losing dem majority in 2010

ib1yysguy said:
I wouldn't. Law enforcement would easily however if one of you guys started shooting at them. They won't have the patience to listen to your constitutional arguments. You send bullets their way, they'll send them back and be doing the world a favor in the process.
Click to expand...

I'm a far better marksman than they are. military training rocks.
 
Yurt said:
you bitch about others talking about killing and you call people terrorists...you're so fanatical you can't see your pathetic hypocrisy....

now answer the question, HOW would you kill them?
Click to expand...

I did answer your question. I would not.
 
Yurt said:
anyone who thinks only a government should possess firearms is delusional and anti american. anyone that has that much trust in government and no trust in his fellow citizen is beyond the pale. as if citizens do not make up the government. such logic is nonsense and it only promoted as a way to control the population like nazis....
Click to expand...

I don't believe only government should own firearms. I own a gun myself. I don't believe registration of firearms is a threat to my ability own a gun, however. It's certainly not mentioned in the constitution.
 
The government needs to do a preemptive strike on domestic terrorists. What, are they supposed to WAIT until they kill people before they do something?! That's madness! /sarcasm
 
ib1yysguy said:
I don't believe only government should own firearms. I own a gun myself. I don't believe registration of firearms is a threat to my ability own a gun, however. It's certainly not mentioned in the constitution.
Click to expand...

since the constitution is a limit on government, since it's not mentioned at all, seems they have no power to register weapons, do they?
 
ib1yysguy said:
Yeah, I'm sure law enforcement snipers have no idea what they're doing and some washed up army private will be able to outshoot them any day of the week.
Click to expand...

I'm sure some of them are damn good. but i'm a marine, i'm much better. haven't you ever heard what a marines job is first and foremost?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
ok, let me rephrase.

constitutions do NOT get reinterpreted, however, bad decisions from the past should ALWAYS be overturned.

yes, I can think of many in the past that were horrible, but we shouldn't use that precedent to just erase parts of the constitution we don't like.

wrongs should indeed be righted.
Click to expand...

and the definition of "wrongs" is hardly ever universally accepted, is it?

What YOU might think of as a wrong from the past, I might disagree with and not want redefined by a new SCOTUS. Similarly, what I might think of as a wrong from the past, you might disagree with. Correct?
 
maineman said:
and the definition of "wrongs" is hardly ever universally accepted, is it?

What YOU might think of as a wrong from the past, I might disagree with and not want redefined by a new SCOTUS. Similarly, what I might think of as a wrong from the past, you might disagree with. Correct?
Click to expand...

don't know, and I doubt we'd disagree much.

for instance......dred v. scott. way wrong decision
 
SmarterThanYou said:
don't know, and I doubt we'd disagree much.

for instance......dred v. scott. way wrong decision
Click to expand...

dred scott v. sandford? I agree. bad law

However, I would not think that a supreme court decision that narrowly defined the right to bear arms as it pertains to a well regulated militia would be bad law.... you would. I think that a supreme court decision that upheld an assault weapons ban would be good law... I doubt you would.
 
maineman said:
dred scott v. sandford? I agree. bad law

However, I would not think that a supreme court decision that narrowly defined the right to bear arms as it pertains to a well regulated militia would be bad law.... you would. I think that a supreme court decision that upheld an assault weapons ban would be good law... I doubt you would.
Click to expand...

then you obviously prefer courts to make decisions on whats best for present society instead of actual text. so why not scrap the constitution and let 9 black robed individuals tell you whats right and wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top