The Right To Bear Arms

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

special pleading is not very superior.

What the FUCK is that supposed to mean?

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Our Second Amendment is not a Constitution unto itself. Everyone knows this.

That's funny, coming from you, Mr. Welfare Clause.

Every term of the constitution should be given its full, distinct meaning based on its plain language.

You don't speak English, so you don't quite understand.

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

you have nothing but fallacy, in close support not any form of valid argument.

Really?

Which fallacy?

How does that help your stupid argument?

.

 

[danielpalos]

Well regulated militia are the People, too. Guess which Persons of the People enjoy literal recourse to our Second Amendment.

A militia is distinct from people. So, only males between 18-45 years old are people? I know you're stupid, but I didn't think you were THAT stupid.

The PERSONS who enjoy recourse from the 2A are EVERYONE....ALL PEOPLE...

You have failed to prove a collective intent over and over and over. You have failed to explain why the founders used the distinct terms "people" and "militia."

I have explained it. But, you respond with more "we have a second amendment and no security" bullshit.

Here it is again.

Militia was comprised of MEN ONLY. No women or children served in the militia.

So, if the founders intended the right to only apply to service in the militia, they would not have used the distinct term "people" when barring congressional power on the right to arms.

They intended to preserve the right of the PEOPLE, not the militia. That means they intended all people to have the right, not just MEN.

Now, go back to Mexico and learn some English while you wait to enter the country legally, mmmkay pumpkin.

.

The People are the Militia; you are Either well regulated or not.

 

[danielpalos]

Our Second Amendment is not a Constitution unto itself. Everyone knows this.

That's funny, coming from you, Mr. Welfare Clause.

Every term of the constitution should be given its full, distinct meaning based on its plain language.

You don't speak English, so you don't quite understand.

.

i understand it in a superior fashion to You.

 

[danielpalos]

you have nothing but fallacy, in close support not any form of valid argument.

Really?

Which fallacy?

How does that help your stupid argument?

.

Nothing but right wing special pleading like usual?

“I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials.”
— George Mason

 

[hadit]

Well regulated militia should not merely troll.

and the right of the people....shall not be infringed.

The People who are well regulated may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

That's not what it says and you know it. I've educated you on this, now behave.

i am the federalist, not You.

A "Federalist" has very little meaning today. That might explain your gibberish.

 

[danielpalos]

Well regulated militia should not merely troll.

and the right of the people....shall not be infringed.

The People who are well regulated may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

That's not what it says and you know it. I've educated you on this, now behave.

i am the federalist, not You.

A "Federalist" has very little meaning today. That might explain your gibberish.

it explains Your gibberish even less.

 

[hadit]

and the right of the people....shall not be infringed.

The People who are well regulated may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

That's not what it says and you know it. I've educated you on this, now behave.

i am the federalist, not You.

A "Federalist" has very little meaning today. That might explain your gibberish.

it explains Your gibberish even less.

Are you really so juvenile that you think repeating what someone says back to them is an effective tactic, especially when what you say is totally meaningless in the context?

 

[danielpalos]

The People who are well regulated may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

That's not what it says and you know it. I've educated you on this, now behave.

i am the federalist, not You.

A "Federalist" has very little meaning today. That might explain your gibberish.

it explains Your gibberish even less.

Are you really so juvenile that you think repeating what someone says back to them is an effective tactic, especially when what you say is totally meaningless in the context?

simply claiming something and having valid arguments, are Two Different Things.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

simply claiming something and having valid arguments, are Two Different Things.

Ally that to your last 500 posts.

.

 

[danielpalos]

simply claiming something and having valid arguments, are Two Different Things.

Ally that to your last 500 posts.

.

i don't need to make up stories.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

And I have had enough of Daniel's bullshit trolling.

IGNORE

 

[danielpalos]

And I have had enough of Daniel's bullshit trolling.

IGNORE

ran out of logic and reason and blame the Poor, like usual.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Did dan say something?

Who am I kidding? Dan never says anything.

 

[Lesh]

And I have had enough of Daniel's bullshit trolling.

IGNORE

Smart move. First one I've ever seen you make

 

[hadit]

simply claiming something and having valid arguments, are Two Different Things.

Ally that to your last 500 posts.

.

i don't need to make up stories.

Then why do you continue to do it?

 

[danielpalos]

simply claiming something and having valid arguments, are Two Different Things.

Ally that to your last 500 posts.

.

i don't need to make up stories.

Then why do you continue to do it?

Our Founding Fathers already manufactured the story.

 

[hadit]

simply claiming something and having valid arguments, are Two Different Things.

Ally that to your last 500 posts.

.

i don't need to make up stories.

Then why do you continue to do it?

Our Founding Fathers already manufactured the story.

Not the ones you're inventing.

 

[danielpalos]

simply claiming something and having valid arguments, are Two Different Things.

Ally that to your last 500 posts.

.

i don't need to make up stories.

Then why do you continue to do it?

Our Founding Fathers already manufactured the story.

Not the ones you're inventing.

you invented it, not me. i have no need.