When is it right to avail oneself of the 2nd amendment?

[mawilson 2,133]

Open the thread if you want to. Another opportunity to best you is fine by me because I outgun you intellectually. Just don't conflate the two threads in your desperate and unprincipled efforts to keep your extended magazine which no doubt is one of your few pride and joys

Uhm yeah, I'm such a right winger. A drug-legalization-, gay-marriage-supporting, pro-choice,

anti-war right winger atheist from the UK who lives in New York City and voted for Obama.

You sure have me pegged.

[^_^ 5,021]

Uhm yeah, I'm such a right winger. A drug-legalization-, gay-marriage-supporting, pro-choice,

anti-war right winger atheist from the UK who lives in New York City and voted for Obama.

You sure have me pegged.

that was directed at gary

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Gary,

If I say football sucks and you respond by asking me to leave the U.S., is that a violation of my First Amendment rights?

The correct answer to that is no but I suspect Alan doesn't quite "get" how that works.

Alan has a negotiable idea of what rights are. You certainly have a RIGHT to use a search engine to seek out anything Alan ever said. I respect all our rights, even Alan's right to use his rights to try and destroy our other rights...now I'm confused.

But anyone that thinks the 2A can be arbitrarily restricted by, say, 10 round magazines (who picked 10 rounds and why?) then why not arbitrarily restrict the 1st amendment? We could just ban the unpopular religions maybe? Or maybe restrict praying to once per day? 10 posts per day, that's it. Who needs more than that? The REASON for the amendments was that we were tired of the UK habit of arbitrarily changing things and wanted to make sure it would never happen again after we kicked their arses out.

We have RIGHTS. RIGHTS are not subject to popular opinion.

[Captain Oates 911]

So when you went off on your name calling diatribes against me (in this thread) was it then you realized you brought an intellectual knife to a gun fight?

That is merely your opinion and is worth one, three hundred millionth of the available ones in just this country.

In order to make it stick, you have to be able to string a reasoned argument together which is what you people always fail to do

It therefore descends into a round of people digging dirt from last year etc and no new arguments emerge for the debate

That is why I know you are out of ammo and there is non on the way.

If you were laid in an Arizona hospital with a bullet through your brain, your statements could not be more vacuous or lacking in debating points to which I could respond

It's just a series of grunts

Edited January 16, 2011 by Alan the Red

[mawilson 2,133]

that was directed at gary

No, it wasn't. He quoted my thread.

[Captain Oates 911]

Alan has a negotiable idea of what rights are. You certainly have a RIGHT to use a search engine to seek out anything Alan ever said. I respect all our rights, even Alan's right to use his rights to try and destroy our other rights...now I'm confused.

But anyone that thinks the 2A can be arbitrarily restricted by, say, 10 round magazines (who picked 10 rounds and why?) then why not arbitrarily restrict the 1st amendment? We could just ban the unpopular religions maybe? Or maybe restrict praying to once per day? 10 posts per day, that's it. Who needs more than that? The REASON for the amendments was that we were tired of the UK habit of arbitrarily changing things and wanted to make sure it would never happen again after we kicked their arses out.

We have RIGHTS. RIGHTS are not subject to popular opinion.

The constitution has been changed many times and will be changed many times more

It is not set in stone

It is not the ten commandments

Even though you wish it was

[^_^ 5,021]

No, it wasn't. He quoted my thread.

You're right, he did. But it still sounds like he was addressing Gary. Gary is a lot more vocal about his weapons than you are. And out-intellect you? Alan must know he doesn't even come close. But with Gary? Maybe he has a shot (or did a few decades ago - unfortunately senility sets in early in some. Poor man.)

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

that was directed at gary

I also support gay marriage, legalization of marijuana, de-criminalizing other drugs, anti-war (at least these wars)and I am pro-choice...on everything. I also support the legalization of vibrators in Alabama...so there!

[Captain Oates 911]

You're right, he did. But it still sounds like he was addressing Gary. Gary is a lot more vocal about his weapons than you are. And out-intellect you? Alan must know he doesn't even come close. But with Gary? Maybe he has a shot (or did a few decades ago - unfortunately senility sets in early in some. Poor man.)

Personal abuse now - senility - you must be losing

[^_^ 5,021]

I also support gay marriage, legalization of marijuana, de-criminalizing other drugs, anti-war (at least these wars)and I am pro-choice...on everything. I also support the legalization of vibrators in Alabama...so there!

So you're one of them godless libruls.

[Captain Oates 911]

You're right, he did. But it still sounds like he was addressing Gary. Gary is a lot more vocal about his weapons than you are. And out-intellect you? Alan must know he doesn't even come close. But with Gary? Maybe he has a shot (or did a few decades ago - unfortunately senility sets in early in some. Poor man.)

Why don't you two get a room ?

[mawilson 2,133]

You're right, he did. But it still sounds like he was addressing Gary. Gary is a lot more vocal about his weapons than you are. And out-intellect you? Alan must know he doesn't even come close. But with Gary? Maybe he has a shot (or did a few decades ago - unfortunately senility sets in early in some. Poor man.)

Thanks man.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

The constitution has been changed many times and will be changed many times more

It is not set in stone

It is not the ten commandments

Even though you wish it was

The Bill of Rights has never been changed. There is no legal procedure TO change it. The Bill of Rights ARE set in stone. The constitution was not ratified until they were added to assure those things COULD NOT be changed. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. Changing the constitution is not the same as changing the Bill of Rights. Get a clue.

Besides, tell me WHO has suggested a constitutional amendment to restrict magazine capacity.

(The LOL icon may be an abuse of the first amendment in this case...I don't care)

So you're one of them godless libruls.

I am a Godless true liberal. Pro choice on everything. Maybe I was never clear about that? Sorry, I never meant to be obtuse.

[mawilson 2,133]

The Bill of Rights has never been changed. There is no legal procedure TO change it. The Bill of Rights ARE set in stone.

I thought the Bill of Rights was just a name given to the first ten amendments. I wasn't aware of their special status.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I thought the Bill of Rights was just a name given to the first ten amendments. I wasn't aware of their special status.

Yes, and they are not set in stone.