Infringement

[Into the Night]

No, I don't think we should destroy muh constitution, it's a cute little propaganda tool. And we already have an oligarchy. I think we should decentralize power more so the public gets more of a say.

No, we have a constitution. Any oligarchies are unconstitutional.

We are not a democracy.

 

[Truth Detector]

Just the opposite, illiterate racist cunt.

Barrel strokers think that ANY law that restricts ANYTHING about guns is a violation of their Constitutional rights. A bunch of ignorant morons.

Why it is a waste of time to take morons like this seriously.

 

[Into the Night]

The Constitution determines which rights are not to be restricted by government. Sure, the 9th Amendment says there are other rights not listed in 1-8 that are reserved to the people. The right to privacy is one of those rights the courts have created.

No, the laws concerning privacy are laid out in the 4th and 5th amendments. No court has the authority to change the Constitution.

 

[Into the Night]

"You want to overthrow the United States and install an oligarchy."

What a laughable crock of horseshit.

Not really. It's what YOU want to do. THAT's the horseshit.

 

[StoneByStone]

No, we have a constitution. Any oligarchies are unconstitutional.

We are not a democracy.

Which just shows how powerless muh constitution is. We have an oligarchy in which the (((1%))) controls everything.

 

[Flash]

No, the laws concerning privacy are laid out in the 4th and 5th amendments. No court has the authority to change the Constitution.

There was no right to privacy except as it applies to searches in criminal cases and statements. It was not until Griswold v. Conn that the court changed the constitutional interpretation to interpret a right to privacy (9th) as it applied to contraceptives; unless you think we do not have the right to read about contraception.

You can argue the court has no authority to change the Constitution but they can "discover" interpretations that did not exist before.

 

[gfm7175]

Neither, dumbfuck.

You are still locked in paradox...

[1] People have the right to defend themselves.
[2] Governments can remove people's right to defend themselves.

You are at the point of complete irrationality due to your anger issues. Either people HAVE the right to defend themselves or they do NOT... Which one is it, domer?...

Where is the universal right to defend yourself?

Argument By Repetition. This has been addressed already.

Look at extreme Muslim cultures. Females have no rights, including the right to self defense.

Argument By Repetition. This has been addressed already.

Yep, people can defend themselves. Big fucking deal. There is no universal right to do so. Only the physical ability to do so.

Irrational argumentation. See above.

Governments can choose to not grant the right to defend yourself with a gun. That's the point, moron.

Irrational argumentation. See above.

 

[domer76]

Not really. It's what YOU want to do. THAT's the horseshit.

Sure, I do, illiterate liar.

 

[domer76]

I'm sure the average homeschooled kid gets a better education than students who "learn" from your cuntwhistle loser son.

Teaching HS advanced placement history and government. Something that's foreign to you, homeschool. He's forgotten more about government and the Constitution than you'll ever know.

 

[domer76]

You are still locked in paradox...

[1] People have the right to defend themselves.
[2] Governments can remove people's right to defend themselves.

You are at the point of complete irrationality due to your anger issues. Either people HAVE the right to defend themselves or they do NOT... Which one is it, domer?...



Argument By Repetition. This has been addressed already.


Argument By Repetition. This has been addressed already.


Irrational argumentation. See above.


Irrational argumentation. See above.

People have the physical ability to defend themselves. Try to get that straight, Into the Night. Women in the extreme Muslim world have no such right.

Repetition is needed for idiots like you, Into the Night.

Repetition is needed for idiots like you, Into the Night.

Repetition is needed for idiots like you, Into the Night.

Avoiding the answer fallacy.

Dismissed Into the Night. You will soon disappear, troll.

 

[Into the Night]

Which just shows how powerless muh constitution is. We have an oligarchy in which the (((1%))) controls everything.

No, they don't. You are just being ridiculous now.

We do have oligarchy elements within the United States government today. These are unconstitutional organizations, such as the EPA, the NEA, the BATF, elements of the FAA, elements of the FCC, and a host of others.

Nothing gave Congress the authority to create these departments or to give them the power they have.

They do not control everything. Indeed, there level of control is quite limited in scope. Many simply choose to ignore them on some level.

Capitalism is not an oligarchy, neither does it form oligarchies. Indeed, it needs no government at all to implement it.

 

[Into the Night]

There was no right to privacy except as it applies to searches in criminal cases and statements. It was not until Griswold v. Conn that the court changed the constitutional interpretation to interpret a right to privacy (9th) as it applied to contraceptives; unless you think we do not have the right to read about contraception.

You can argue the court has no authority to change the Constitution but they can "discover" interpretations that did not exist before.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

No court has authority to change the Constitution of the United States. No court has the authority to interpret the Constitution of the United States.

 

[StoneByStone]

No, they don't. You are just being ridiculous now.

We do have oligarchy elements within the United States government today. These are unconstitutional organizations, such as the EPA, the NEA, the BATF, elements of the FAA, elements of the FCC, and a host of others.

Nothing gave Congress the authority to create these departments or to give them the power they have.

They do not control everything. Indeed, there level of control is quite limited in scope. Many simply choose to ignore them on some level.

Capitalism is not an oligarchy, neither does it form oligarchies. Indeed, it needs no government at all to implement it.

 

[Into the Night]

People have the physical ability to defend themselves. Try to get that straight, Into the Night. Women in the extreme Muslim world have no such right.

Repetition is needed for idiots like you, Into the Night.

Repetition is needed for idiots like you, Into the Night.

Repetition is needed for idiots like you, Into the Night.

Avoiding the answer fallacy.

Dismissed Into the Night. You will soon disappear, troll.

gfm7175 is not Into the Night. Get yer facts straight. You can't make either of us go away. If you can't stand what we say, you can always put us on your ignore list (for all the good that will accomplish).

 

[domer76]

Some troll is invisible. Save your energy, troll

 

[Flash]

No, the laws concerning privacy are laid out in the 4th and 5th amendments. No court has the authority to change the Constitution.

Ever heard of Griswold v. Conn or Roe v. Wade. Those cases expanded the right of privacy from just criminal searches and testimony to personal privacy between a woman and her husband and a woman and her doctor.

These cases changed the meaning of the Constitution and used the 9th (supported by the 1, 3, 4, 5) as the basis for this expanded privacy.

The things you claim a court cannot do have been done many times.

 

[Flash]

No court has authority to change the Constitution of the United States. No court has the authority to interpret the Constitution of the United States.

Nothing in 4 or 5 protect a woman's freedom (right) to get an abortion. Ever heard of judicial review (Marbury v. Madison)--it gives the courts the power to interpret the constitutionality of laws.

 

[Into the Night]

Ever heard of Griswold v. Conn or Roe v. Wade. Those cases expanded the right of privacy from just criminal searches and testimony to personal privacy between a woman and her husband and a woman and her doctor.

These cases changed the meaning of the Constitution and used the 9th (supported by the 1, 3, 4, 5) as the basis for this expanded privacy.

The things you claim a court cannot do have been done many times.

Not legally.

 

[Into the Night]

Nothing in 4 or 5 protect a woman's freedom (right) to get an abortion. Ever heard of judicial review (Marbury v. Madison)--it gives the courts the power to interpret the constitutionality of laws.

A court cannot legally assume the power to interpret the Constitution of the United States. See Article III of the Constitution of the United States.

 

[gfm7175]

People have the physical ability to defend themselves. Try to get that straight, Into the Night. Women in the extreme Muslim world have no such right.

Yes, they do. They are living...breathing...

Repetition is needed for idiots like you, Into the Night.

Repetition is needed for idiots like you, Into the Night.

Repetition is needed for idiots like you, Into the Night.

Now you're so angry that you've completely lost track of who you are talking to...

Avoiding the answer fallacy.

I haven't avoided anything. That's been YOU...

Dismissed Into the Night. You will soon disappear, troll.

You still don't know who you are talking to, due to your anger. As for me, I am not going anywhere.

You have said that you were done talking to him and I, repeatedly, yet here you still are...