GTAVercetti

weapons for militia versus weapons for army. It is an ARM. Why could a miltia not possess one? Who ever said a nuke is a type of arms only meant for the military? That is an utterly artibitrary idea. Even you definition of militia does not support the idea that a militia could not possess a nuke. You have to be a professional soldier to use a nuke? Is that in the Arms definition handbook? You are making up your own rules. It like a fucking brick wall. I give numerous sources from Constitional sites, INCLUDING the actual Preamble (which does not mention rights infringement between private citizens), and a quote FROM a Founding Father, and you give me...your own opinion. They were not stupid. But they also assumed people would take it as a whole, Preamble included. You do not. Go read QUOTES from the Founding Fathers about the purpose of the document. I already gave you one. Now answer the other question. If you come onto my property with a gun and I say no guns or leave...do you get rid of the gun or leave? Do I have the right to make up the rules about my property or is anyone with a weapon allowed to come onto my property even when I don't want them to? Oh and the 4th? It protects the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE from search and seizure. I have not a clue how you would get that I would think it does not apply to people. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Okay, here's a news story excerpt that reminded me of this thread:"A woman was booted off a airline flight for wearing a T-shirt that bore an expletive and images of President Bush... The airline said several passengers complained about the shirt. She and her husband left and took a rental car home. The airline rules allow the airline to deny boarding to any passenger whose clothing is 'lewd, obscene or patently offensive.'" So, to those of you who are trumpeting the superiority of private property rights: do you agree that the airline had the right to kick this woman off the plane for a T-shirt which offended some passengers? Would you dismiss the lawsuit she plans to file for damages against the airline? If it is their policy to do so and she was given said policy beforehand. yes. Last time I checked a airline was a private business. I agree it is an ABSURD rule, but if they want to have absurd rules, they can. Do you get angry when you decide to work for a business that makes you wear a suit? You either abide by the rules they set forth or you leave. Can you go into a Christian church and practice Satinism without being asked to leave? It all goes back to the Bill of Rights being protection from GOVERNMENT not private entities. I am not really sure how many more quotes and sources I can find relating that truth. I might as well be throwing them down a hole. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

I type too fast. But who knows? you could REALLY have been an idiot. And it is my civic duty as the semichrist and the Abribtrary antichrist to point that out. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

That was me! GFD, your google skill are teh suck. I got ALL the sources for ya: http://news.google.com/news?q=python%20alligator&sourceid=mozilla-search&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=N&tab=wn Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

that is right. You don't want none of this. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Yeah unbelievable that you fell for that. satire dude. satire. God I hope you know that. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

I think his point is Hollywood is full of hypocrits as they produce entertainment in direct conflict with their "public" politics. Art, cinema, etc. does not have to always stay in tune with your beliefs. That is what fiction is. Just because you are a muslim and don't eat pork, and encourage other muslims to do the same, does not mean you cannot make a movie with people who like BLTs. It is not being hypocrytical. Its recognizing that what you create does not always have to reflect reality. And if children are affected, influenced, and become bad people because of the images that cinema and art create, then their parents are not parenting well enough. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Why bother? You wll just claim they meant something else, and didn't write it correctly.....Ya know, just like the founding fathers did with the constitution. Yeah, nice dodge. Oh look pa, a full circle. You keep avoiding the nuclear weapon thing. Very telling. Its an ARM so why can I not have one? And why can I not take it onto an airliner? Or the idea that if I say "No guns" on my property, you have to comply. You disagree? You honestly think you can walk onto anyone's property or anywhere with a gun? "[A] bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular, and what no just government should refuse." --- Thomas Jefferson December 20, 1787 The preamble to the Bill of Rights: "THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution" Right there. It does not say "to extend public confidence in other citizens". The Bill of Rights is to keep the GOVERNMENT from infringing. It implies that all Rights, whether they say it or not, are protection from the GOVERNMENT. The Founding Fathers wrote it correctly...when viewed as a whole. Its when people take one or two amendments out of the context that it becomes incorrect. Bu tI guess they figured people would understand the history of its creation and read the whole thing. The preamble clearly states that the bill of Rights is to give confidence to CITIZENS in the GOVERNMENT and that is it. Oh and for that Preamble go here if you question the authenticity (take a look at the ACTUAL IMAGE of the Bill, the preamble is there): http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html And here is an ARTICLE from that GOVERNMENT site about its origin: "The call for a bill of rights had been the anti-Federalists' most powerful weapon. Attacking the proposed Constitution for its vagueness and lack of specific protection against tyranny, Patrick Henry asked the Virginia convention, "What can avail your specious, imaginary balances, your rope-dancing, chain-rattling, ridiculous ideal checks and contrivances." The anti-Federalists, demanding a more concise, unequivocal Constitution, one that laid out for all to see the right of the people and limitations of the power of government, claimed that the brevity of the document only revealed its inferior nature. Richard Henry Lee despaired at the lack of provisions to protect "those essential rights of mankind without which liberty cannot exist." Trading the old government for the new without such a bill of rights, Lee argued, would be trading Scylla for Charybdis." Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Great...now packing too.... Yeah, sometimes I don't think that my hobby is skydiving. Sometimes I think my hobby is stuffing large pieces of nylon in to small and complicatedly shaped bags... and skydiving is the only interesting way I can come up with to unpack them. I think you just gave me a new sig line full credit will be given Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Its not a board game, but I LOVED "Trouble" as a kid. Not very intellectual though, but me an my mom would laugh until it hurt playing. I like Clue, Monopoly, and Scrabble. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

I have read books on the subject, but since those books don't agree with you you must think they were wrong. Case in point: "Could they have worded that better? Yes." So I see, they worded the Constitution wrong....I guess there is no way YOU just interpreted it wrong? Please point to the books you have read that state the Bill of Rights were NOT to protect only against government infringement (as opposed to infringement by a fellow citizen). And I am talking about books on the Bill of Rights, not Gun advocacy books. The Bill of Rights were created because some people did not trust the government and needed further clarification on what the government could NOT do. But I see you skipped the links I posted (constitution sites, not anti-gun) so why do I bother? If the Bill of Rights is indeed between citizens, then what I say on my property has no bearing if it violates your rights. And we both know that is untrue. You still have not answered my question about nuclear weapons. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Holy fucking shit. mnealtx...we agree on something. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

So it is so hard to mix that you are typing at the same time? Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

See you guys amaze me...You will fight for every right but the second. So you are saying we SHOULD be able to own nuclear weapons? And be able to take them on an airliner? Or into the Pentagon? A nuclear weapon is an Arm after all. And I have the Right to Bear Arms (not GUNS, ARMS). Respond to this notion. No reason to avoid it because you choose to apply your own reasoning to the amendment. Why not defend the idea instead of calling people liberal or saying we don't support the 2nd? Tell us WHY you think we should have guns on airliners (that means ANYONE with conceal and carry permits...which encompasses the good AND the bad) instead of calling us names. Or nukes for that matter. But you are wrong, I don't just hate the 2nd. In fact, I support inciting riots, slander, and exposing classified information if I see it. After all, because the Government cannot impose upon my free speech, I have the right to do all these things, regardless of any agreement I signed. Keeping telling yourself whatever you like. Its hard to face reality when you want to live in black and white. To take us back on topic: Did you even bother to take a look at those links? Probably not. If you had you would realize that the Bill of Rights is to protect form infringement of the GOVERNMENT not infringement by business or other citizen. Could they have worded that better? Yes. Does the HISTORY of the document enforced this idea? Yes it does. Go read some books about it and get back to me. A rule by a company to not allow guns is NOT the government infringing upon your ability to carry a weapon. It is the company. Not covered by the Bill of Rights. Plain and Simple. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Where? I searched for python and alligator. I cannot keep up with Bonfire. Too many postings. Wanna hear my Mexican jalapeño story? No. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Where? I searched for python and alligator. I cannot keep up with Bonfire. Too many postings. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

I guess they can't eat anything... http://www.rednova.com/news/oddities/261762/python_bursts_after_trying_to_eat_gator/index.html?source=r_oddities Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Actually I think the correct terminology is "that'd be fucking COLD, man." That's a move to the East Coast - y'know, where it SNOWS all winter long. What he said. Snow? We don't get as much as you think in VA. It is just fucking cold is all. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

He would take Nancy's. Shonda Smith took Kevin's spot. And it would only be metro DC till the new headquarters are built in Fredericksburg. Though with the rate things grow out here and the commutes some people go through, that may actually be considered METRO DC by then! Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Feel free, expect to get arrested or shot. The second does not say anyhting about property rights. The first says who will not (The Government). The Second simply says that the RIGHT will not be infringed. The 2nd also just says ARMS. So, you wanna go buy a tactical nuke? definition of arms in case you want to debate that: arms: # A weapon, especially a firearm: troops bearing arms; ICBMs, bombs, and other nuclear arms. Face it, sometimes your right to bear arms is overruled. If it is my property and I say no guns, you can comply or get the hell my property. Oh yeah, once you get that nuke, try taking it onto a military base or an airliner. See what happens to your right to bear Arms then. Oh and take a look here: http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_bor.html for analysis of the purpose of the Bill of Rights. Be sure to read the portion with the heading "Bar to Federal Action" The admendments are the rights not to be imposed upon by the Government. It is not a Bill of Rights between private citizens or entities. Here is another: http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/database/article_display.cfm?HHID=295 Here is a good quote: "During the 19th century, the impact of the Bill of Rights was limited. In the 1833 case of Barron v. Baltimore, the Supreme Court ruled that the Bill of Rights only protects individuals from the national, and not the state, governments." And more http://www.constitutioncenter.org/explore/BasicGoverningPrinciples/IndividualRights.shtml http://www.guardster.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=243 Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

So, the Constitution only applies in certain situations? I guess an apartment complex could outlaw guns, or maybe a home owners association? Would you be OK with that? I think I am going to come over to your house with a large group of people and stand on your lawn and say bad things about you day and night. Right outside your window Oh, you would not like that and might call the cops? Or get your gun and tell me to leave. Oh, I am trespassing? But I am exercising my RIGHT to free speech aren't I? Even on private property. But no, your property rights and the right to have who you want on them negates my right to say what I want about you on it without repurcussion. The ABSOLUTE same should apply to the 2nd and private property. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

so god aproves of this kind of behavior does he god boy? ..... Existence does not exist for human beings alone. to think so is absurd and this is the beliefs of christians is it not? I have not a clue what you are talking about or why you called me God Boy. Thanks for the...insult I guess? Seriously, why was this posted at me and why are you suddenly talking about guns when my post was about hype men? Did you run into the wrong thread perhaps? By the way, I am in no way religious. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

And one is a right given in the Constitution, and the other is not protected. I find it funny that Liberals fight like hell to defend all the Amendments but the 2nd. In no way did I say that you cannot have a gun. But you choose to work at a company you abide its rules. Just like the free speech rule. Can you say shit about your boss and disparage your company at work? Doubt it. There goes the 1st too. And liberal? Yeah, I am liberal, but if you think that means democrat, you are wrong. Liberal means I have the right to do what I want and so does a business. If I choose to work for said business, what I want is now trumped by the agreement I made with the company. If I don't like it, I am free to leave. I am NOT against guns. I am for following the rules of a company I CHOSE to work at. Oh and funny how you use skydiving as an example of similar reasoning, but when we call you on the fact that your analogy was not in corrolation with the topic (guns on business property), you dismiss YOUR OWN EXAMPLE. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Exactly. I have said it over and over again: You don't like company policy? Either talk to management and get it changed or quit. And I also agree, a business with the attitude of not allowing sports OUTSIDE of its property will not last long. But they ARE allowed to exist. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

Answer the question, not dodge it. Would you feel the same way if your company said you could not skydive if you wanted to work there? You have a funny idea of dodging. The idea is this. Company says: you cannot have a gun on our property That means I cannot carry and gun there but has NO effect on my ability to carry at my home, in the woods or off the property granting I have the proper permits. Now, implicitly, if you choose to follow the rules, then yes, you probably do not want to keep the gun in the car on the way there, but they are not making that direct rule. You posed the question: What if they made a rule that says you cannot skydive OUTSIDE of work? That is a DIRECT rule about it, not something implicit. just like they have not made a direct rule about skydiving outside of work, they have not made a direct rule about guns outside of work. They are making rules about THEIR property and how I act while there, not elsewhere. It is a DIRECT corollary. My company says I cannot skydive into work and I cannot have a gun there. They made NO rule about me skydiving outside the fence or carrying a gun to just outside either. I am sorry that eluded you. If they said, "owning and using a gun is strictly prohibited by our employees at ANY TIME" then I would take issue. Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.