Poor poor liberal gun grabbers.

[danielpalos]

Not a straw man at all; it is merely your cognitive dissonance (exogenous to myself) that prevents you from realizing it.

Nonsense. Nonsense fabricated from nothing. Total fiction. Entirely baseless in fact--like your retarded point.

You are simply appealing to ignorance of any Thing not in our Second Article of Amendment to construe your argument.

There is clearly no Appeal to Ignorance being made here, you insufferable cretin.

Considering that 10 USC 311 (Militia: Composition and Classes) makes no mention at all of a "well regulated milita", your reference to it remains entirely meaningless--like your half-witted point.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

It is only your cognitive dissonance (exogenous to myself) that prevents you from recognizing that well regulated militias must be organized militias.

well-regulated means well-trained...it has nothing to do with the organizational structure.

At issue would be CONSTITUTIONAL militias vs Tom, Dick & Harry's private militias.

nope; in our US case, it means whatever our federal Congress prescribes.

Only if they amend the Constitution...but I am not surprised that you are one of the Idiocrats who think Congress can simply pass a law to change the Constitution.

You only appeal to ignorance.

Wellness of regulation for the Militia of the United States must be prescribed by our federal Congress.

 

[Dan Daly]

Nonsense. Nonsense fabricated from nothing. Total fiction. Entirely baseless in fact--like your retarded point.

There is clearly no Appeal to Ignorance being made here, you insufferable cretin.

Considering that 10 USC 311 (Militia: Composition and Classes) makes no mention at all of a "well regulated milita", your reference to it remains entirely meaningless--like your half-witted point.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

It is only your cognitive dissonance (exogenous to myself) that prevents you from recognizing that well regulated militias must be organized militias.

well-regulated means well-trained...it has nothing to do with the organizational structure.

At issue would be CONSTITUTIONAL militias vs Tom, Dick & Harry's private militias.

nope; in our US case, it means whatever our federal Congress prescribes.

Only if they amend the Constitution...but I am not surprised that you are one of the Idiocrats who think Congress can simply pass a law to change the Constitution.

You only appeal to ignorance.

Wellness of regulation for the Militia of the United States must be prescribed by our federal Congress.

psst...the only Constitutional militias are those of the States (where applicable)...which of course predate our federal government. But I wouldn't expect a ninny to know any of that.

As far as a federal militia, you should probably also look at the types of militias outlined in the US Code...one of which is decidedly UNORGANIZED.

The more you try to look smart, the dumber you look.

 

[Dan Daly]

and AGAIN, the mention of well-regulated militias in the 2nd Amendment has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO with our right to keep and bear arms. Deal with it, Nancy.

Fact is, our right to keep and bear arms isn't dependent upon the 2nd Amendment, the Constitution or any other document...it is an inherent human right that you and your government toadies can only infringe IF we allow you to disarm us...which ain't gonna happen, Junior.

Yes, it does, simply Because, not All of the Militia of the United States is well regulated.

I didn't realize you were mentally challenged, so please read carefully and slowly:

The mention of a well-regulated militia in the 2nd Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

If that still isn't clear, feel free to ask questions. If your handicap prevents you from being able to communicate effectively with words, feel free to draw pictures.

Yes, it does; Paragraph (2) of DC v. Heller specifically applies to gun lovers without a clue or a Cause, but not well regulated militias of Individuals of the People.

You just keep looking dumber with every post. You must work for the Obama bunch.

That you don't understand the plain language of the 2nd Amendment, or the slightly more complicated language of Heller is depressing. I assume you are a product of public education?

Yes, the plain language is limited by the context of the Intent and Purpose.

of which you are obviously ignorant.

You should probably limit yourself to debating those ignorant of this issue...it's the only way that at least the rest of the Idiocracy might think you are smart.

 

[danielpalos]

It is only your cognitive dissonance (exogenous to myself) that prevents you from recognizing that well regulated militias must be organized militias.

well-regulated means well-trained...it has nothing to do with the organizational structure.

At issue would be CONSTITUTIONAL militias vs Tom, Dick & Harry's private militias.

nope; in our US case, it means whatever our federal Congress prescribes.

Only if they amend the Constitution...but I am not surprised that you are one of the Idiocrats who think Congress can simply pass a law to change the Constitution.

You only appeal to ignorance.

Wellness of regulation for the Militia of the United States must be prescribed by our federal Congress.

psst...the only Constitutional militias are those of the States (where applicable)...which of course predate our federal government. But I wouldn't expect a ninny to know any of that.

As far as a federal militia, you should probably also look at the types of militias outlined in the US Code...one of which is decidedly UNORGANIZED.

The more you try to look smart, the dumber you look.

dude, you really just do need a clue and a Cause.

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;

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, it does, simply Because, not All of the Militia of the United States is well regulated.

I didn't realize you were mentally challenged, so please read carefully and slowly:

The mention of a well-regulated militia in the 2nd Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

If that still isn't clear, feel free to ask questions. If your handicap prevents you from being able to communicate effectively with words, feel free to draw pictures.

Yes, it does; Paragraph (2) of DC v. Heller specifically applies to gun lovers without a clue or a Cause, but not well regulated militias of Individuals of the People.

You just keep looking dumber with every post. You must work for the Obama bunch.

That you don't understand the plain language of the 2nd Amendment, or the slightly more complicated language of Heller is depressing. I assume you are a product of public education?

Yes, the plain language is limited by the context of the Intent and Purpose.

of which you are obviously ignorant.

You should probably limit yourself to debating those ignorant of this issue...it's the only way that at least the rest of the Idiocracy might think you are smart.

dude, there is no appeal to ignorance of the law. that Must include the Intent and Purpose.

 

[LOki]

Nonsense. Nonsense fabricated from nothing. Total fiction. Entirely baseless in fact--like your retarded point.

There is clearly no Appeal to Ignorance being made here, you insufferable cretin.

Considering that 10 USC 311 (Militia: Composition and Classes) makes no mention at all of a "well regulated milita", your reference to it remains entirely meaningless--like your half-witted point.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

It is only your cognitive dissonance (exogenous to myself) that prevents you from recognizing that well regulated militias must be organized militias.

You are wrong.

You are wrong about what "well regulated militia" means. It means, a militia maintained in proper function.

You are wrong about what "organized militia" means. It means, the militia organized by the Federal Government.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

I can't be wrong that well regulated militias must be organized.

Yes you can. And you obviously are.

You are wrong about what "well regulated militia" means. It means, a militia maintained in proper function.

You are wrong about what "organized militia" means. It means, the militia organized by the Federal Government.

It is merely your cognitive dissonance (exogenous to the objective nature of reality) that prevents you from realizing it.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Regardless, a well regulated Militia is dependent upon (NOT a constraint upon) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms; hence, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed--not by any limitation to militia membership.

You can reference "a well regulated militia" ad-nauseam, but your reference will remain entirely irrelevant to the unambiguous, and explicitly asserted declaration that it is the people's right, not any militia's, but each individual US sovereign's right to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed.

So you remain wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

I can't be wrong that well regulated militias must be organized.

All you have done is appeal to ignorance; a well regulated militia must be an organized militia.

There is clearly no Appeal to Ignorance being made here, you insufferable cretin.

You are wrong.

You are wrong about what "well regulated militia" means. It means, a militia maintained in proper function.

You are wrong about what "organized militia" means. It means, the militia organized by the Federal Government.

There is nothing about being "well regulated" that is contingent upon being "organized."

There is nothing about being "organized" that is contigent upon being "well regulated."

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Regardless, a well regulated Militia is dependent upon (NOT a constraint upon) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms; hence, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed--not by any limitation to militia membership.

You can reference "a well regulated militia" ad-nauseam, but your reference will remain entirely irrelevant to the unambiguous, and explicitly asserted declaration that it is the people's right, not any militia's, but each individual US sovereign's right to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed.

So you remain wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

 

[danielpalos]

It is only your cognitive dissonance (exogenous to myself) that prevents you from recognizing that well regulated militias must be organized militias.

You are wrong.

You are wrong about what "well regulated militia" means. It means, a militia maintained in proper function.

You are wrong about what "organized militia" means. It means, the militia organized by the Federal Government.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

I can't be wrong that well regulated militias must be organized.

Yes you can. And you obviously are.

You are wrong about what "well regulated militia" means. It means, a militia maintained in proper function.

You are wrong about what "organized militia" means. It means, the militia organized by the Federal Government.

It is merely your cognitive dissonance (exogenous to the objective nature of reality) that prevents you from realizing it.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Regardless, a well regulated Militia is dependent upon (NOT a constraint upon) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms; hence, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed--not by any limitation to militia membership.

You can reference "a well regulated militia" ad-nauseam, but your reference will remain entirely irrelevant to the unambiguous, and explicitly asserted declaration that it is the people's right, not any militia's, but each individual US sovereign's right to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed.

So you remain wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

I can't be wrong that well regulated militias must be organized.

All you have done is appeal to ignorance; a well regulated militia must be an organized militia.

There is clearly no Appeal to Ignorance being made here, you insufferable cretin.

You are wrong.

You are wrong about what "well regulated militia" means. It means, a militia maintained in proper function.

You are wrong about what "organized militia" means. It means, the militia organized by the Federal Government.

There is nothing about being "well regulated" that is contingent upon being "organized."

There is nothing about being "organized" that is contigent upon being "well regulated."

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Regardless, a well regulated Militia is dependent upon (NOT a constraint upon) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms; hence, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed--not by any limitation to militia membership.

You can reference "a well regulated militia" ad-nauseam, but your reference will remain entirely irrelevant to the unambiguous, and explicitly asserted declaration that it is the people's right, not any militia's, but each individual US sovereign's right to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed.

So you remain wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Wellness of regulation must be prescribed by our federal Congress for the Militia of the United States.

 

[Dan Daly]

I didn't realize you were mentally challenged, so please read carefully and slowly:

The mention of a well-regulated militia in the 2nd Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

If that still isn't clear, feel free to ask questions. If your handicap prevents you from being able to communicate effectively with words, feel free to draw pictures.

Yes, it does; Paragraph (2) of DC v. Heller specifically applies to gun lovers without a clue or a Cause, but not well regulated militias of Individuals of the People.

You just keep looking dumber with every post. You must work for the Obama bunch.

That you don't understand the plain language of the 2nd Amendment, or the slightly more complicated language of Heller is depressing. I assume you are a product of public education?

Yes, the plain language is limited by the context of the Intent and Purpose.

of which you are obviously ignorant.

You should probably limit yourself to debating those ignorant of this issue...it's the only way that at least the rest of the Idiocracy might think you are smart.

dude, there is no appeal to ignorance of the law. that Must include the Intent and Purpose.

Son, I was creating, enforcing, judging and teaching the law since before you were a gleam in your gay daddy's eye.

 

[Dan Daly]

You are wrong.

You are wrong about what "well regulated militia" means. It means, a militia maintained in proper function.

You are wrong about what "organized militia" means. It means, the militia organized by the Federal Government.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

I can't be wrong that well regulated militias must be organized.

Yes you can. And you obviously are.

You are wrong about what "well regulated militia" means. It means, a militia maintained in proper function.

You are wrong about what "organized militia" means. It means, the militia organized by the Federal Government.

It is merely your cognitive dissonance (exogenous to the objective nature of reality) that prevents you from realizing it.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Regardless, a well regulated Militia is dependent upon (NOT a constraint upon) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms; hence, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed--not by any limitation to militia membership.

You can reference "a well regulated militia" ad-nauseam, but your reference will remain entirely irrelevant to the unambiguous, and explicitly asserted declaration that it is the people's right, not any militia's, but each individual US sovereign's right to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed.

So you remain wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

I can't be wrong that well regulated militias must be organized.

All you have done is appeal to ignorance; a well regulated militia must be an organized militia.

There is clearly no Appeal to Ignorance being made here, you insufferable cretin.

You are wrong.

You are wrong about what "well regulated militia" means. It means, a militia maintained in proper function.

You are wrong about what "organized militia" means. It means, the militia organized by the Federal Government.

There is nothing about being "well regulated" that is contingent upon being "organized."

There is nothing about being "organized" that is contigent upon being "well regulated."

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Regardless, a well regulated Militia is dependent upon (NOT a constraint upon) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms; hence, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed--not by any limitation to militia membership.

You can reference "a well regulated militia" ad-nauseam, but your reference will remain entirely irrelevant to the unambiguous, and explicitly asserted declaration that it is the people's right, not any militia's, but each individual US sovereign's right to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed.

So you remain wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Wellness of regulation must be prescribed by our federal Congress for the Militia of the United States.

I have two questions:

1. Is English your first language?
2. Do you even understand the words you are writing?

Apparently not.

 

[LOki]

I didn't realize you were mentally challenged, so please read carefully and slowly:

The mention of a well-regulated militia in the 2nd Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

If that still isn't clear, feel free to ask questions. If your handicap prevents you from being able to communicate effectively with words, feel free to draw pictures.

Yes, it does; Paragraph (2) of DC v. Heller specifically applies to gun lovers without a clue or a Cause, but not well regulated militias of Individuals of the People.

You just keep looking dumber with every post. You must work for the Obama bunch.

That you don't understand the plain language of the 2nd Amendment, or the slightly more complicated language of Heller is depressing. I assume you are a product of public education?

Yes, the plain language is limited by the context of the Intent and Purpose.

of which you are obviously ignorant.

You should probably limit yourself to debating those ignorant of this issue...it's the only way that at least the rest of the Idiocracy might think you are smart.

dude, there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

There is clearly no Appeal to Ignorance being made here, you insufferable cretin.

that Must include the Intent and Purpose.

The prefatory clause of the 2nd Amendment does NOT limit any assertion of the main clause, because it is subordinate to and dependent upon the main clause.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, it does; Paragraph (2) of DC v. Heller specifically applies to gun lovers without a clue or a Cause, but not well regulated militias of Individuals of the People.

You just keep looking dumber with every post. You must work for the Obama bunch.

That you don't understand the plain language of the 2nd Amendment, or the slightly more complicated language of Heller is depressing. I assume you are a product of public education?

Yes, the plain language is limited by the context of the Intent and Purpose.

of which you are obviously ignorant.

You should probably limit yourself to debating those ignorant of this issue...it's the only way that at least the rest of the Idiocracy might think you are smart.

dude, there is no appeal to ignorance of the law. that Must include the Intent and Purpose.

Son, I was creating, enforcing, judging and teaching the law since before you were a gleam in your gay daddy's eye.

what a waste of resources. have you considered simply walking around with any old book, call yourself John, and proclaim you are expounding "the gospel Truth".

 

[danielpalos]

I can't be wrong that well regulated militias must be organized.

Yes you can. And you obviously are.

You are wrong about what "well regulated militia" means. It means, a militia maintained in proper function.

You are wrong about what "organized militia" means. It means, the militia organized by the Federal Government.

It is merely your cognitive dissonance (exogenous to the objective nature of reality) that prevents you from realizing it.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Regardless, a well regulated Militia is dependent upon (NOT a constraint upon) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms; hence, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed--not by any limitation to militia membership.

You can reference "a well regulated militia" ad-nauseam, but your reference will remain entirely irrelevant to the unambiguous, and explicitly asserted declaration that it is the people's right, not any militia's, but each individual US sovereign's right to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed.

So you remain wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

I can't be wrong that well regulated militias must be organized.

All you have done is appeal to ignorance; a well regulated militia must be an organized militia.

There is clearly no Appeal to Ignorance being made here, you insufferable cretin.

You are wrong.

You are wrong about what "well regulated militia" means. It means, a militia maintained in proper function.

You are wrong about what "organized militia" means. It means, the militia organized by the Federal Government.

There is nothing about being "well regulated" that is contingent upon being "organized."

There is nothing about being "organized" that is contigent upon being "well regulated."

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Regardless, a well regulated Militia is dependent upon (NOT a constraint upon) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms; hence, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed--not by any limitation to militia membership.

You can reference "a well regulated militia" ad-nauseam, but your reference will remain entirely irrelevant to the unambiguous, and explicitly asserted declaration that it is the people's right, not any militia's, but each individual US sovereign's right to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed.

So you remain wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Wellness of regulation must be prescribed by our federal Congress for the Militia of the United States.

I have two questions:

1. Is English your first language?
2. Do you even understand the words you are writing?

Apparently not.

nothing but Diversion; i got it.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, it does; Paragraph (2) of DC v. Heller specifically applies to gun lovers without a clue or a Cause, but not well regulated militias of Individuals of the People.

You just keep looking dumber with every post. You must work for the Obama bunch.

That you don't understand the plain language of the 2nd Amendment, or the slightly more complicated language of Heller is depressing. I assume you are a product of public education?

Yes, the plain language is limited by the context of the Intent and Purpose.

of which you are obviously ignorant.

You should probably limit yourself to debating those ignorant of this issue...it's the only way that at least the rest of the Idiocracy might think you are smart.

dude, there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

There is clearly no Appeal to Ignorance being made here, you insufferable cretin.

that Must include the Intent and Purpose.

The prefatory clause of the 2nd Amendment does NOT limit any assertion of the main clause, because it is subordinate to and dependent upon the main clause.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Yes, it must limit the context. There is no appeal to ignorance of the Intent and Purpose.

 

[Dan Daly]

Yes you can. And you obviously are.

You are wrong about what "well regulated militia" means. It means, a militia maintained in proper function.

You are wrong about what "organized militia" means. It means, the militia organized by the Federal Government.

It is merely your cognitive dissonance (exogenous to the objective nature of reality) that prevents you from realizing it.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Regardless, a well regulated Militia is dependent upon (NOT a constraint upon) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms; hence, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed--not by any limitation to militia membership.

You can reference "a well regulated militia" ad-nauseam, but your reference will remain entirely irrelevant to the unambiguous, and explicitly asserted declaration that it is the people's right, not any militia's, but each individual US sovereign's right to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed.

So you remain wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

I can't be wrong that well regulated militias must be organized.

All you have done is appeal to ignorance; a well regulated militia must be an organized militia.

There is clearly no Appeal to Ignorance being made here, you insufferable cretin.

You are wrong.

You are wrong about what "well regulated militia" means. It means, a militia maintained in proper function.

You are wrong about what "organized militia" means. It means, the militia organized by the Federal Government.

There is nothing about being "well regulated" that is contingent upon being "organized."

There is nothing about being "organized" that is contigent upon being "well regulated."

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Regardless, a well regulated Militia is dependent upon (NOT a constraint upon) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms; hence, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed--not by any limitation to militia membership.

You can reference "a well regulated militia" ad-nauseam, but your reference will remain entirely irrelevant to the unambiguous, and explicitly asserted declaration that it is the people's right, not any militia's, but each individual US sovereign's right to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed.

So you remain wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Wellness of regulation must be prescribed by our federal Congress for the Militia of the United States.

I have two questions:

1. Is English your first language?
2. Do you even understand the words you are writing?

Apparently not.

nothing but Diversion; i got it.

Diversion from your idiocy is what you need, not I, cupcake.

 

[LOki]

You are wrong.

You are wrong about what "well regulated militia" means. It means, a militia maintained in proper function.

You are wrong about what "organized militia" means. It means, the militia organized by the Federal Government.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

I can't be wrong that well regulated militias must be organized.

Yes you can. And you obviously are.

You are wrong about what "well regulated militia" means. It means, a militia maintained in proper function.

You are wrong about what "organized militia" means. It means, the militia organized by the Federal Government.

It is merely your cognitive dissonance (exogenous to the objective nature of reality) that prevents you from realizing it.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Regardless, a well regulated Militia is dependent upon (NOT a constraint upon) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms; hence, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed--not by any limitation to militia membership.

You can reference "a well regulated militia" ad-nauseam, but your reference will remain entirely irrelevant to the unambiguous, and explicitly asserted declaration that it is the people's right, not any militia's, but each individual US sovereign's right to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed.

So you remain wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

I can't be wrong that well regulated militias must be organized.

All you have done is appeal to ignorance; a well regulated militia must be an organized militia.

There is clearly no Appeal to Ignorance being made here, you insufferable cretin.

You are wrong.

You are wrong about what "well regulated militia" means. It means, a militia maintained in proper function.

You are wrong about what "organized militia" means. It means, the militia organized by the Federal Government.

There is nothing about being "well regulated" that is contingent upon being "organized."

There is nothing about being "organized" that is contigent upon being "well regulated."

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Yet, without ever looking at 10 USC 311, even the least aware turnip could grasp (unlike yourself) the fact of reality that the United States Code can IN NO MANNER modify or inform the Constitution of the United States.

To put it plainly for the profoundly retarded--such as yourself--the incontestable fact of reality is that the ENTIRE United States Code--including 10 USC 311 (you mouth-breathing moron) is SUBJECT to the US Constitution...including the 2nd Amendment.

It literally DOES NOT, and is powerless to, put any constraint or limitation upon the unambiguous assertion that "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I could be ENTIRELY ignorant of 10 USC 311, and you would be obviously wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Regardless, a well regulated Militia is dependent upon (NOT a constraint upon) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms; hence, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed--not by any limitation to militia membership.

You can reference "a well regulated militia" ad-nauseam, but your reference will remain entirely irrelevant to the unambiguous, and explicitly asserted declaration that it is the people's right, not any militia's, but each individual US sovereign's right to keep and bear arms that shall not be infringed.

So you remain wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Wellness of regulation must be prescribed by our federal Congress for the Militia of the United States.

Meaningless butt noises in your head, informing the retarded notions you post here.

Absent any cogent rebuttal, you remain wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

 

[LOki]

You just keep looking dumber with every post. You must work for the Obama bunch.

That you don't understand the plain language of the 2nd Amendment, or the slightly more complicated language of Heller is depressing. I assume you are a product of public education?

Yes, the plain language is limited by the context of the Intent and Purpose.

of which you are obviously ignorant.

You should probably limit yourself to debating those ignorant of this issue...it's the only way that at least the rest of the Idiocracy might think you are smart.

dude, there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

There is clearly no Appeal to Ignorance being made here, you insufferable cretin.

that Must include the Intent and Purpose.

The prefatory clause of the 2nd Amendment does NOT limit any assertion of the main clause, because it is subordinate to and dependent upon the main clause.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Yes, it must limit the context.

No. No such necessity is called for or indicated. The prefatory clause of the 2nd Amendment does NOT limit any assertion of the main clause, because it is subordinate to and dependent upon the main clause.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

There is no appeal to ignorance of the Intent and Purpose.

There is clearly no Appeal to Ignorance being made here, you insufferable cretin.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

 

[danielpalos]

y'all merely need a clue and a Cause. A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, is the Intent and Purpose for literal recourse to our Second Amendment. Any questions?

 

[LOki]

y'all merely need a clue and a Cause. A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, is the Intent and Purpose for literal recourse to our Second Amendment. Any questions?

Intent and purpose for what, Pumpkin?

If you wish to assert that the intent and purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to place limits and constraints upon, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed," then you are OBLIGATED to demonstrate it.

I have no apprehensions that you will even try.

Because you are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

You will misapply "Appeal to Ignorance" again, because you're an idiot who doesn't bother to understand the term.

And you will be wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

You will fatuosly cite 10 USC 311 again, because you're an idiot who doesn't bother to understand the terms "regulated" and "organized" as they are used in their respective documents.

And you will be wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

You will deny that the USC is SUBJECT to, and constrained by the US Constitution, and like an imbecile, you will insist rather that the US Constitution is subject to the USC.

And you will be wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

You will flatly refuse to acknowledge the obvious logical and factual necessity that a well regulated militia is clearly declared to be dependent upon (NOT any constraint upon) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms; hence, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

And you will be wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

It is merely your cognitive dissonance (exogenous to the objective nature of reality) that prevents you from realizing it.

 

[Gunman]

Am I still Wrong... How you gonna get folks in the USA to give up 600,000,000 Guns..? ? ?

 

[danielpalos]

y'all merely need a clue and a Cause. A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, is the Intent and Purpose for literal recourse to our Second Amendment. Any questions?

Intent and purpose for what, Pumpkin?

If you wish to assert that the intent and purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to place limits and constraints upon, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed," then you are OBLIGATED to demonstrate it.

I have no apprehensions that you will even try.

Because you are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

You will misapply "Appeal to Ignorance" again, because you're an idiot who doesn't bother to understand the term.

And you will be wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

You will fatuosly cite 10 USC 311 again, because you're an idiot who doesn't bother to understand the terms "regulated" and "organized" as they are used in their respective documents.

And you will be wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

You will deny that the USC is SUBJECT to, and constrained by the US Constitution, and like an imbecile, you will insist rather that the US Constitution is subject to the USC.

And you will be wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

You will flatly refuse to acknowledge the obvious logical and factual necessity that a well regulated militia is clearly declared to be dependent upon (NOT any constraint upon) the right of the people to keep and bear Arms; hence, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

And you will be wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

It is merely your cognitive dissonance (exogenous to the objective nature of reality) that prevents you from realizing it.

Dude; not all of the Militia of the United States is well regulated.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State...means Only that Part of the Militia of the United States which is well regulated, may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union. 10USC311 applies simply because our Second Article of Amendment is not a Constitution unto itself.