Dismiss Notice
Thanks for being a member of our community. Please donate toward site expenses if you can.

The right to bare arms..... questioning the understanding.

Discussion in 'United States' started by Mr Stefan Downey, Jun 11, 2012.

Page 6 of 14
  1. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    it doesn't.
     
    rahl, Jun 29, 2012
    #126
  2. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I've already presented my argument. no fallacy what so ever. just a complete refutation of your argument. the right to keep and bear arms is not in any way tied to, or dependant upon a militia.
     
    rahl, Jun 29, 2012
    #127
  3. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    That is a fallacy of composition that can easily be corrected on error. The Second Amendment merely exempts a well regulated militia of the People who keep and bear Arms, from State gun control (laws) in favor of federal gun control (laws). That is all it does since rights in private property are secured in State Constitutions as in the case of the Constitution of the State of California, which specifically enumerates the right to acquire, posses, and by implication to keep and bear that private property which may include Arms.

    That declaration of those inalienable rights are also not contingent upon militia service.
     
    danielpalos, Jun 29, 2012
    #128
  4. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    yes, it does.
     
    danielpalos, Jun 29, 2012
    #129
  5. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    I only claim, that only a well regulated militia of the People who keep and bear Arms, is exempt from State gun control (laws) in favor of federal gun control (laws).
     
    danielpalos, Jun 29, 2012
    #130
  6. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    nope. I just showed you what the supreme law of the land is. the right to keep and bear arms is in no way tied to or dependent upon any militia. you can stomp you feet all you want, but I just showed you the actual decision of the supreme court case where they stated verbatum, those exact words.
     
    rahl, Jun 29, 2012
    #131
  7. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    nope........
     
    rahl, Jun 29, 2012
    #132
  8. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    no, you claim that the right to keep and bear arms is directly tied to being part of a militia.
     
    rahl, Jun 29, 2012
    #133
  9. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    That is a fallacy of composition that can easily be corrected on error. The Second Amendment merely exempts a well regulated militia of the People who keep and bear Arms, from State gun control (laws) in favor of federal gun control (laws). That is all it does since rights in private property are secured in State Constitutions as in the case of the Constitution of the State of California, which specifically enumerates the right to acquire, posses, and by implication to keep and bear that private property which may include Arms.

    That declaration of those inalienable rights are also not contingent upon militia service.
     
    danielpalos, Jun 29, 2012
    #134
  10. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    yup....
     
    danielpalos, Jun 29, 2012
    #135
  11. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    That is your straw man argument, not mine. I only claim, that only a well regulated militia of the People who keep and bear Arms, is exempt from State gun control (laws) in favor of federal gun control (laws).
     
    danielpalos, Jun 29, 2012
    #136
  12. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    no fallacy, simply reality.
     
    rahl, Jun 30, 2012
    #137
  13. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    nope.......
     
    rahl, Jun 30, 2012
    #138
  14. stjames1_53

    stjames1_53 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    12,736
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You have used all of these methods of argument, and all have failed.
    http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#statistics

    You are entitled to you opinions unfortunately, you present an argument that has no definitive excercise
    eg. "There is no wind here, but it's blowing real hard"
    ...militia is armed citizens. Yep, we got that. Today we use a more modern term called the National Guard. Militias are comprised of citizen/soldiers, volunteers that can be called up for duty. It is voluntary, but they can be called up by an act of Congress for national defense or the govenor of the respective states to handle issues within their own states. This meets the definition.
    The National Guard is not to be confused with the regular army, to which one can be drafted or conscripted by the government. You cannot be drafted into the National Guard.
    Rahl, do you even know what fallacy means? You record has a skip on it. (old vinyl record joke)
    Since your "no" requires no submission of evidence, the basis is a fallacy. You have presented not one particle of evidence to support your claim and just saying "no" is not proof.
    The contrary posters have presented enough "evidence" to overshadow your claim and all you have accomplished is "chumming the waters"
    Go visit another thread.........
     
    stjames1_53, Jun 30, 2012
    #139
  15. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    See post 121

    no, I need to stay here to keep correcting both of you.
     
    rahl, Jun 30, 2012
    #140
  16. stjames1_53

    stjames1_53 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    12,736
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    0
    kids........
    college? university? highschool? something other than copy and paste?
    You argue like my thirteen old used to. Your methodology is a sham and I suspect no one involved in this "discussion" really cares now about your unsupported claims.
    and correct this, flamer....... (you act similar to some 12 year old trying to correct his parents.......hahahahah, that's funny)
    .....your thoughts are duly noted, your opinions registered but you are arguing for the sake of arguing and nothing more, that's why you are a sham, because you attacked me with your smarta&&ed mouth and still failed to deal with my statements.
    OR, you are trying to bully your way. Either way, you lack expertise and finess, all typical of a lack of education.
    There is another term for this type of arguing, splitting hairs, another waste of time
    In my other forum, you would be banned as a spammer phffffffffffft....go get some milk and cookies, take a nap, play well with others, share your toys, and quit annoying the adults....
     
    stjames1_53, Jun 30, 2012
    #141
  17. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Lol, i provided direct quotes from the decision in hellar, and provided a link to the decision. You were proven wrong, and are now stomping your feet in a tantrum
     
    rahl, Jun 30, 2012
    #142
  18. stjames1_53

    stjames1_53 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    12,736
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    0
    ...taken out of context.....
    subject to yuor own personal interpretaion
    you are in no position to correct me or anyone else for that matter. You are unqualified
     
    stjames1_53, Jun 30, 2012
    #143
  19. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What was taken out of context? I just gave you the decision. It state quite clearly that the right to keep and bear arms is in no way tied to or dependant upon any militia. So of course i corrected you

    But keep stomping your feet though, maybe reality will change if you stomp hard enough
     
    rahl, Jun 30, 2012
    #144
  20. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    How does your line of reasoning explain the well regulated militia of the United States known as the National Guard who's members are specifically exempted from State gun control (laws) that affect every other citizen of that same State?
     
    danielpalos, Jun 30, 2012
    #145
  21. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Heller is an error in judgment if quoted out of context in the manner gun lovers are wont to do.
     
    danielpalos, Jun 30, 2012
    #146
  22. mikezila

    mikezila New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    23,299
    Likes Received:
    250
    Trophy Points:
    0
    shirts and shoes are required where food is sold.
     
    mikezila, Jun 30, 2012
    #147
  23. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This has nothing to do with the second amendment or the right to keep and bear arms
     
    rahl, Jun 30, 2012
    #148
  24. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is simply your opinion. The law and decision is quite clear. The right to keep and bear arms is not tied to or dependant upon a militia
     
    rahl, Jun 30, 2012
    #149
  25. stjames1_53

    stjames1_53 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    12,736
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    0
    ...not in front of a hotdog stand
     
    stjames1_53, Jun 30, 2012
    #150
Page 6 of 14

Share This Page