Poor poor liberal gun grabbers.

[LOki]

Here is the argument you need to refute, unless you Only have fallacy for your Cause.

Repetition of your obvious errors of fact, your own faulty logic, your intentionally cultivated ignorance, and your mendacious denials of reality have lead you, predictably, once more to your place of shame.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Not sure how you reached your conclusion without appealing to ignorance of the Intent and Purpose of our own laws.

No appeal to ignorance has been made. The conclusions reached are based upon valid arguments applied to the verifiable and unambiguous facts of reality presented as their basis. Facts and arguments that remain uncontested by you or anyone else.

The repetition of your obvious errors of fact, your own faulty logic, your intentionally cultivated ignorance, and your mendacious denials of reality constitute no rebuttal at all, but have lead you, predictably, once more to your place of shame.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

The term "State" is found in both laws, which are supreme in a State and the Union.

Yet no mention of a "States' right is mentioned.

Repetition of your obvious errors of fact, your own faulty logic, your intentionally cultivated ignorance, and your mendacious denials of reality have lead you, predictably, once more to your place of shame.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

The defense and protection of the State and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the State. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

10USC311-The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age....

Any questions?

Yes. What is the argument? None of what you've quoted above constitutes an argument. You must state an argument. Simply citing the NYS Constitution, the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and 10 USC 311 is no argument.

Repetition of your obvious errors of fact, your own faulty logic, your intentionally cultivated ignorance, and your mendacious denials of reality have lead you, predictably, once more to your place of shame.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

 

[LOki]

dude; here is the argument you need to rebut:

Here it is again, for those of the opposing who won't get it, without the constant repetition of simple propaganda and rhetoric:

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

That Obligation of the People, is a States' right secured by our Second Article of Amendment.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

It really is that simple; except to the disingenuous right.

The Bill of Rights is specifically for individual citizens. The 1st amendment does not give the states freedom of speech. It gives it to individuals.

That is a myth. There is no general rule for our Bill of Rights. The terms are explicit and leave no room for ambiguity.

"The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution."
​

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

 

[LOki]

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of our own laws; especially this one--10USC311.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

Thus, it is easy to recognize that what must be a States right secured by our Second Amendment.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Only if you ignore the second part of the sentence "... the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.".

The SCOTUS has repeatedly ruled this to be an individual right, not a states right. The intent was to make sure the population could defend the nation, not to provide for a state military.

How does applying 10USC311 ignore the second clause?

10 USC 311 is NOT APPLICABLE TO the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution...10 USC 311 is SUBJECT TO the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution... 10 USC 311 HAS NO BEARING UPON the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution. The ENTIRE USC is constrained by, and answerable to, the US Constitution--including the 2nd Amendment.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Not all of the Militia of the United States is well regulated; well regulated militias are expressly declared necessary to the security of a free State.

There can be no assurance of a well regulated militia unless the People can arm themselves, hence the unambiguous assertion in the 2nd that "...the right of the People (no States' right mentioned) to keep and bear arms (forming organized militias NOT mentioned) shall not be infringed."

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

 

[danielpalos]

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of our own laws; especially this one--10USC311.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

Thus, it is easy to recognize that what must be a States right secured by our Second Amendment.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

This is as idiotic as the thread premise, the BoR enshrine individual, not states' rights.

What is even more idiotic, is any appeal to ignorance (of the law) while diagnosing the Body politic.

 

[danielpalos]

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of our own laws; especially this one--10USC311.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

Thus, it is easy to recognize that what must be a States right secured by our Second Amendment.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Only if you ignore the second part of the sentence "... the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.".

The SCOTUS has repeatedly ruled this to be an individual right, not a states right. The intent was to make sure the population could defend the nation, not to provide for a state military.

How does applying 10USC311 ignore the second clause?

10 USC 311 is NOT APPLICABLE TO the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution...10 USC 311 is SUBJECT TO the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution... 10 USC 311 HAS NO BEARING UPON the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution. The ENTIRE USC is constrained by, and answerable to, the US Constitution--including the 2nd Amendment.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Not all of the Militia of the United States is well regulated; well regulated militias are expressly declared necessary to the security of a free State.

There can be no assurance of a well regulated militia unless the People can arm themselves, hence the unambiguous assertion in the 2nd that "...the right of the People (no States' right mentioned) to keep and bear arms (forming organized militias NOT mentioned) shall not be infringed."

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

There is no appeal to ignorance of the law, especially this one--10USC311. Our Second Amendment expressly declares what is necessary to the security of a free State.

 

[PredFan]

Defeat after defeat after defeat has left the Progressive gun grabbers so butthurt that they don't even make sense anymore.

Freaking hilarious.

 

[danielpalos]

Defeat after defeat after defeat has left the Progressive gun grabbers so butthurt that they don't even make sense anymore.

Freaking hilarious.

There is no appeal to ignorance of what is necessary to the security of a free State.

 

[Gunman]

Yall STILL at this Shit AGAIN ... ? ? ?

 

[PredFan]

Defeat after defeat after defeat has left the Progressive gun grabbers so butthurt that they don't even make sense anymore.

Freaking hilarious.

There is no appeal to ignorance of what is necessary to the security of a free State.

And another defeat for this particular gun grabber.

 

[PredFan]

Yall STILL at this Shit AGAIN ... ? ? ?

Yeah, so what?

 

[WinterBorn]

Yall STILL at this Shit AGAIN ... ? ? ?

Hey, I showed up late and they graciously kept the party going for me.

 

[danielpalos]

I would like take this time and opportunity to thank those of the opposing view for having nothing but fallacy for their Cause.

 

[WinterBorn]

I would like take this time and opportunity to thank those of the opposing view for having nothing but fallacy for their Cause.

Maintaining that the Bill of Rights is exclusively for the individual and not the state is certainly not a fallacy.

 

[PredFan]

I would like take this time and opportunity to thank those of the opposing view for having nothing but fallacy for their Cause.

Maintaining that the Bill of Rights is exclusively for the individual and not the state is certainly not a fallacy.

He just learned that word so he's practicing using it. After he gets comfortable with it, he'll look it up to see what it means.

 

[danielpalos]

I would like take this time and opportunity to thank those of the opposing view for having nothing but fallacy for their Cause.

Maintaining that the Bill of Rights is exclusively for the individual and not the state is certainly not a fallacy.

Not the Second Amendment since it is not a Constitution unto itself; as demonstrated previously regarding 10USC311, and Article 1, Section 8 of our federal Constitution.

 

[danielpalos]

I would like take this time and opportunity to thank those of the opposing view for having nothing but fallacy for their Cause.

Maintaining that the Bill of Rights is exclusively for the individual and not the state is certainly not a fallacy.

He just learned that word so he's practicing using it. After he gets comfortable with it, he'll look it up to see what it means.

I already know it is a fallacy of composition via fallacy of false, via a fallacy of appeal to ignorance.

 

[WinterBorn]

I would like take this time and opportunity to thank those of the opposing view for having nothing but fallacy for their Cause.

Maintaining that the Bill of Rights is exclusively for the individual and not the state is certainly not a fallacy.

He just learned that word so he's practicing using it. After he gets comfortable with it, he'll look it up to see what it means.

I already know it is a fallacy of composition via fallacy of false, via a fallacy of appeal to ignorance.

If it is an appeal to ignorance, then I am ignorant. But then, so were my university professors and the justices on the US Supreme Court. And since the US Code cannot override the US Constitution, there is no fallacy on my part.

The basic fallacy on your part is the assumption that the 10USC311 defines the militia in any meaningful way.

 

[LOki]

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of our own laws; especially this one--10USC311.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

Thus, it is easy to recognize that what must be a States right secured by our Second Amendment.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Only if you ignore the second part of the sentence "... the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.".

The SCOTUS has repeatedly ruled this to be an individual right, not a states right. The intent was to make sure the population could defend the nation, not to provide for a state military.

How does applying 10USC311 ignore the second clause?

10 USC 311 is NOT APPLICABLE TO the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution...10 USC 311 is SUBJECT TO the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution... 10 USC 311 HAS NO BEARING UPON the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution. The ENTIRE USC is constrained by, and answerable to, the US Constitution--including the 2nd Amendment.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Not all of the Militia of the United States is well regulated; well regulated militias are expressly declared necessary to the security of a free State.

There can be no assurance of a well regulated militia unless the People can arm themselves, hence the unambiguous assertion in the 2nd that "...the right of the People (no States' right mentioned) to keep and bear arms (forming organized militias NOT mentioned) shall not be infringed."

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

There is no appeal to ignorance of the law, especially this one--10USC311. Our Second Amendment expressly declares what is necessary to the security of a free State.

Repetition of your obvious errors of fact, your own faulty logic, your intentionally cultivated ignorance, and your mendacious denials of reality have lead you, predictably, once more to your place of shame.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

 

[LOki]

I would like take this time and opportunity to thank those of the opposing view for having nothing but fallacy for their Cause.

Repetition of your obvious errors of fact, your own faulty logic, your intentionally cultivated ignorance, and your mendacious denials of reality have lead you, predictably, once more to your place of shame.

You are stupid and boring. You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

 

[PredFan]

There is no Appeal to Ignorance of our own laws; especially this one--10USC311.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

Thus, it is easy to recognize that what must be a States right secured by our Second Amendment.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Only if you ignore the second part of the sentence "... the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.".

The SCOTUS has repeatedly ruled this to be an individual right, not a states right. The intent was to make sure the population could defend the nation, not to provide for a state military.

How does applying 10USC311 ignore the second clause?

10 USC 311 is NOT APPLICABLE TO the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution...10 USC 311 is SUBJECT TO the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution... 10 USC 311 HAS NO BEARING UPON the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution. The ENTIRE USC is constrained by, and answerable to, the US Constitution--including the 2nd Amendment.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

Not all of the Militia of the United States is well regulated; well regulated militias are expressly declared necessary to the security of a free State.

There can be no assurance of a well regulated militia unless the People can arm themselves, hence the unambiguous assertion in the 2nd that "...the right of the People (no States' right mentioned) to keep and bear arms (forming organized militias NOT mentioned) shall not be infringed."

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

There is no appeal to ignorance of the law, especially this one--10USC311. Our Second Amendment expressly declares what is necessary to the security of a free State.

Repetition of your obvious errors of fact, your own faulty logic, your intentionally cultivated ignorance, and your mendacious denials of reality have lead you, predictably, once more to your place of shame.

You are wrong. AGAIN. STILL.

He's a liberal. He believes that you say something often enough, it becomes truth.