @ 21 May 2002,22:31) | CK and veistrain, you are so full of shit. You consitantly make posts that describe how liberals are wrong, and in doing so you do the exact same thing that you accuse others of.
| Quote | | you have no clue how things actually work do you? I'm sorry but that's all I can say to that and the rest of your posts, they sound like the rantings of a lunatic, I mean liberal. |
This is brainless rhetoric that Ck always accuses people of (most of the time just because they disagree with him) and then he goes on to praise this person. Interesting.
Also, as soon as someone posts a link to their disertation on 18'th centuray language, I don't give two shits about what you think well-regulated militia means in todays context. You're no more a valid speaker on it than anyone else here. Pertaining to that, if you go -find- a disertation on said subject I will do nothing but applaud your google skills, since there are probably 100's for and against each side.
| Quote | | CK hit the nail on the head when he said that the purpose of the 2nd ammendment is to keep the population armed to prevent the US gov. from becomming tyranical. |
Again, this is just your opinion and I don't see any information here that proves that point of view any more than the alternative.
In -my- completely uneducated opinion, with absolutely no evidence to back it up, I'm pretty fucking glad their are gun regulations. If we don't let felons vote, why should they be able to own weapons since they have proved themselves to be detriments to society? I also don't want people bringing guns anywhere near a school, or quite frankly, most public places. I fail to see how it makes anyone any safer if you're toting around a .45 in your handbag. Chances are, whoever is carrying it wil just do something stupid if they ever pull it out.
| Quote | | the number of gun owners who are trained FAR EXCEEDS the number of illegal/untrained owners by a factor of something like 100,000 to 1 |
I don't see any proof for this number either. How you manage to find that number, I really don't care, since there are both opinions online and I'm sure we could find both sides. |
take something out of context and you can make it sound however you want. He's acting like the the executive branch's stance on the 2nd amendmant means nothing, when it indeed means a great deal or did you miss the fact that the executive branch sets the tone for law enforcment around the country and the president has the power to pardon. In addittion my satirical reply was of course also in reply to brainless rhetoric in the face of facts. Of course you'll ingore that context as well in your attempt to make me look foolish, but then I don't expect any less in this debate.
As far as gun regulations and felons... TRY READING THE FUCKING ARTICLE I POSTED. The second paragraph reads and I quote...
| Quote | | That right, however, is "subject to reasonable restrictions designed to prevent possession by unfit persons or to restrict the possession of types of firearms that are particularly suited to criminal misuse." |
It's not like were saying "HEY, everyone should have at least one gun." More, "Hey, every law-abiding citizen who's fit to make the descision on whether or not they want a gun should be able to have one."
check out this paragraph for even more clues...
| Quote | The change in policy is an extension of views expressed by Ashcroft in a letter to the National Rifle Association last year.
In it, the attorney general said that the Second Amendment confers the right to "keep and bear arms" to private citizens, and not merely to the "well-regulated militia" mentioned in the amendment's text and used by gun control advocates to argue that the Second Amendment only refers to individual gun ownership when the individual is a member of the military or police forces.
|
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 23
|
ic0n0
I have become Death, Destroyer of Worlds
Group: Members
Posts: 1352
Joined: Sep. 2000
|
|
Posted on: May 22 2002,05:23 |
|
|
I am staying out of this, but let it be known I agree more with CK.
--------------
"I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time." (Isaac Asimov)
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 24
|
Beastie Dr
I will abort you.
Group: Members
Posts: 293
Joined: Apr. 2002
|
|
Posted on: May 22 2002,05:23 |
|
|
Then I'm saying you are bitch, so back it up.
--------------
"Bladow, blazwoks!"
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 25
|
j0eSmith
Outlier
Group: Members
Posts: 783
Joined: May 2000
|
|
Posted on: May 22 2002,05:44 |
|
|
hahahaha, crazy yanks. 
--------------
"Warning! This is not underwear! Do not attempt to put in pants."
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 26
|
veistran
We don't listen to people that don't like us.
Group: Members
Posts: 967
Joined: May 2000
|
|
Posted on: May 22 2002,05:46 |
|
|
| Quote (j0eSmith @ 21 May 2002,23:44) | | hahahaha, crazy yanks. |
at least we're not the french.
--------------
V|-
"Headed down the hard way
Concrete battleground
Urban monkey warfare
Sabotage underground camouflage"
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 27
|
Bob_the_Cannibal
Anonymous Coward
Group: Members
Posts: 313
Joined: Feb. 2002
|
|
Posted on: May 22 2002,06:05 |
|
|
look, you all look at this wrong. speak it out loud. it was dictation. the stuff between commas is clarification.
it can, however go both ways:
A well regulated Militia, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, shall not be infringed.
<ot>
anyway, you two bitch too much. STFU. get some peace, or go out and meet each other for a deul. Kuru'd probably supply the guns.
I don't fucking care.
</ot>
Anyway, I read the whole thing as:
People should have guns. they should have training. The guns should be as powerful as the government's. the training should be as well as the government's.
otherwise, the government can make laws like the DMCA and the CBDTPA or SSSCA(sp?), or repeal the constitution, and erode your rights.
</0.02>
and one last thing: you two need to find common ground. stop your, (as Kamilion of #detnet puts it: "stop bitchfighting..."...
edit: godamn it editor! fix this dumb shit to convert IBcode to HTML and back when editing/previewing... >:
Edited by Bob_the_Cannibal on Jan. 01 1970,01:00
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 28
|
damien_s_lucifer
Emperor of Detnet
Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: Jan. 1970
|
|
Posted on: May 22 2002,06:50 |
|
|
Ah! Thanks to Conservative re-education, I have seen the error of my ways. I know this is a long post, but please read it so you, too, may know the TRUTH:
The Founding Fathers hated government so much that they wrote up a document that created a Government, whose purpose- as mentioned in the very first paragraph of this document- is this:
| Quote | | ...to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity |
They knew the tyranny an horror of government so well that the SECOND paragraph created a body with full authority to make law:
| Quote | | Section 1. All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives. |
Inherently fearful of the Government they were creating, they made sure to grant it a broad range of powers in Article I, Section 8. It is interesting to note some of the powers they granted this government :
| Quote | | The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; |
...this proves that the personal income tax is unconstitutional.
| Quote | | To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions; |
...this proves that the Founders believed in the right, nay, the duty of citizens to participate in armed revolt.
| Quote | | To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress; |
...this proves that neither the States nor Congress have any authority to govern the militia.
| Quote | | To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof. |
Yet more proof of their belief that Governments are inherently tyrannical and must be restrained as much as possible.
In order to further assure that their Government would not have any real power, they made sure to relinquish almost all of their authority to the State governments :
| Quote | | No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility. |
Because the government they created wasn't weak enough, some additions to the Constitution were made later on.
Amendment 14 gave away even more Congressional authority:
| Quote | Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws...
Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. |
The 16th Amendment made sure that we would NEVER have such a tyrannical thing as a personal income tax:
| Quote | | The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration. |
There is much, much more, but I need to rest... but doesn't it all make sense now?
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 29
|
Beldurin
Mayor of Detnet
Group: Members
Posts: 1242
Joined: Aug. 2001
|
|
Posted on: May 22 2002,07:17 |
|
|
A couple of things, from my own pov/interpretation, and then some advice.
I think everyone has analyzed the literal meaning of the passage in the 2nd amendment, but you're forgetting that, in reality, laws have three aspects.
1.) The letter of the law: how it reads literally
2.) The spirit of the law: how it was meant
3.) The enforcement of the law: how it is upheld
This is really key to this whole debate as some of you are arguing about 1, and some about 2. When it was written, they were essentially the same. However, while the letter of the law has remained, the spirit has changed. Herein lies the problem.
IMO, the letter of the law is fairly clear.
| Quote | | "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon [by Congress] because a well-regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free State." |
People have the right, not the responsibility to keep and bear arms. BF asks why did the write it this way? Simple, they couldn't possibly imagine our nation as it is today. The did not envision a national army of this magnitude. The state militias were mandated because they saw it as necessary to the survival of the United States. If, as DSL argues, gun control is truly a state issue (as derived from this passage), then so is defense (as derived from the same logic). You cannot selectively separate those conclusions. Therefore, by your logic, the U.S. military is unconstitutional. A dangerous thought. I personally am comforted by the presence of the U.S. military. In addition, it also means that any citizen owning a gun [I]must [I] be part of the organized militia. This sounds like a form of conscription/pressing. Besides, you're telling me that my 65-year-old grandfather who loved to hunt squirrels with his .22 since he was 8 must now be a part of the state military? Please.
What it comes down to, then, is the spirit of the law, as it applies now. In many ways the Constitution, as it was written, is simply not applicable to our 21st century world. That was the true genius of the framers...they knew that they didn't know everything, and so they made it a living, flexible document that can be adapted. I believe that the spirit of the law is that, as a freedom, citizens should be allowed to own guns. There must be restrictions, of course (such as prohibition from felons owning them), but it is a constitutional right.
Besides, I think the major issue has been overlooked. The reason that we have a problem with things like accidental death and children shooting their friends while playing is not because guns do not belong in the home. It is because the parents have failed their children. One simple word would end the vast majority of these tragedies: Education. I've been exposed to firearms since I was 5. My father had several. The reason I was never in any danger was twofold.
First, they weren't hidden, they weren't secret. Parents, there's nothing that you can hide that your kids won't find, and nothing attracts kids like a secret. You take away the mystique, then you take away the attraction.
Secondly, the first thing that I was taught is a simple phrase that made a world of difference: "There is no such thing as an unloaded gun." My father taught me that, and I've lived by it whenever around guns. Never point it at anything unless you intend to shoot it. I don't care if you've dropped the clip and cycled the slide 1,000 times, or if you pumped the shells out of the gun...it's never unloaded. Treat it that way at all times, and you won't have a problem.
Education. It's the answer.
--------------
If someone's ungrateful and you tell him he's ungrateful, okay, you've called him a name.
You haven't solved anything.
-- zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 30
|
veistran
We don't listen to people that don't like us.
Group: Members
Posts: 967
Joined: May 2000
|
|
Posted on: May 22 2002,07:37 |
|
|
Fuck, DSL reminds me of PETA/Greenpeace mothefuckers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
