billvon 3,162 #76 July 8, 2009 >Based on the conditions the FF's put into place. Can you can show ONE quote from a Founding Father to support a prohibition on giving guns to rapists? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #77 July 8, 2009 Quote Considering the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution that gives the Supreme Court the final word on interpretation of laws, including the Constitution, I am quite certain the FF would agree with Kallend on this point. You think the Founding Fathers would agree to taking away what they considered to be a basic RIGHT?!?!?!?!? No historical data would back that opinion. Can you fine ONE quote where the Founding Fathers are against individual ownership of firearms? ONE!?!?!?!?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,206 #78 July 8, 2009 QuoteQuoteWhy should someone who has so much contempt for the country and his/her fellow citizens that he or she won't pay their fair share towards the costs of running the country benefit from the rights that the country bestows on its honest supportive citizens? A tax fraud steals from everyone Why would YOU support taking that right from everyone? I don't. Your error.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #79 July 8, 2009 QuoteCan you can show ONE quote from a Founding Father to support a prohibition on giving guns to rapists? Sure... No FREE man...... Look at my quote. Since rape is illegal he would not be a free man now would he? Can you show ONE quote where they do not want individuals to have the right? Again: Do you or do you not think a legal citizen in good standing should be allowed to buy a new full auto M-16?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #80 July 8, 2009 QuoteI don't. Your error. Oh, so you would support repealing the Hughes Amendment?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,206 #81 July 8, 2009 QuoteQuoteUnfortunately for YOU, the Supremes trump your opinion, and the Founding Fathers no longer have any say in the matter. The FF's DO have a say in the fact that they wrote the Constitution... YOU may want to throw it out, but it is the basis for this Country's freedoms YOU seem to enjoy. QuoteThe Supremes decide what the law IS and what the Constitution MEANS. Not you. And the SC has stated that the militia is any bodied male willing to take up arms. The SC has said that those men should be equipped with what is in common military use at the time. The SC has said that it is an INDIVIDUAL right. Yet YOU support bans which have been ruled Unconstitutional. . Your error again. I support the concept that the 2nd is a (not unlimited) individual right. Try unwadding your panties, you'll be less frantic.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,206 #82 July 8, 2009 QuoteQuoteI don't. Your error. Oh, so you would support repealing the Hughes Amendment? Try reading Scalia's opinion for the majority in Heller. You'll find it helps you understand the concept of a "not unlimited" right.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #83 July 8, 2009 Quote Try reading Scalia's opinion for the majority in Heller. You'll find it helps you understand the concept of a "not unlimited" right. Try reading the SC in Miller... you will find it helps understand what the 2nd actually said. QuoteThe signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. 'A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.' And further, that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #84 July 8, 2009 Quote Quote Considering the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution that gives the Supreme Court the final word on interpretation of laws, including the Constitution, I am quite certain the FF would agree with Kallend on this point. You think the Founding Fathers would agree to taking away what they considered to be a basic RIGHT?!?!?!?!? Do you disagree with my assertion that the Founding Fathers empowered the SCOTUS with the final word w/r/t to interpreting US law, including the Constitution? If not, could you please let us know what authority supersedes the SCOTUS w/r/t interpretation of law? If no such authority exists, then Heller is the valid interpretation of the second amendment, regardless of how you or I or the NRA or the ACLU may interpret it.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #85 July 8, 2009 Quote>Based on the conditions the FF's put into place. Can you can show ONE quote from a Founding Father to support a prohibition on giving guns to rapists? I doubt it. but I think we could guess more closely as to what they would say about a person who is getting a divorce having his right to have a firearm pulled. (as long as you are playing a guessing game)"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #86 July 8, 2009 QuoteSince rape is illegal he would not be a free man now would he? Upon completing his sentence he would once again be a free man.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #87 July 8, 2009 QuoteIf no such authority exists, then Heller is the valid interpretation of the second amendment Heller simply said that some cases such as prisons and courts could be banned. Hughes bans a TYPE of firearm and the SC has already ruled on that in Miller."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #88 July 8, 2009 Quoteyou're badly confusing rights with authority or duties Funny the definition of authority is having the right to. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #89 July 8, 2009 QuoteHeller simply said that some cases such as prisons and courts could be banned. Among other cases. I'll refer you back to post number 60 in this thread. Do you intend to answer my question and defend your claim that the SCOTUS' opinion isn't really the only one that matters w/r/t interpreting the second amendment?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #90 July 8, 2009 Penn & Teller on the 2nd Amendment http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GNu7ldL1LM this makes sense to me. I think logic, history, and executions in so called gun free zones have thought me at least, that gun control laws are good for the criminals. Again I have mentioned this before. Never forget your right to own guns is not just to be able to protect your self from the murders but most important it is to protect you from government.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,162 #91 July 8, 2009 >Sure... No FREE man...... Look at my quote. I did. Now, can you show ONE quote where they do not specifically want rapists to have weapons? You've been badgering people for a dozen posts, asking them for a specific quote saying that the founding fathers do not want individuals to have the right to own weapons. I am now asking you for a specific quote supporting what _you_ said. Can you measure up to your own standards? >Do you or do you not think a legal citizen in good standing should be allowed >to buy a new full auto M-16? I'm fine with it, and I am also fine with letting local cities/states decide that on their own. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darius11 12 #92 July 8, 2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjCIT3M1dqs heres a few from TJ. the first 30 sec.I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #93 July 8, 2009 QuoteSure... No FREE man...... Look at my quote. Since rape is illegal he would not be a free man now would he? Does it not occur to you that the phrase "free man" meant something entirely different in Jefferson's time? Or are you advocating that women shouldn't be allowed to own guns at all? Or that black men should only be allowed to own 3/5th of a gun? Does it not also occur to you that, unless you just cherry pick, much of what the "founding fathers" wrote actually can be seen as sometimes contradictory? That even Supreme Court decisions are frequently not unanimous. That there is room for differing opinion and debate? While "the US history according to Ron" may be fine for you, it's not fine for others?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #94 July 8, 2009 QuoteQuoteyou're badly confusing rights with authority or duties Funny the definition of authority is having the right to. At work I have the right to login as root. I deny that right to 4000 other employees. But that has jack to do with civil liberties. It would be just a daft to talk about rights as something you do in a car. Just admit you can't find any and move on. Or if you insist on this farce, find an example in the Bill of Rights where the group has a right, but the individual does not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #95 July 8, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteRon, do you think that convicted felons or the insane should have the right to own weapons? It would depend on several factors. Is the guy a felon for tax fraud? Sure! . Why should someone who has so much contempt for the country and his/her fellow citizens that he or she won't pay their fair share towards the costs of running the country benefit from the rights that the country bestows on its honest supportive citizens? A tax fraud steals from everyone. Nowadays, they just get Cabinet positions.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,206 #96 July 8, 2009 Ron, The Founding Fathers made the Supreme Court the final arbiter of the meaning of the Constitution in case of dispute. They didn't make you the arbiter. The Supreme Court has stated unambiguously that the individual right conferred by the 2nd Amendment is "not unlimited".... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #97 July 8, 2009 QuoteQuite afew groups are tax exempt, certainly doesn't mean that every member of that group is exempt from paying taxes themselves. (though that would be a great recruiting tool for most religions) Tax exemption isn't a right. Rights are things like freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, right of petition (I think there's a list somewhere floating around in Washington DC). Are there actual cases where a group of individuals can speak when each individual themself is barred from doing so? Are groups permitted free exercise of religion, while individuals are not? QuoteThe military has the right to maintain nuclear weapons. Doesn't mean every member of the military has that same right. Congress has the right to declare war, but every individual member does not does not. Government has the right to impose taxes, yet every single member of government does not have that right individually. The military is not a group of individuals. It's an arm of the government. Government isn't a collection of individuals, either. It's a separate entity, independent unto itself.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #98 July 8, 2009 QuoteOr if you insist on this farce, find an example in the Bill of Rights where the group has a right, but the individual does not. How about Freedom of the Press? Not so much that an individual can't write pretty much whatever they choose, but an individual certainly won't be granted access the way an established news group will be. Being denied individual access can certainly be construed as limiting free speech.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #99 July 8, 2009 QuoteTax exemption isn't a right. Isn't a chuch's tax exempt status derived from the first amendment of the Constitution, just like theose other rights you listed? QuoteGovernment isn't a collection of individuals, either. It's a separate entity, independent unto itself. Lincoln disagreed (as do I).Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #100 July 8, 2009 QuoteIf not, could you please let us know what authority supersedes the SCOTUS w/r/t interpretation of law? Um, he's quoting from currently valid Supreme Court Precedent (Miller).-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
