Now do you suppose the Founding Fathers envisioned

[Into the Night]

blablabla

I asked you for one single example of a state case citing the bill of rights prior the 14th amendment

you failed. you are a fucking failure dude.

you just repeat your same bullshit over and over like a chimp with a keyboard

Irrelevant. Attempted proof by redirection.

 

[zymurgy]

Irrelevant. Attempted proof by redirection.

blablabla

you would be able to find a single case that backs up you claim if it was based on fact and not fiction

 

[Into the Night]

blablabla

you would be able to find a single case that backs up you claim if it was based on fact and not fiction

Irrelevant. Attempted proof by redirection. RQAA.

 

[zymurgy]

Irrelevant. Attempted proof by redirection. RQAA.

you are a clown

asking you for a single example that backs up you claims - and this is what you provide

derp derp jackass. derp derp

 

[Into the Night]

you are a clown

asking you for a single example that backs up you claims - and this is what you provide

derp derp jackass. derp derp

Irrelevant. Attempted proof by redirection. RQAA.

 

[zymurgy]

Irrelevant. Attempted proof by redirection. RQAA.

your entire presence is Irrelevant and you are a shit show

you keep saying the same bullshit over and over but fail to actually provide anything to back up your claims

total mouth breather

 

[Into the Night]

your entire presence is Irrelevant and you are a shit show

you keep saying the same bullshit over and over but fail to actually provide anything to back up your claims

total mouth breather

Insult fallacies. Irrelevant. Attempted proof by redirection. RQAA.

 

[zymurgy]

Insult fallacies. Irrelevant. Attempted proof by redirection. RQAA.

blablabla


I laugh knowing other conservatives read this. you are an embarrassment. you really fit more with liberals that refuse to see facts and just say things .

Why didn't a single state court cite the bill of rights prior to the 14th amendment? 100 years of case law to use, but you come up empty - and I know why

you are a moron dude. you don't understand what the founders intended. you don't understand our history.

 

[Into the Night]

blablabla


I laugh knowing other conservatives read this. you are an embarrassment. you really fit more with liberals that refuse to see facts and just say things .

Why didn't a single state court cite the bill of rights prior to the 14th amendment? 100 years of case law to use, but you come up empty - and I know why

you are a moron dude. you don't understand what the founders intended. you don't understand our history.

Irrelevant. Attempted proof by redirection. RQAA. Omniscience fallacy. False authority fallacy. Void argument fallacy.

The Constitution is not 'case law'. No court has authority to change or interpret the Constitution.

 

[zymurgy]

Irrelevant. Attempted proof by redirection. RQAA. Omniscience fallacy. False authority fallacy. Void argument fallacy.

The Constitution is not 'case law'. No court has authority to change or interpret the Constitution.

blablabla

retarded fallacy. you are a retard. the 14th amendment was ratified and changed the scope of the bill of rights

 

[Dutch Uncle]

one of those “well regulated militia’s” walking into public facilities and gunning down sixteen innocent people with a musket?

Amazing how supposed educated jurists like Scalia, Thomas, and Alito try to justify the insanity by telling us they know what the Founding Fathers thought thru the Originalism bullshit

They'd do the same thing we're doing now; shooting or hanging them.

 

[evince]

However, spouting nonsense on this board is not that process. Pretending that the founders didn't want the 2nd Amendment to mean what they wrote it to mean is absurd, if you want to change the 2nd Amendment then put forward the 28th Amendment, put up or shut up.

My bet is this amendment would fail, it would never get the support of 3/4 of the states if it even passed the 2/3rds of the Senate requirement.

You are not the king


The people hate your ideas

 

[Dutch Uncle]

However, spouting nonsense on this board is not that process. Pretending that the founders didn't want the 2nd Amendment to mean what they wrote it to mean is absurd, if you want to change the 2nd Amendment then put forward the 28th Amendment, put up or shut up.

My bet is this amendment would fail, it would never get the support of 3/4 of the states if it even passed the 2/3rds of the Senate requirement.

With the current divisiveness across the nation, I agree, regardless of what the amendment is about. Additionally, this is why I think a Convention of States is a waste of time since it would fail for exactly the same reasons.

https://conventionofstates.com/

ARTICLE V CONVENTION
I support Convention of States; a national movement to call a convention under Article V of the United States Constitution, restricted to proposing amendments that will impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit its power and jurisdiction, and impose term limits on its officials and members of Congress.

 

[Into the Night]

blablabla

retarded fallacy. you are a retard. the 14th amendment was ratified and changed the scope of the bill of rights

The 14th amendment did not change anything in the Bill of Rights.

 

[Into the Night]

You are not the king


The people hate your ideas

He never said he was the king. Hallucination.
You don't get to speak for everybody. You only get to speak for you. Omniscience fallacy.
Bulverism fallacy.

 

[archives]

Insult fallacies. False authority fallacy.
The Constitution of the United States is the ONLY authoritative reference of the Constitution of the United States.

It is unconstitutional to ban or limit any gun.

Now correct me if I am wrong but does that same Constitution you find infallible also recognize that slavery is legal in the U.S., and anyone in slavery, which at the time meant black Americans, were only three fifths of a real person?

NEXT

 

[Into the Night]

Now correct me if I am wrong but does that same Constitution you find infallible also recognize that slavery is legal in the U.S., and anyone in slavery, which at the time meant black Americans, were only three fifths of a real person?

NEXT

Slavery is not legal in the U.S. See the 13th amendment.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Slavery is not legal in the U.S. See the 13th amendment.

He's post about the 3/5s clause, dumbass. The one that existed from the beginning of the Constitution in 1787 to 1865 when the 13th Amendment was adopted.

 

[Into the Night]

He's post about the 3/5s clause, dumbass. The one that existed from the beginning of the Constitution in 1787 to 1865 when the 13th Amendment was adopted.

He posted about slavery, Sock.

 

[Lionfish]

one of those “well regulated militia’s” walking into public facilities and gunning down sixteen innocent people with a musket?

Amazing how supposed educated jurists like Scalia, Thomas, and Alito try to justify the insanity by telling us they know what the Founding Fathers thought thru the Originalism bullshit

Poor anchovies, how many times are you going to drag out this mantra? When you abandon your computer and start writing with a quill, bring your letter to Benjamin Franklin's home office and we will get back to you.