NRA and Right Wing Talking About Breaking Our Constitution

Anti-Party said:
Oh so you changed your stance, no suprise there.

So your new stance is "well regulated" doesn't mean "well regulated" it means "well trained"..............I'll bite
Click to expand...
I have never changed my stance on that. maybe you've talked to too many people about it.

Anti-Party said:
Note there are TWO definitions of "regulated". Both definitions use the term "control". You chose the less likely definition "to control or supervise"

You are basically stating the 2nd Amendment says, "Well controlled and supervised citizens, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

You lose either way.
Click to expand...
I'm choosing the framers definition, which is the only one that matters. That is to be in good order. absolutely nothing about being controlled by the government. I'll say it again. It's the height of stupidity to believe that the framers would guarantee the right of a standing army to keep and bear arms after they had just won their independence from an oppressive central government and standing army that tried to take their private firearms.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
I have never changed my stance on that. maybe you've talked to too many people about it.

I'm choosing the framers definition, which is the only one that matters. That is to be in good order. absolutely nothing about being controlled by the government. I'll say it again. It's the height of stupidity to believe that the framers would guarantee the right of a standing army to keep and bear arms after they had just won their independence from an oppressive central government and standing army that tried to take their private firearms.
Click to expand...

Is there a "framers dictionary" that I don't know about? I'm pretty sure words definitions don't change much after we define them. If anything they keep old definitions but add a new one, but they don't change.

You trying to make the case that "regulated" means "in good order" is a trash argument. I'm sorry that you are sticking to it. No matter how you twist or turn it you are saying that the government needs to train our army to defend America against the government, who trains our army.

Stop trying to manipulate the Constitution to suit your opinion and use some common sense for god sakes.
 
Anti-Party said:
Note: I am not trying to hurt anyones feelings. I am not trying to make anyone mad. But I will stand by the words of the Constitution no matter what. If I was proven to be wrong, I would accept it. If the person who proved me wrong wasn't rude, I would thank them.
In my opinion I've only solidified that I am right in these debates.
Click to expand...
That's only because you ignore everything that destroys your argument.
You've been proven wrong, you simply lack the intellectual honesty to admit it.
 
sPzAbt505 said:
This is a lie; you know you present a false dichotomy.
If you're so right, why do you need to lie to make your point?
Click to expand...

Kid I have 100% proven my point without a shadow of a doubt. I have challenged and won every debate against it. You wouldn't even challenge the words of the 2nd Amendment. "SmarterThanYou" did.
 
If you are the type of person that fears our government is just due to be overturned by a bad control seeking party, you are probably correct. Only, you are probably wrong about which party.

If you are STILL after all of this debate saying that "militia" means military and/or "regulate" doesn't mean regulate but something different, you are controlled by the threat to America and our Constitution. The text is plain, clear and simple. YOU are the Anti-American scum if you try to change the definitions of the text.

If you vow to stand against the government when it tries to regulate gun ownership, I will fight for the government.

If you try to gun grab for the government, I will fight for our former government.

It's that simple. You uninformed Anti-Americans need to wake up. Gun control is NOT just about gun grabbing.
 
sPzAbt505 said:
That's only because you ignore everything that destroys your argument.
You've been proven wrong, you simply lack the intellectual honesty to admit it.
Click to expand...

I have proven everything I have stated. You have not read the full script of the thread and keep making our argument that I'm talking about gun grabbing. I don't respond because you are the only person that doesn't know what the conversation is about.

It's always a good rule to read a post fully before responding to it. I'm pretty sure that is just a standard rule..
 
I have a feeling that guy went back, read the entire post, realized someone already debated from his standpoint and lost, then snuggled up to his Assault Rifle saying, "I know they are out to get you baby. I just can't prove it yet."
 
SmarterthanYou said:
no valid options here. try again.
Click to expand...

There are only two options for the definition of "regulated". If you say, "No valid options here. Try again." It's the clear win for me, as if it wasn't from the start.

I don't care if there is no valid options in defining the constitution for your opinion. I only care about America, the safety of my children and the hope that people will stop listening to party talk because it makes them sound egg headed.
 
How is it we managed to get all the way into the 20th Century, and the rise of the political left, before we suddenly had to start debating over the meaning of the 2nd Amendment? Federalists, Jeffersonian Democrats, Jacksonian Democrats, and Whigs all agreed on the document...
 
Threedee said:
How is it we managed to get all the way into the 20th Century, and the rise of the political left, before we suddenly had to start debating over the meaning of the 2nd Amendment? Federalists, Jeffersonian Democrats, Jacksonian Democrats, and Whigs all agreed on the document...
Click to expand...

Easy answer. Up until now no one tried to change the definition of "regulated". Regulated means regulated end of story. Today specific groups sponsored by the NRA and gun manufacturers are trying to change "regulated" to "in good order" as if they didn't invent the words "in good order" back then................Regulated means regulated, end of story. Stop pissing on our Constitution
 
Anti-Party said:
Easy answer. Up until now no one tried to change the definition of "regulated". Regulated means regulated end of story. Today specific groups sponsored by the NRA and gun manufacturers are trying to change "regulated" to "in good order" as if they didn't invent the words "in good order" back then................Regulated means regulated, end of story. Stop pissing on our Constitution
Click to expand...
you are purposefully ignoring the founders usage for your own totalitarian agenda. It is the height of stupidity to believe that the framers of the constitution wrote the 2nd Amendment to allow gun control after their government tried to disarm them.
 
Threedee said:
How is it we managed to get all the way into the 20th Century, and the rise of the political left, before we suddenly had to start debating over the meaning of the 2nd Amendment? Federalists, Jeffersonian Democrats, Jacksonian Democrats, and Whigs all agreed on the document...
Click to expand...
In the late 19th century, liberals adopted an agenda that demands the state have a monopoly on force; an armed citizenry gets in the way of that.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
you are purposefully ignoring the founders usage for your own totalitarian agenda. It is the height of stupidity to believe that the framers of the constitution wrote the 2nd Amendment to allow gun control after their government tried to disarm them.
Click to expand...

Yea you keep repeating that. You are trying to assume you know exactly what the founders were thinking while I am providing text of what they were thinking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top