When the Constitution was trashed and how we may never recover.

[Into the Night]

No, because it is the function of each state to determine criminal law. None include abortion under murder laws.

Irrelevant. Abortion for the sake of convenience is murder.

How did I discount them?

You discarded any reference to them as valid. RQAA. Stop asking this question. It has already been answered

Jefferson was an anti-federalists and the framers of the Constitution were federalists.

Jefferson helped to WRITE THE CONSTITUTION, dumbass!

Their attempts to protect liberty did not satisfy most anti-federalists because the new document did not contain anything protecting our basic liberties;

Yes it does, dumbass!

thus, the framers agreed to add the Bill of Rights to get their support.

The Bill of Rights is more specific, but does the same thing.

Those constitutional rights protect our liberties, not the Declaration.

They both do.

 

[Into the Night]

Right. That is why most gun laws are state regulations.

Any law limiting or banning guns or any other weapon is unconstitutional.

Sorry, I assumed you agreed with the claims of Into the Night that there are only 48 states. That makes him a minority of one.

Argument of ignorance fallacy. You do not get to speak for everyone on the planet or even everyone in the States of America.

 

[Into the Night]

then do you disagree with a federal prohibition on the ownership of automatic weapons?


I did not see him stating that, so my apologies as well for my assumptions

I have stated there are currently only 48 States of America. The SOTC and the SOTNY are no longer States of America. They have no functioning constitution and their governments are currently both oligarchies. Since Oregon is also heading in this direction, there may soon be only 47.

 

[Into the Night]

Yes, because federal gun legislation does exist.

You are now locked in paradox. Which is it, dude?
Arguing both sides of a paradox is irrational.

 

[Into the Night]

Neither of those are about immigration. Naturalization means rules establishing citizenship. Naturalization laws (from 1790) did not include anything about immigration. Naturalization and immigration are not the same thing.

One cannot exist without the other, dumbass. You are trying to describe a one-sided coin. That's irrational.

The other refers to the importation of slaves. Congress could not prohibit the importation of slavery for 20 years.

It is not referring to slaves. It is referring to ANYONE coming to the United States for any reason.

 

[Truth Detector]

I know the legislation. Where does Congress get the constitutional power to pass legislation about immigration control?

I know Congress has the legislative power, but they need constitutional authority. You shouldn't be calling anybody dumb when you don't know how government works.

They have the constitutional authority which was handed to you and yet here you are pounding your fist on the table looking like a dumbass. Run along child.

 

[Truth Detector]

I read it, you fucking stupid asshole.

I R O N Y!!!!

Another great reason why one should not argue with an uneducated moron on steroids.

 

[Truth Detector]

You're one of those low information morons who believes that the constitution was written on Mount Sinai.

Apparently, you're one of those low information morons who believes that strawmen make coherent factual arguments.

 

[Truth Detector]

Constitution worship is no less stupid than religion.

Bloviating strawman claims makes you look like an uneducated moron.

 

[Truth Detector]

Time for STY to join ITN.

^Clueless dumbass thinks anyone would care if they get ignored by him.

 

[Flash]

They have the constitutional authority which was handed to you and yet here you are pounding your fist on the table looking like a dumbass. Run along child.

In other words, you have no clue.

 

[Truth Detector]

In other words, you have no clue.

In other words, you would rather flail and look like a dumbass.

 

[Flash]

In other words, you would rather flail and look like a dumbass.

Still no answer? Turning to juvenile personal insults is always a sign the poster has nothing substantive to contribute.

 

[Into the Night]

In other words, you have no clue.

WRONG. See Article I, $8. RQAA.

 

[Into the Night]

Still no answer? Turning to juvenile personal insults is always a sign the poster has nothing substantive to contribute.

Inversion fallacy. You are asking the same question over and over, even though it has already been answered. RQAA.

 

[saltydancin]

The Constitution is law, dumbass. Not a religion. Redefinition fallacy.

Used to be law of the land. Still more cross conditioned way beyond therapy Christiananlity pedophilia acceptance to dispense super ego pseudoscience medical diagnosis to avoid Federal Lynching enforcement of Eisenhower as a mass murderer war criminal thru SCOTUS fabricated Islam misnomers & immaculate drug conceptions for granted standing of that 9/11 health care plan patriot act immunity for thieving US Constitution arsonists.

 

[Truth Detector]

Still no answer? Turning to juvenile personal insults is always a sign the poster has nothing substantive to contribute.

They aren't insults. They are an accurate description of you dipshit. Run along. You're not interested in honest debate. But rather, removing any doubt what a dumbass you are.

 

[Truth Detector]

Inversion fallacy. You are asking the same question over and over, even though it has already been answered. RQAA.

BINGO. Then he whines about a lack of debate.

 

[Truth Detector]

Used to be law of the land. Still more cross conditioned blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah