It is currently Tue Nov 26, 2024 1:39 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 144 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Hatchetman wrote:
if Walt is so tough why does he need uncle sam to protect him?

Excellent question!

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
Darkside wrote:
Is there one person in the United States (that is not legally insane) that thinks the 2nd Amendment would make it ok to own nuclear weapons? What a silly ass question.


There are people who say "knives kill people! Let's ban knives!"... so its really not a silly question at all. Given the line of thinking of a lot of gun advocates, it's actually the next natural question.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:14 pm 
Darkside wrote:
Is there one person in the United States (that is not legally insane) that thinks the 2nd Amendment would make it ok to own nuclear weapons? What a silly ass question.

Wayne Lapierre. Next question.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 65770
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
leashyourkids wrote:
Darkside wrote:
Is there one person in the United States (that is not legally insane) that thinks the 2nd Amendment would make it ok to own nuclear weapons? What a silly ass question.


There are people who say "knives kill people! Let's ban knives!"... so its really not a silly question at all. Given the line of thinking of a lot of gun advocates, it's actually the next natural question.

No. I'm sticking with silly. I think that makes a lot more sense.

The ban knives point is supposed to be silly.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 65770
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
Baby McNown wrote:
Darkside wrote:
Is there one person in the United States (that is not legally insane) that thinks the 2nd Amendment would make it ok to own nuclear weapons? What a silly ass question.

Wayne Lapierre. Next question.

Were you trying to be funny?

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92083
Location: To the left of my post
leashyourkids wrote:
Darkside wrote:
Is there one person in the United States (that is not legally insane) that thinks the 2nd Amendment would make it ok to own nuclear weapons? What a silly ass question.


There are people who say "knives kill people! Let's ban knives!"... so its really not a silly question at all. Given the line of thinking of a lot of gun advocates, it's actually the next natural question.
The answer for the nuke is really easy though. It is impossible to protect yourself with a nuke since it will kill you too, and if you happen to be far enough away that it wouldn't, then you wouldn't need the nuke in the first place. Having a gun to protect yourself is key to most rational gun rights supporters. Hunting also factors in, but hunting with a nuke would be hard too.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:43 pm
Posts: 18493
Location: end of lonely street
pizza_Place: Obbies
FavreFan wrote:
Hatchetman wrote:
if Walt is so tough why does he need uncle sam to protect him?

Excellent question!

what the fuck is that

_________________
I'm going to bounce from the spot for awhile but I will be back at some point to argue with you about this hoops stuff again. Playoffs have been great this season. See ya up the road.

I'm out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
So the next time someone says "ban knives!", an anti-gun person can say "legalize a-bombs!" and no one will raise an eye brow, right?

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 65770
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
leashyourkids wrote:
So the next time someone says "ban knives!", an anti-gun person can say "legalize a-bombs!" and no one will raise an eye brow, right?

not sure if serious

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40650
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
People really do not understand discussions when it comes to the bill of rights. Of course you should not have WMD's per the 2nd amendment. But certainly those that defend that amendment with all of their being aren't really any different than the first amendment zealots. People get torked off when the ACLU defends some Nazi/KKK asshole for using his right. It just is different because generally that right does not usually come up in the news with a school getting lit up by an AK-47.

You cannot pick and choose or shave edges off of rights no matter what. Unless of course you make a new amendment. Lots of luck with that.

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
Darkside wrote:
Is there one person in the United States (that is not legally insane) that thinks the 2nd Amendment would make it ok to own nuclear weapons? What a silly ass question.


There are people who say "knives kill people! Let's ban knives!"... so its really not a silly question at all. Given the line of thinking of a lot of gun advocates, it's actually the next natural question.
The answer for the nuke is really easy though. It is impossible to protect yourself with a nuke since it will kill you too, and if you happen to be far enough away that it wouldn't, then you wouldn't need the nuke in the first place. Having a gun to protect yourself is key to most rational gun rights supporters. Hunting also factors in, but hunting with a nuke would be hard too.


Fair enough. But my next question is where does the Constitution define an arm as something to defend yourself? I know there is a common law definition of arms... Just asking the question...

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
pittmike wrote:
People really do not understand discussions when it comes to the bill of rights. Of course you should not have WMD's per the 2nd amendment. But certainly those that defend that amendment with all of their being aren't really any different than the first amendment zealots. People get torked off when the ACLU defends some Nazi/KKK asshole for using his right. It just is different because generally that right does not usually come up in the news with a school getting lit up by an AK-47.

You cannot pick and choose or shave edges off of rights no matter what. Unless of course you make a new amendment. Lots of luck with that.


I agree. Where do we define arms?

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 65770
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
leashyourkids wrote:
Fair enough. But my next question is where does the Constitution define an arm as something to defend yourself? I know there is a common law definition of arms... Just asking the question...

I believe interpretation is reserved for the Supreme Court, and they've made a few rulings which clarify your question.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:03 pm
Posts: 43572
The only thing that will stop a bad guy with a nuke is a good guy with a nuke.

_________________
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
I am not a legal expert, how many times do I have to say it?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
Darkside wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
So the next time someone says "ban knives!", an anti-gun person can say "legalize a-bombs!" and no one will raise an eye brow, right?

not sure if serious


I am. It's the exact same logic.

You and I have had this discussion many times before.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:33 pm
Posts: 19045
pizza_Place: World Famous Pizza
leashyourkids wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
Darkside wrote:
Is there one person in the United States (that is not legally insane) that thinks the 2nd Amendment would make it ok to own nuclear weapons? What a silly ass question.


There are people who say "knives kill people! Let's ban knives!"... so its really not a silly question at all. Given the line of thinking of a lot of gun advocates, it's actually the next natural question.
The answer for the nuke is really easy though. It is impossible to protect yourself with a nuke since it will kill you too, and if you happen to be far enough away that it wouldn't, then you wouldn't need the nuke in the first place. Having a gun to protect yourself is key to most rational gun rights supporters. Hunting also factors in, but hunting with a nuke would be hard too.


Fair enough. But my next question is where does the Constitution define an arm as something to defend yourself? I know there is a common law definition of arms... Just asking the question...


The Supreme Court essentially defined "arm" in US. v. Miller:

"In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense.

The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. 'A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.' And further, that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.""

_________________
Seacrest wrote:
The menstrual cycle changes among Hassidic Jewish women was something as well.


Last edited by SpiralStairs on Tue May 27, 2014 8:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 65770
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
leashyourkids wrote:
Darkside wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
So the next time someone says "ban knives!", an anti-gun person can say "legalize a-bombs!" and no one will raise an eye brow, right?

not sure if serious


I am. It's the exact same logic.

You and I have had this discussion many times before.

Ok.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40650
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
leashyourkids wrote:
pittmike wrote:
People really do not understand discussions when it comes to the bill of rights. Of course you should not have WMD's per the 2nd amendment. But certainly those that defend that amendment with all of their being aren't really any different than the first amendment zealots. People get torked off when the ACLU defends some Nazi/KKK asshole for using his right. It just is different because generally that right does not usually come up in the news with a school getting lit up by an AK-47.

You cannot pick and choose or shave edges off of rights no matter what. Unless of course you make a new amendment. Lots of luck with that.


I agree. Where do we define arms?



Guns in general. Fully automatic is a canard. When I was in the Army actually they came out with the M-16 A2. It was not fully auto. The auto part was limited to 3 shots per trigger pull. The idea being that after three your naturally physical tendencies took you off target and wasted ammo.

So aside from the news calling scary looking weapons assault weapons it makes no sense. As for true fully automatic killing machines like a M-60 or 50 Cal there is no need to have it and can be regulated very easily I assume. I generally never saw on the news a Rambo M-60 incident.

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:27 pm 
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
Darkside wrote:
Is there one person in the United States (that is not legally insane) that thinks the 2nd Amendment would make it ok to own nuclear weapons? What a silly ass question.


There are people who say "knives kill people! Let's ban knives!"... so its really not a silly question at all. Given the line of thinking of a lot of gun advocates, it's actually the next natural question.
The answer for the nuke is really easy though. It is impossible to protect yourself with a nuke since it will kill you too, and if you happen to be far enough away that it wouldn't, then you wouldn't need the nuke in the first place. Having a gun to protect yourself is key to most rational gun rights supporters. Hunting also factors in, but hunting with a nuke would be hard too.

Where does the second amendment say anything about self defense?


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
Thanks spiral. I wasn't aware.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92083
Location: To the left of my post
Baby McNown wrote:
Where does the second amendment say anything about self defense?
In my opinion, it's the very reason the amendment exists. The whole concept of a militia is about self defense.

Anyways, if you want to get completely literal with what it says, then all guns with military effectiveness should be legal. However, that isn't what I think it should be.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:30 pm 
Darkside wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Darkside wrote:
Is there one person in the United States (that is not legally insane) that thinks the 2nd Amendment would make it ok to own nuclear weapons? What a silly ass question.

Wayne Lapierre. Next question.

Were you trying to be funny?

I don't think Mr. Lapierre would find it funny.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:31 pm 
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
Where does the second amendment say anything about self defense?
In my opinion, it's the very reason the amendment exists. The whole concept of a militia is about self defense.

Anyways, if you want to get completely literal with what it says, then all guns with military effectiveness should be legal. However, that isn't what I think it should be.

I agree with you. As long as you are part of the miltia.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 65770
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
Baby McNown wrote:
I don't think Mr. Lapierre would find it funny.

All right. Thanks.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92083
Location: To the left of my post
Baby McNown wrote:
I agree with you. As long as you are part of the miltia.
Every male over 18 is in the de facto reserves of the military, and because of Jezebel, probably all females.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:35 pm 
And as we're talking about the second amendment, it also expressly says "well regulated". So when you become part of the milita, the government then gets to regulate your arms.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Leash - why do you think people should be allowed to own guns? You've said consistently that they shouldn't be banned, but I only ever hear anti-gun arguments from you.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92083
Location: To the left of my post
Baby McNown wrote:
And as we're talking about the second amendment, it also expressly says "well regulated". So when you become part of the milita, the government then gets to regulate your arms.
That isn't what regulated means.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:37 pm 
So when is your draft date? And I assume you will be using your own weapon when you get shipped to the Middle East, so we can cut all defense spending for guns.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Joe Da Plumber
PostPosted: Tue May 27, 2014 8:38 pm 
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Baby McNown wrote:
And as we're talking about the second amendment, it also expressly says "well regulated". So when you become part of the milita, the government then gets to regulate your arms.
That isn't what regulated means.

:lol: Ok. Mr. Lapierre. I'll take your word over Thomas Jefferson.


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 144 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 40 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group