Shocking, another mass murder, they've become as American as apple pie

[Abatis]

the main problem with most libs and cons is that they feel they have to rely upon supreme court decisions as to what the constitution allows and doesn't allow. It shows an inability to think for themselves and that the constitution and the 'law' is just way too difficult and complex for the common person to understand, so courts, lawyers, and judges are absolutely necessary to tell us what they all mean. Until there comes an issue that they've been led to believe they must support, like abortion or guns, then they come off like con law experts and that those judges don't know shit.

Believing a court decision is wrong is one thing, misrepresenting an entire branch of precedent like anti-gunners do with the 2nd Amendment is quite another, e.g., Micawber:

The right to keep and bear arms has only been adjudicated to be a personal right by scotus recently. That means for 200 years it was not adjudicated to be a personal right at all.

Yeah, right . . .

I don't fault anyone for having an informed opinion about the law or the Constitution (that's what makes for good debate) but to deny what is in plain English just to maintain / advance / protect a political agenda is bullshit and should be called-out and rebutted and destroyed whenever it is seen.

 

[Teflon Don]

ARE CHILDERN ALLOWED TO BUY GUNS??????



no

that is a gun restriction idiot

They should be especially if they are getting an abortion

They should be taught how to use a gun while they are getting sex ed

The guns should be kept next to the condoms

 

[domer76]

domer fucktard believes that you only have permissions that can be denied by the government at will.

I take that as a “no”.

lol

 

[domer76]

So who gave you the right to free speech? Got a name?

It’s referred to as the First Amendment. Certainly, your Creator has nothing to do with it.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Believing a court decision is wrong is one thing, misrepresenting an entire branch of precedent like anti-gunners do with the 2nd Amendment is quite another, e.g., Micawber:

Yeah, right . . .

I don't fault anyone for having an informed opinion about the law or the Constitution (that's what makes for good debate) but to deny what is in plain English just to maintain / advance / protect a political agenda is bullshit and should be called-out and rebutted and destroyed whenever it is seen.

Micawber has me on ignore because I completely trashed and debunked his idea of what the constitution is and does.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

I take that as a “no”.

lol

the funny part of all this is you've skirted around and completely avoided answering any questions about the constitution, rights, and specific items about them, instead relying on your only talking point which is all rights are alienable...........

so at least you have that going for you

 

[SmarterthanYou]

It’s referred to as the First Amendment. Certainly, your Creator has nothing to do with it.

and to actually prove my point about you not knowing what the constitution does or doesn't do, you give a clear example of your idiocy.

 

[Abatis]

domer 76 is correct that the idea of natural law comes from people, not a superstitious cloud guy that doesn't exist.

Where does any philosophy come from?

The debate between Bodin / Filmer and Locke / Sidney was whether the king had a "divine right" to rule or humans had a inherent right to choose their own government. The founders / framers chose Locke and Sidney's "natural rights" theory and Jefferson embraced that and it became the basis for telling the king to fuck off and killing a shit-ton of redcoats. The Constitution that followed bound the US government to treat the rights of the citizen as inherent and pre-existing the Constitution thus not in any manner dependent upon the Constitution.

Abatis is a moron.

Saying it is one thing, proving it is quite another.

He is only armed with a tiny speck of misinformation, but in the hands of a doofus, the ignorance is magnified.

Micawber getting all Tasmanian Devilish. Ooooohh, stand back!

If natural law does not depend upon a deity, then it comes from an abstract idea of men, therefore it does not matter whether the right to keep and bear arms is of constitutional origin or not. It is still a human abstraction made into social contract, not a sacrament.

Why is philosophy enforced by social contract such a hard concept for you to understand?

It can be erased by a 2/3 majority just as it was written, and having done so, can be enforced by violence, as was done with cavemen, Hammurabi , Napoleon or the Dumpstocity himself.

There are quite a few problems with your assessment; some make for good debate. I guess we'll never know.

Violence is not itself a law or a right. THINK!

Having the right to consent to be governed means "We the People" also retain the right to rescind our consent to be governed.

That's the "violence" the 2nd Amendment secures.

I guess you are going to chicken out on a one on one, supported, insult-free, debate . . .

I'm never surprised by guys like you.

 

[Stretch]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/cri...fice-park-targeted-shooting-article-1.3571504

Nothing will change, rhetoric will escalate, as will shootings, but there are so many mass shootings in America that we have become desensitized to it, if massacring children in an elementary school doesn't produce any change nothing will, we are the gun killing capital of the world

All this time I thought you were a lib.
Libs love pointing out that we all have "the right" to do anything we want that's OK'd by the Constitution, and that men and women fought and died to protect our liberties even if some disagree.

 

[Abatis]

A simple question to the evince's, domer76's and Micawber's of the board:

If the concept of inherent and unenumerated rights is mystical bullshit believed only by gun crazy fools and right-wing idiots, how and why is the recognition and protection of the right to privacy and the derivative rights to abortion etc., based upon it?

 

[Teflon Don]

It’s referred to as the First Amendment. Certainly, your Creator has nothing to do with it.

Where did the first amendment come from? Who gave you the first amendment right?

 

[domer76]

But the Constitution says that what I say is true.

The federal government possesses only the express, limited powers granted to it.

10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.​

Everything not granted to the feds is retained by the people (rights) or the states (state powers delegated by the state's citizens through their particular constitutions, again holding rights out of the compact).

State constitution are especially interesting to read. They call out the rights of the citizen before any powers are delegated or duties assigned.

Just for shits and giggles my state's (Pennsylvania) first constitution established in 1776 first calls out "THE RIGHTS OF THE INHABITANTS" then begins to set-out the "PLAN OR FRAME OF GOVERNMENT".

Wouldn't that be backwards if rights only existed because of their recognition by government?

The current PA constitution still follows that formula; in Article I the origin and existence of rights are declared and forever held out of the powers being conferred, then the government's powers and organization and duties laid out in subsequent Articles.

Do you find that structure of state constitutions at all interesting or compelling?

“All is retained that is not surrendered.”

No shit, huh?

 

[domer76]

Never heard of the 9th or 10th Amendments huh? They announce the principles of conferred powers and retained rights and that of inherent (retained) unenumerated (not codified) rights as being rules of constitutional interpretation.

I find it amusing (in a 'what a dumb fuck' kinda way) that you are disavowing the legal theory by which the right to privacy and the derivative rights of abortion, contraception and LGBTQ rights including gay marriage have been recognized and secured.

Did you mean to do that or is that just a unintended outcome that flows from your profound ignorance of the US Constitution?

I mentioned nothing about LGBTQ rights or abortion, which were secured under the exercise of completely different rights. But you knew that, didn’t you?

 

[domer76]

the main problem with most libs and cons is that they feel they have to rely upon supreme court decisions as to what the constitution allows and doesn't allow. It shows an inability to think for themselves and that the constitution and the 'law' is just way too difficult and complex for the common person to understand, so courts, lawyers, and judges are absolutely necessary to tell us what they all mean. Until there comes an issue that they've been led to believe they must support, like abortion or guns, then they come off like con law experts and that those judges don't know shit.

How’s that trip to the courthouse coming, Festus?

 

[domer76]

Where did the first amendment come from? Who gave you the first amendment right?

You don’t know how the BofR originated? Kinda pathetic.

 

[Teflon Don]

You don’t know how the BofR originated? Kinda pathetic.

What person gave you the right to speak? And who can take it away?

 

[Micawber]

It’s referred to as the First Amendment. Certainly, your Creator has nothing to do with it.

They are idiots. The behaviors and things codified as rights existed apart from independent of and before the US Constitution like speech! Eureka. So did everything. But the rights enumerated and those necessary and proper etc etc in the Constitution
are those we've agreed to live by here, in some cases loving them and in others hating them. "It existed before the Constitution therefore God created it!" Therefore we have a right to sodomy and rape and murder too! Thanks Jesus!

 

[Abatis]

“All is retained that is not surrendered.”

No shit, huh?

The "question" is in your court, you're the one arguing against the principle.

I know where I stand

I mentioned nothing about LGBTQ rights or abortion, which were secured under the exercise of completely different rights. But you knew that, didn’t you?

I know now that you don't have a clue about how LGBTQ rights or abortion came to be recognized and secured.

 

[Micawber]

“All is retained that is not surrendered.”

No shit, huh?

I wonder where that douchnozzle Abate thinks his mental masterbation is taking him, or has he forgotten his purpose as it appears?

 

[Micawber]

Personally I think he is just attempting to establish worth by breaking out his favorite Rush Limbaugh pimped Regnery Press bastardized Con Law book for Nazis
and quoting random passages.