I have no "militia theory" merely quoting the words of the amendment itself hardly implies such a thing.
Looks like you can attempt distortion of anything but are rarely successful with those who can read. Nothing in the second amendment indicates it to be directed AT the state but it clearly states that it exists to PROTECT A FREE STATE. It is true that initially it did not include the states and they routinely violated the BoR until the 14th amendment theoretically put a stop to that.
Though Jesse and Rev. Al don't like it FELONS are not allowed to legally possess firearms. I have no problem with that any more than I do with not allowing inmates to possess them in the joint.
How is the statement of a simple FACT an "emotional appeal?" When the majority of the voters stops falling for the gungrabbers bullshiite the gun control laws will be thrown out. Nothing emotional there and it shouldn't be hard for even you to grasp the point.
You brand yourself as a believer in the 'militia' theory of the 2nd.. -- then go on to say:
-- "Nor do I believe the amendment was pointed at the government" ---
An outright admission that, to you, our various levels of government are not bound by "shall not be infringed"..
To ice the cake, you claim that blacks in LA who are suspected of gangsterism have no RKBA's as such laws may be "justifiable and necessary".
And to finish up you make an emotional appeal that we should allow majority rule to win on the AWB renewal, --- as when maybe a new majority gains power it would "go away", -- using the same harebrained theory..
Jsuati, my boyo, you are WAY over the edge here..
-- Thanks.. Bizarro posts like yours are alotta fun..
I have no "militia theory" merely quoting the words of the amendment itself hardly implies such a thing.
Your own words here belie you.. You've spouted portions of that 'line' on a bunch of posts on this thread..
Looks like you can attempt distortion of anything but are rarely successful with those who can read. Nothing in the second amendment indicates it to be directed AT the state but it clearly states that it exists to PROTECT A FREE STATE. It is true that initially it did not include the states and they routinely violated the BoR until the 14th amendment theoretically put a stop to that.
It is not 'true'.. The supermacy clause has always included all states in requiring compliance to our individual rights.
Though Jesse and Rev. Al don't like it FELONS are not allowed to legally possess firearms. I have no problem with that any more than I do with not allowing inmates to possess them in the joint. How is the statement of a simple FACT an "emotional appeal?"
You just so appealed in that last line.. Inmates/guns are not the issue here. Emotional appeals that this is a about criminals w/guns is ludicrous hype.
When the majority of the voters stops falling for the gungrabbers bullshiite the gun control laws will be thrown out.
There you go, appealing to majority rule. Odds are the great unwashed majority will ALLways be BSed about gun rights.. What then?
Nothing emotional there and it shouldn't be hard for even you to grasp the point.
How dense can you get?