Infringement

[domer76]

1) Wikipedia is summarily discarded. You cannot use that as a reference with me.
2) You linked to an unrelated fallacy that has nothing to do with an inversion fallacy.
False authority fallacy. Redirection fallacy.

You are using it to mean infringement on gun rights by gun control laws, and moving the goalposts to mean property rights are gun control laws. That's a fallacy, dude.

Try this one dumfuck. It says the same thing. Now, find my “if/then” statement

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/...the-Antecedent

You don’t have a fucking clue what an inversion fallacy is.

[USFREEDOM911]

Wait, you think one can simply order a gun online and have it shipped directly to their doorstep? Surely, even you are not that stupid.

This misconception has been explained numerous times and JPP liberals still seem to want to promote it.

Then when asked for proof of their assertion, then end up suddenly have "other things to do".

[USFREEDOM911]

Tell us about your sawed off shotgun. That does not limit your right to bear arms?

Or just use this:

[RB 60]

I prefer one of these (.45 LC/.45 ACP convertible). One hangs loaded on my bedpost in a custom made holster.

[countryboy]

This misconception has been explained numerous times and JPP liberals still seem to want to promote it.

Then when asked for proof of their assertion, then end up suddenly have "other things to do".

He knows it's a lie. Liberalism is built on lies, there's no other way to sell what they're peddling.

[Into the Night]

Cut the diversionary bullshit. I didn’t ask for gun laws, dumbfuck. I asked for a list of countries that includes a RIGHT to bear arms.

Insufficient space to list here. See 'nations of the world'.

[Into the Night]

There is nothing in the Constitution suggesting these rights are inalienable. The freedoms included in the Bill of Rights were those freedoms as they existed at the time. Courts have since expanded those rights to give us more freedom from government restrictions than in the early republic.

The Constitution does not grant rights. Neither does any court.

The court has recognized, though, that the Bill of Rights is NOT an exhaustive list of rights. They have little choice, since they are not authorized to change the Constitution.

[Into the Night]

Hopefully none. The point of gun control is to limit gun rights.

...never mind the Constitution of the United States, or republics at all for that matter. You want an oligarchy. That's a dictatorship by committee. You want to overthrow the United States and install an oligarchy.

Do you really think you will become part of the 'elite' in that oligarchy?

[Into the Night]

Try this one dumfuck. It says the same thing. Now, find my “if/then” statement

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/...the-Antecedent

You don’t have a fucking clue what an inversion fallacy is.

You again linked to an unrelated fallacy that has nothing to do with an inversion fallacy.
False authority fallacy. Redirection fallacy.

[StoneByStone]

...never mind the Constitution of the United States, or republics at all for that matter. You want an oligarchy. That's a dictatorship by committee. You want to overthrow the United States and install an oligarchy.

Do you really think you will become part of the 'elite' in that oligarchy?

I want the laws to change through the process we have now.

[Into the Night]

I want the laws to change through the process we have now.

The only way to install the laws you want is to amend the Constitution of the United States to remove the 2nd amendment, remove the 4th amendment, remove the 5th amendment, remove the 9th amendment, and remove the 10th amendment, and to specifically redefine what powers the federal government is given to regulate guns and by what criteria, and the powers delegated to each branch to implement such laws. This essentially gives the government power to create oligarchies overseeing guns, with no further input from the people.

or

Destroy the Constitution and install a fascism by oligarchy directly.

That is the process. There is no other.

[StoneByStone]

The only way to install the laws you want is to amend the Constitution of the United States to remove the 2nd amendment, remove the 4th amendment, remove the 5th amendment, remove the 9th amendment, and remove the 10th amendment, and to specifically redefine what powers the federal government is given to regulate guns and by what criteria, and the powers delegated to each branch to implement such laws. This essentially gives the government power to create oligarchies overseeing guns, with no further input from the people.

or

Destroy the Constitution and install a fascism by oligarchy directly.

That is the process. There is no other.

Or we can just do what we do now. Ignore muh constitution like we always have.

[Into the Night]

Or we can just do what we do now. Ignore muh constitution like we always have.

So you choose the 2nd option. Destroy the constitution and install a fascism by oligarchy.

[StoneByStone]

So you choose the 2nd option. Destroy the constitution and install a fascism by oligarchy.

No, I don't think we should destroy muh constitution, it's a cute little propaganda tool. And we already have an oligarchy. I think we should decentralize power more so the public gets more of a say.

[Flash]

The Constitution does not grant rights. Neither does any court.

The court has recognized, though, that the Bill of Rights is NOT an exhaustive list of rights. They have little choice, since they are not authorized to change the Constitution.

The Constitution determines which rights are not to be restricted by government. Sure, the 9th Amendment says there are other rights not listed in 1-8 that are reserved to the people. The right to privacy is one of those rights the courts have created.