Utah Sheriffs warn Obama

[Death Metal]

Obviously you care less about it than I do considering that we're arguing over the definition of the second amendment when it's overtly clear what it means. You're just being in denial about now. Either that or you have low reading comprehension.

Or, you know, I could bring up the actual 2nd Amendment and some annotations on it. Now, if we're going by literal definitions here, it says:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

A well regulated militia. Meaning not owning more firepower than your average third-world nation. Now, anything else about my apparent low reading comprehension and my 'state of denial' or are you going to address this?

Not to mention that, again "bear arms" doesn't mean you get guns. It means you get weapons. So as long as you can keep a weapon of any kind, all guns can be banned and the letter of the Amendment remains intact.

Not that such a measure will ever be adopted, nor will any save an extreme fringe minority ever even propose such a matter.

Also: Now that I think about it, it says you are allowed the weapons, but says nothing about ammunition of said weapon. So we can technically ban bullets too.

[Herador]

Them being "rude" has nothing to do with them proving you wrong.

It has everything to do with whether not I'll be reading their posts. Don't like, then don't be rude.

Ignoring that they proved you wrong doesn't change the fact that it happened.

[Wisconsin9]

It has everything to do with whether not I'll be reading their posts. Don't like, then don't be rude.

Ignoring that they proved you wrong doesn't change the fact that it happened.

I honestly don't care. Actually, he did me a favor. Now I can go into any thread he posts on and instantly cause him to completely and totally discredit himself.

[Yandere Schoolgirls]

It has everything to do with whether not I'll be reading their posts. Don't like, then don't be rude.

Ignoring that they proved you wrong doesn't change the fact that it happened.

Well, whatever; I've stated my opinion in this thread, and you can choose to ignore what the amendment says/means. After all many of you seem like the type of lot who would believe 2+2=5 if you were under enough social pressure from authority, and, as well, your peers.

[Death Metal]

Ironic that someone named Yandere Schoolgirls acts like an early-stage Tsundere schoolgirl.

[Isolated China]

Or, you know, I could bring up the actual 2nd Amendment and some annotations on it. Now, if we're going by literal definitions here, it says:

A well regulated militia. Meaning not owning more firepower than your average third-world nation. Now, anything else about my apparent low reading comprehension and my 'state of denial' or are you going to address this?

A well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free state, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. I hope that clears things up for you.

Term, well regulated. Let me get the definitions, shall I?

well
adverb
1.
in a good or satisfactory manner: Business is going well.
2.
thoroughly, carefully, or soundly: to shake well before using; listen well.
3.
in a moral or proper manner: to behave well.
4.
commendably, meritoriously, or excellently: a difficult task well done.
5.
with propriety, justice, or reason: I could not well refuse.
6.
adequately or sufficiently: Think well before you act.
7.
to a considerable extent or degree (often used in combination): a sum well over the amount agreed upon; a well-developed theme.
8.
with great or intimate knowledge: to know a person well.
9.
certainly; without doubt: I anger easily, as you well know.
10.
with good nature; without rancor: He took the joke well.
adjective
11.
in good health; sound in body and mind: Are you well? He is not a well man.
12.
satisfactory, pleasing, or good: All is well with us.
13.
proper, fitting, or gratifying: It is well that you didn't go.
14.
in a satisfactory position; well-off: I am very well as I am.

Now for regulated:

reg·u·late
transitive verb \ˈre-gyə-ˌlāt also ˈrā-\
reg·u·lat·edreg·u·lat·ing
Definition of REGULATE
1
a: to govern or direct according to rule
b (1): to bring under the control of law or constituted authority (2): to make regulations for or concerning <regulate the industries of a country>
2: to bring order, method, or uniformity to <regulate one's habits>
3: to fix or adjust the time, amount, degree, or rate of <regulate the pressure of a tire>
Examples of REGULATE
The dam regulates the flow of water into the river.
We need better laws to regulate the content of the Internet.
Laws have been made to regulate working conditions.
The government regulates how much lead may be found in our water supply.
The department regulates foreign trade.

There. Now connect the dots.

[Yandere Schoolgirls]

A well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free state, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. I hope that clears things up for you.

Term, well regulated. Let me get the definitions, shall I?

well
adverb
1.
in a good or satisfactory manner: Business is going well.
2.
thoroughly, carefully, or soundly: to shake well before using; listen well.
3.
in a moral or proper manner: to behave well.
4.
commendably, meritoriously, or excellently: a difficult task well done.
5.
with propriety, justice, or reason: I could not well refuse.
6.
adequately or sufficiently: Think well before you act.
7.
to a considerable extent or degree (often used in combination): a sum well over the amount agreed upon; a well-developed theme.
8.
with great or intimate knowledge: to know a person well.
9.
certainly; without doubt: I anger easily, as you well know.
10.
with good nature; without rancor: He took the joke well.
adjective
11.
in good health; sound in body and mind: Are you well? He is not a well man.
12.
satisfactory, pleasing, or good: All is well with us.
13.
proper, fitting, or gratifying: It is well that you didn't go.
14.
in a satisfactory position; well-off: I am very well as I am.

Now for regulated:

reg·u·late
transitive verb \ˈre-gyə-ˌlāt also ˈrā-\
reg·u·lat·edreg·u·lat·ing
Definition of REGULATE
1
a: to govern or direct according to rule
b (1): to bring under the control of law or constituted authority (2): to make regulations for or concerning <regulate the industries of a country>
2: to bring order, method, or uniformity to <regulate one's habits>
3: to fix or adjust the time, amount, degree, or rate of <regulate the pressure of a tire>
Examples of REGULATE
The dam regulates the flow of water into the river.
We need better laws to regulate the content of the Internet.
Laws have been made to regulate working conditions.
The government regulates how much lead may be found in our water supply.
The department regulates foreign trade.

There. Now connect the dots.

Okay, enjoy your Orwellian state.

[Herador]

-snip-

I have, oddly enough, never made that connection before; thank you for pointing that out.

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

Then you have proven my point and there is no further reason for us to continue this dialogue. Good night to you sir.

I'm not reading any of it I'm literally focusing on the smileys to my right as I type this.

I think you've had enough fun trolling the forum for a while. And lord knows we've had enough reports on you. *** 24-hr Ban *** to give you time to rethink your approach here, or go find something else to amuse yourself with.

[Alekera]

Obviously you care less about it than I do considering that we're arguing over the definition of the second amendment when it's overtly clear what it means. You're just being in denial about now. Either that or you have low reading comprehension.

Or, you know, I could bring up the actual 2nd Amendment and some annotations on it. Now, if we're going by literal definitions here, it says:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

A well regulated militia. Meaning not owning more firepower than your average third-world nation. Now, anything else about my apparent low reading comprehension and my 'state of denial' or are you going to address this?

Let me break this down even further...

" A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state..." Here it pretty much state that we need a standing army, one that is organized and strong enough to keep America from falling prey to attacks.

"... the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Here we see it is the right of the people (i.e the citizens [i.e the individuals]) to keep and bear arms. Arms being a very broad term.... Meaning pretty much anything you can defend yourself with. We also see how it state that the peoples' right to bear arms "shall not be infringed". Infringed can mean many things....

According to the New Oxford Dictionary:

infringe |inˈfrinj|
verb ( infringes, infringing, infringed ) [ with obj. ]
actively break the terms of (a law, agreement, etc.): making an unauthorized copy would infringe copyright.
• act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on: his legal rights were being infringed | [ no obj. ] : I wouldn't infringe on his privacy.

So if we can take the dictionary definition, being, "act so as to limit or undermine (something)" and apply it to what is written in the 2nd amendment, we can see that it would be against the 2nd amendment to make 'weapon X' illegal to buy... meaning any weapon.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Or, you know, I could bring up the actual 2nd Amendment and some annotations on it. Now, if we're going by literal definitions here, it says:

A well regulated militia. Meaning not owning more firepower than your average third-world nation. Now, anything else about my apparent low reading comprehension and my 'state of denial' or are you going to address this?

Not to mention that, again "bear arms" doesn't mean you get guns. It means you get weapons. So as long as you can keep a weapon of any kind, all guns can be banned and the letter of the Amendment remains intact.

Not that such a measure will ever be adopted, nor will any save an extreme fringe minority ever even propose such a matter.

Also: Now that I think about it, it says you are allowed the weapons, but says nothing about ammunition of said weapon. So we can technically ban bullets too.

1) DC v. Heller (as applied through incorporation due to McDonald v. Chicago) disagrees. 'Arms', at the very least applies to handguns quite specifically. I also recall a court case wherein arms is defined as being weapons in common usage but perhaps I am misremembering that so allow me to search for it here.

2) A ban on ammunition would be a de facto infringement of the second amendment. Laws which themselves may be constitutional but infringe on the rights contained in the Constitution are unconstitutional.

[Death Metal]

Not to mention that, again "bear arms" doesn't mean you get guns. It means you get weapons. So as long as you can keep a weapon of any kind, all guns can be banned and the letter of the Amendment remains intact.

Not that such a measure will ever be adopted, nor will any save an extreme fringe minority ever even propose such a matter.

Also: Now that I think about it, it says you are allowed the weapons, but says nothing about ammunition of said weapon. So we can technically ban bullets too.

1) DC v. Heller (as applied through incorporation due to McDonald v. Chicago) disagrees.

True, BUT that doesn't mean it can't be later overturned by a future Supreme Court, which has happened before. Again, extremely unlikely, but not impossible.

Also to your second point, you don't necessarily need ammunition to use a gun as a weapon. In fact I think some gun models are designed specifically to allow for the old buttstroke without causing a jam. Plus, you know, bayonets.

[Idaho Conservatives]

1) DC v. Heller (as applied through incorporation due to McDonald v. Chicago) disagrees.

True, BUT that doesn't mean it can't be later overturned by a future Supreme Court, which has happened before. Again, extremely unlikely, but not impossible.

Also to your second point, you don't necessarily need ammunition to use a gun as a weapon. In fact I think some gun models are designed specifically to allow for the old buttstroke without causing a jam. Plus, you know, bayonets.

If you are using a rifle just for the bayonet, you're doing it wrong.

[Dyakovo]

Them being "rude" has nothing to do with them proving you wrong.

It has everything to do with whether not I'll be reading their posts. Don't like, then don't be rude.

Or we'll just continue mocking you for declaring people to be rude because they disagree with you and have proven you wrong.

[Isolated China]

True, BUT that doesn't mean it can't be later overturned by a future Supreme Court, which has happened before. Again, extremely unlikely, but not impossible.

Also to your second point, you don't necessarily need ammunition to use a gun as a weapon. In fact I think some gun models are designed specifically to allow for the old buttstroke without causing a jam. Plus, you know, bayonets.

If you are using a rifle just for the bayonet, you're doing it wrong.

Unless your too poor to afford ammo. Though then that would come into the question of how you got the gun in the first place...

[Dyakovo]

Or, you know, I could bring up the actual 2nd Amendment and some annotations on it. Now, if we're going by literal definitions here, it says:

A well regulated militia. Meaning not owning more firepower than your average third-world nation. Now, anything else about my apparent low reading comprehension and my 'state of denial' or are you going to address this?

Not to mention that, again "bear arms" doesn't mean you get guns.

You've been wrong every other time you've claimed this, repeating it doesn't change that one iota.

[Death Metal]

True, BUT that doesn't mean it can't be later overturned by a future Supreme Court, which has happened before. Again, extremely unlikely, but not impossible.

Also to your second point, you don't necessarily need ammunition to use a gun as a weapon. In fact I think some gun models are designed specifically to allow for the old buttstroke without causing a jam. Plus, you know, bayonets.

If you are using a rifle just for the bayonet, you're doing it wrong.

Agreed, but my point is you can have one and it would still function as a weapon without bullets.

I believe there's a European country which allows ownership of weapons but ammunition is limited to firing range rounds, though I can't remember which one right now.

Further in times when a militia is necessary, ordinance could be supplied to you.

Again, not advocating any of these measures as something that should actually be passed. Just pointing out that limiting the sale of bullets does not render a firearm truly impotent.

[Security K]

Lol

Sherman's March wasn't funny.

Unless your idea of funny is burning cities and killing rebels.

You mean those rebels who where fighting to maintain slaver and devaluation of an entire race? Be careful who you stick up for.

Torching cities is still bad, but I would watch which rebels you stick up for.

[Vistulange]

This thread is so silent with Yandere gone...

[Chernoslavia]

Or, you know, I could bring up the actual 2nd Amendment and some annotations on it. Now, if we're going by literal definitions here, it says:

A well regulated militia. Meaning not owning more firepower than your average third-world nation. Now, anything else about my apparent low reading comprehension and my 'state of denial' or are you going to address this?

Not to mention that, again "bear arms" doesn't mean you get guns. It means you get weapons. So as long as you can keep a weapon of any kind, all guns can be banned and the letter of the Amendment remains intact.

Not that such a measure will ever be adopted, nor will any save an extreme fringe minority ever even propose such a matter.

Also: Now that I think about it, it says you are allowed the weapons, but says nothing about ammunition of said weapon. So we can technically ban bullets too.

Thats like saying ''freedom of speech'' means to speak what you like orally, but writing your thoughts on paper could be banned.

[Chernoslavia]

Not at all. I do have the right to own a cannon or an F-16.

No, you really don't.

Yes, he really does....provided he isnt a felon.

[Neo Art]

No, you really don't.

Yes, he really does....provided he isnt a felon.

Are you seriously trying to argue that a non felon has the right to own a Fighting Falcon? Come the fuck on.

[Neo Art]

This thread is so silent with Yandere gone...

and thus begins the inoxerable march to eventual flameout. Will it be a slow and prolongued burn like YGO, a feiry tempest like Pathenon, or a brilliant and sudden flash like Objectiveland? Some burn slow, some burn fast, but in the end, they all burn.

It's only a matter of time.

[Bug Out]

Yes, he really does....provided he isnt a felon.

Are you seriously trying to argue that a non felon has the right to own a Fighting Falcon? Come the fuck on.

As the second was written, yes.

[Neo Art]

Are you seriously trying to argue that a non felon has the right to own a Fighting Falcon? Come the fuck on.

As the second was written, yes.

What complete fucking bullshit.