US district Judge rules ban on guns for felon is unconstitutional

[Rogue AI]

The same authority that allows the ultimate confiscation, the death penalty.

The death penalty was carried out numerous times when the Founders governed, there was no instance of the revocation of inalienable rights.

 

[1miseryindex]

OK, thanks for letting me know

OK, thanks for explaining. I won't waste your time anymore

 

[kaz]

Use any word you desire. If the government can take your life, what’s so sacrosanct about taking away a gun from a violent felon?

There is nothing wrong with taking a gun from a dangerous felon. It's the anarchists arguing against it. If you were smarter, you could parse your enemies into groups. But as it is, all you see is "Republican" even when they aren't. If you have more questions, let me know

 

[konradv]

There is nothing wrong with taking a gun from a dangerous felon. It's the anarchists arguing against it. If you were smarter, you could parse your enemies into groups. But as it is, all you see is "Republican" even when they aren't. If you have more questions, let me know

I don’t recall talking about enemies. I was discussing gun confiscation vs the death penalty!

 

[kaz]

Life was listed as an inalienable right.

I don’t recall talking about enemies. I was discussing gun confiscation vs the death penalty!

Life is very confusing for you, isn't it?

 

[konradv]

The death penalty was carried out numerous times when the Founders governed, there was no instance of the revocation of inalienable rights.

Isn’t life one of the inalienable rights alongside liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

 

[konradv]

Life is very confusing for you, isn't it?

When people like you become deliberate trolls, yes.

 

[kaz]

Isn’t life one of the inalienable rights alongside liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

Yes, which is why you have to be convicted of a crime to get the death penalty. Life is a right like every other you potentially forfeit when you commit crimes. See how that works? You don't, do you? Be honest ...

 

[TNHarley]

The same authority that allows the ultimate confiscation, the death penalty.

Where is that located?

 

[TNHarley]

I didn’t imply any such thing.

Much like the bullshit originalists, you took what I wrote and decided it meant whatever you wanted it to mean.

Im sorry you dont understand your own words. Well, im not. I was just trying to be nice.

 

[kaz]

Where is that located?

It's under the bridge down by the docks

 

[Marener]

Im sorry you dont understand your own words. Well, im not. I was just trying to be nice.

Unfortunately trolls like you can’t be part of an adult conversation.

Suit yourself.

 

[TNHarley]

2) They cannot be deprived of home security just because they were once criminal too.

Excellent point. Thank you.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

They cannot be deprived of home security just because they were once criminal too.

They aren't. Guns are not the only available method for home security.

 

[konradv]

Where is that located?

You deny that government has had the authority to execute people?

 

[TNHarley]

You deny that government has had the authority to execute people?

You said it was in the same spot. Im just asking you to quote that, or at least tell me where it is. As I am a bit confused because I dont remember seeing that

 

[kaz]

You said it was in the same spot. Im just asking you to quote that, or at least tell me where it is. As I am a bit confused because I dont remember seeing that

You're asking him to support his argument with a quote? Where did I hear that before?

 

[MagicMike]

Irrelevant, given the fact that changes in technology do not change the nature of inalienable rights.

They were Wogden and Barton smooth bore dueling pistols. That is the only free lesson you get.

"Inalienable rights?"
You'd better check your history.
The D.C. v. Heller decision was only 15 years ago.
it is fashion.....nothing "inalienable" about it.
Someday a less NRA funded SCOTUS could easily overturn this decision and send is back toward sanity.

 

[konradv]

You said it was in the same spot. Im just asking you to quote that, or at least tell me where it is. As I am a bit confused because I dont remember seeing that

What spot? I was talking about life being more important than guns, so if the government can take one for cause, why not the other?

 

[konradv]

You're asking him to support his argument with a quote? Where did I hear that before?

No with logic. Sorry if that’s confusing.