Australian Politics Forum

Panther Gold Member Offline My Heart beats True for the Red White & Blue... Posts: 11854 Gender:	Disarming USA....The Left's Impossible Dream! Reply #870 - Sep 30^th, 2015 at 7:40pm I only quote the relevant part, the operative clause, which is the relevant part relating directly to the individual right to keep & bear arms.....don't like that....tough....there's nothing you can do about it....so, until you get over it...suck it up princess.
Back to top	"When the People fear government there is Tyranny; When government fears the People there is Freedom & Liberty!" ' Live FREE or DIE! ' IP Logged

Panther Gold Member Offline My Heart beats True for the Red White & Blue... Posts: 11854 Gender:	Re: Disarming USA Reply #871 - Sep 30^th, 2015 at 7:41pm .
Back to top	"When the People fear government there is Tyranny; When government fears the People there is Freedom & Liberty!" ' Live FREE or DIE! ' IP Logged

Secret Wars

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3928
Gender: male

Re: Disarming USA
Reply #872 - Sep 30^th, 2015 at 7:53pm

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 30^th, 2015 at 7:27pm:

Why don't you quote the whole 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution, DreamRyderX? Does it embarrass you? Roll Eyes

It is perfectly congruent with the individual right. In medieval times a Lord and his Knights would draft his serfs with their weapons, axes and scythes as soldiers, in Colonial times of the revolution, the landed gentry would raise from among their communities soldiers who would bring along individual weapons.

In the wake of a just won revolutionary war against that eras superpower and without the ability to support a substantial standing army, the framers of the constitution envisaged a people's militia to rise against any force that they did not wish to govern them.

That militia drawing on the people required that the people's right to bear arms should not be denied by any governmental direction by any government.

I am not excusing it, I am explaining the historical surroundings around that clause and one that I beleive has been supported by the supreme court in interpreting the constitution. It is not a requirement that you be in a militia to possess a weapon, but that a well regulated milita have access to a draft of armed men, in the same way that medieval lords and colonial landed did.

Back to top

IP Logged

Prime Minister for Canyons

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 26906
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Disarming USA....The Left's Impossible Dream!
Reply #873 - Sep 30^th, 2015 at 10:02pm

Panther wrote on Sep 30^th, 2015 at 7:40pm:

I only quote the relevant part, the operative clause, which is the relevant part relating directly to the individual right to keep & bear arms.....don't like that....tough....there's nothing you can do about it....so, until you get over it...suck it up princess. Tongue

http://imgur.com/LSTvoRr.png

Doesnt it talk about a militia too?

Back to top

In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy)

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Offline

Representative of me

Posts: 46255

Re: Disarming USA
Reply #874 - Sep 30^th, 2015 at 10:09pm

Except by leaving half of the statement out, he has refused to accept the qualifier. The full statement is:

Quote:

"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."

Until 2008, the US Supreme Court took that to mean that you needed to be a member of a Militia, which they took to be the National Guard. The sole reason why the interpretation of the 2nd amendment changed was because of gun nut radicalism which had infected one of the judges.

In otherwords, in order to have a gun in the US, you needed to be in the Militia (National Guard). QED. Roll Eyes

Back to top

It seems that I have upset a Moderator and are forbidden from using posting to the general forum now. So much for Freedom of Speech. Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Secret Wars

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3928
Gender: male

Re: Disarming USA
Reply #875 - Sep 30^th, 2015 at 10:23pm

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 30^th, 2015 at 10:09pm:

Except by leaving half of the statement out, he has refused to accept the qualifier. The full statement is:

Quote:

"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."

Until 2008, the US Supreme Court took that to mean that you needed to be a member of a Militia, which they took to be the National Guard. The sole reason why the interpretation of the 2nd amendment changed was because of gun nut radicalism which had infected one of the judges.

In otherwords, in order to have a gun in the US, you needed to be in the Militia (National Guard). QED. Roll Eyes

And a later Supreme Court bench has ruled that you don't need to be in a militia. QED. Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

Secret Wars

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3928
Gender: male

Re: Disarming USA
Reply #876 - Sep 30^th, 2015 at 10:26pm

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 30^th, 2015 at 10:09pm:

Except by leaving half of the statement out, he has refused to accept the qualifier. The full statement is:

Quote:

"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."

Until 2008, the US Supreme Court took that to mean that you needed to be a member of a Militia, which they took to be the National Guard. The sole reason why the interpretation of the 2nd amendment changed was because of gun nut radicalism which had infected one of the judges.

In otherwords, in order to have a gun in the US, you needed to be in the Militia (National Guard). QED. Roll Eyes

And further, prior to 2008 you did not need to be in the militia to own a gun. QED. Roll Eyes

.

Back to top

IP Logged

Prime Minister for Canyons

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 26906
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Disarming USA
Reply #877 - Sep 30^th, 2015 at 10:35pm

Secret Wars wrote on Sep 30^th, 2015 at 10:23pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 30^th, 2015 at 10:09pm:

Except by leaving half of the statement out, he has refused to accept the qualifier. The full statement is:

Quote:

"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."

Until 2008, the US Supreme Court took that to mean that you needed to be a member of a Militia, which they took to be the National Guard. The sole reason why the interpretation of the 2nd amendment changed was because of gun nut radicalism which had infected one of the judges.

In otherwords, in order to have a gun in the US, you needed to be in the Militia (National Guard). QED. Roll Eyes

And a later Supreme Court bench has ruled that you don't need to be in a militia. QED. Roll Eyes

I do love how they can interpret the constitution in different ways.

Back to top

In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy)

IP Logged

Panther

Gold Member

Offline

My Heart beats True for
the Red White & Blue...

Posts: 11854
Gender: male

Re: Disarming USA
Reply #878 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 7:25am

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Sep 30^th, 2015 at 10:35pm:

Secret Wars wrote on Sep 30^th, 2015 at 10:23pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 30^th, 2015 at 10:09pm:

Except by leaving half of the statement out, he has refused to accept the qualifier. The full statement is:

Quote:

"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."

Until 2008, the US Supreme Court took that to mean that you needed to be a member of a Militia, which they took to be the National Guard. The sole reason why the interpretation of the 2nd amendment changed was because of gun nut radicalism which had infected one of the judges.

In otherwords, in order to have a gun in the US, you needed to be in the Militia (National Guard). QED. Roll Eyes

And a later Supreme Court bench has ruled that you don't need to be in a militia. QED. Roll Eyes

I do love how they can interpret the constitution in different ways.

And don't ya love it when all is said & done, there isn't anywhere else to appeal.....the Supreme Court Findings & Judgments are final (unless another future Supreme Court can muster a majority finding otherwise).

The chances, even though possible, & it has been done before, the chances are slim to none...........the successful overturning of previous Supreme Court decisions/findings/judgments by a subsequent Supreme Court ... see here
..... Please Note: No Second Amendment Supreme Court Judgment has ever been overturned ... over 225 years ).

When The Supreme Court interprets the Constitution, that interpretation finding in their final judgment becomes the Law of the Land.....argue all you wish, the question is finished....done....over....precedent hinges on their findings & will be used in related future argument & judgments.

I strongly suggest you, if your are truly interested in knowing, I strongly suggest you investigate how The Supreme Court works........from how --- the procedures they follow --- on how they accept to hear an argument, how they set the hearing dates & such, how they individually & in group investigate the Original Intent of the Constitution & prior precedent, how they actually hear the arguments, & how they follow all the mechanisms in coming to a final judgment/finding/decision....etc....etc....etc.

When The Supreme Court comes to the decision to actually hear a case (they turn down over 90% of the requests) it's a very intensive, time consuming process thereafter, sometimes taking many court sessions.

If you wish, you can start HERE

And search HERE

Back to top

« Last Edit: Oct 1^st, 2015 at 8:00am by Panther »

"When the People fear government there is Tyranny;
When government fears the People there is Freedom & Liberty!"

'
Live FREE or DIE!
'

IP Logged

Prime Minister for Canyons Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 26906 Canberra Gender:	Re: Disarming USA Reply #879 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 9:36am Does anyone even bother appealing 2nd amendment cases? With the batshit crazy NRA its political suicide.
Back to top	In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act. No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy) IP Logged

Pho Huc

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 985
Victoria
Gender: male

Re: Disarming USA....The Left's Impossible Dream!
Reply #880 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 12:22pm

Panther wrote on Sep 30^th, 2015 at 7:21pm:

Woman Calls 911, Waits for Police, Then Takes Personal Responsibility For Her Own Defense.

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/02/woman-with-gun-AP-640x480.jpg

Source: BREITBART Quote:

On September 9 Breitbart News reported that a female Dayton, Ohio homeowner who had been targeted for crime multiple times called 911 to report an alleged invader, then shot and killed the suspect herself.

News reports have since revealed that the police response time for that 911 call was over an hour long.

For example, ABC 22 ran a story titled, “Why did it take over an hour to respond to a home invasion call?” In it, they report that the female homeowner called 911 only to be told “to keep an eye out for the officer and call them back if [she heard] anything else.”

An hour later the officer had not arrived, but the suspect had made it inside the home and was allegedly coming toward the woman, who shot and fatally wounded him........continued

If she hadn't provided for her own protection it would probably have been her in the lead obituary.

http://imgur.com/LSTvoRr.png

Good for her.
She shot someone. That's gotta be good right?
She's safe!
Can you please post the articles for the 22 people who got shot accidentally by family members, friends and children?
Otherwise people may think that you have a biased interpretation of this issue!

Rather than being used for self-defense, guns in the home are 22 times more likely to be involved in accidental shootings, homicides, or suicide
attempts. For every one time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were 4 unintentional shootings, 7 criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubm...
http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/nc...
http://peoplepress.org/reports/questionnaires/513.pd
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubm...
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr63/nvsr63_03.pdf
Page on nyagv.org

Back to top

The law locks up the man who steals the goose from the common, but leaves the greater criminal loose who steals the common from the goose (convict saying)

IP Logged

Panther

Gold Member

Offline

My Heart beats True for
the Red White & Blue...

Posts: 11854
Gender: male

Re: Disarming USA....The Left's Impossible Dream!
Reply #881 - Oct 1^st, 2015 at 2:58pm

Pho Huc wrote on Oct 1^st, 2015 at 12:22pm:

...... Can you please post the articles for the 22 people who got shot accidentally by family members, friends and children?......

....... Rather than being used for self-defense, guns in the home are 22 times more likely to be involved in accidental shootings, homicides, or suicide
attempts. For every one time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were 4 unintentional shootings, 7 criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.......

Freedom doesn't come free.

While accidents are unfortunate, & we all sincerely wish they didn't happen, it's a fact of life that they do & will happen.

Education & proper training might reduce firearm accidents, but they can never totally eliminate accidents.

The second statement, based on the published 1993 study by Dr. Arthur Kellermann of Emory University, has been contested, the methodology behind the data was found to be in error & misleading at best, & Dr. Kellermann himself suggested the reverse causation data probably provided false assumptions & conclusions (see below).

* Due to the unfortunate total character count restrictions on this BBS, I am posting the following quoted text as an image.

Quote:

Wink

Back to top

« Last Edit: Oct 1^st, 2015 at 5:25pm by Panther »

"When the People fear government there is Tyranny;
When government fears the People there is Freedom & Liberty!"

'
Live FREE or DIE!
'

IP Logged

Prime Minister for Canyons Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 26906 Canberra Gender:	Re: Disarming USA Reply #882 - Oct 2^nd, 2015 at 9:45am OH look another shooting in the States.
Back to top	In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act. No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy) IP Logged

Panther Gold Member Offline My Heart beats True for the Red White & Blue... Posts: 11854 Gender:	Disarming the USA? Fat Chance! Reply #883 - Oct 2^nd, 2015 at 12:12pm Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2015 at 9:45am: OH look another shooting in the States. Oh, another mental defective shot some people............ and your point is? Please don't tell me you think it's the naughty gun's fault....again...
Back to top	« Last Edit: Oct 2^nd, 2015 at 12:18pm by Panther » "When the People fear government there is Tyranny; When government fears the People there is Freedom & Liberty!" ' Live FREE or DIE! ' IP Logged

greggerypeccary Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 150627 Gender:	Re: Disarming USA Reply #884 - Oct 2^nd, 2015 at 12:15pm
Back to top	GOP = Guardians Of Paedophiles IP Logged