Everything is NOT negotiable

I've given you an example of how that's just not true.

I'm reading your article and will probably watch the movie. But, fairly well into the article, interesting though it may be, I don't yet see how it pertains.

 

No, You gave an opinion that just isn't true. You can't change ANYTHING in the constitution without the support of 2/3rds of the states.
You can't legislate what the constitution covers or legislate any law that is against it.
Thats the firmest form of law we have.

 

It pertains, because citizens took up arms against tyranny.

There is no realistic example that proves, or even suggests that I'm wrong.

 

clinton is old news. investigate away. lock ger up if a crime can be proved.

i didn't even vote for her.

if biden is guilty i expect the investigations to prove it as thoroughly as the 1/6 committee proved it on trump. right now all i see is an old laptop that anyone could have tampered with.

 

I'm not trying to argue that when our nation was formed the paradigm, for centuries, had been Citizen Militias that supplemented or, in fact were the "Army". But, those times are long past, we no longer defend ourselves with "militias". That we have "rouge" militias throughout the States does not equate to the Citizen Militias of Colonial times. I've seen some video's of what they do and by and large it's laughable, and worse yet it's very hard to determine if they want to uphold OUR Nation, or tear it down.

I realize that there are folks that are for confiscating firearms Carte Blanche, or by "type" or some other ambiguous way. I'm not one of them, nor are most people that want to legislatively address our "Active Shooter" problem.

HRC is THE most investigated American on the planet and President Biden's "ties to foreign countries" don't exist, if you have authoritative, contrary, information please link it.

 

Ahh! There we go. So much for holding the people you adore to the same standard.

Why not just admit that you hate Trump and that's really the only reason you want him drug across the coals

 

you got anything that would't be illegal (crt) in my state

 

I haven't seen anyone who wants to "legislatively address the active shooter problem" that doesn't want to ban guns. Have you?

The most effective way to address active shooters is to stop the shooter from shooting, either before he attacks, or while he's attacking. Hundreds of mass shootings are prevented, or stopped before they kill more people. Gun laws have stopped exactly zero.

 

regulate, now and in the 18th century has a clear implication of discipline, not logistics. if we are talking supplies, why would the militia (which certainly could include all able bodied men, but are the town drunk, the villiage idiot, and known criminals (like maybe "witches and adulterers) be considered "able bodied?") be providing their own weapons ?

 

asked and answered. i really hate people who tell me what i think. ignore list.

 

Yes, in a sense. He's suggesting alternatives.

The Americans at the Continental Congress were NOT suggesting they become an Independent Country. They wanted to keep on being an "Autonomous Region" which is what they had become. "Liberty" to them was pretty much what it is to us, the Rights of An Englishman, a free person but a loyal subject/citizen

 

Me.
The most effective way to address active shooters is to stop the shooter from shooting, either before he attacks, or while he's attacking. Hundreds of mass shootings are prevented, or stopped before they kill more people. Gun laws have stopped exactly zero.[/QUOTE]

I got well roasted in a thread where I dared to suggest that firearm's education from early youth "might" help, along with that I suggested funding preventative counseling and education on how to get it. I suggested addressing poverty and underemployment; all of which were lambasted or ignored. I know some mass shootings have been stopped in progress, I don't think "hundreds". I think you're being unfair saying "gun laws have stopped exactly zero"; I'm pretty sure that's false.

 

I got well roasted in a thread where I dared to suggest that firearm's education from early youth "might" help, along with that I suggested funding preventative counseling and education on how to get it. I suggested addressing poverty and underemployment; all of which were lambasted or ignored. I know some mass shootings have been stopped in progress, I don't think "hundreds". I think you're being unfair saying "gun laws have stopped exactly zero"; I'm pretty sure that's false.[/QUOTE]
Feel free to show us one mass shooting that was prevented by any gun law, Federal, state, or local.

 

I'm not telling you what you think. I'm reminding you of what you said.

 

Well of course you can't, specifically, prove the reason something that didn't happen. If you asked me to prove I don't have a stick of dynamite in my house ... I would have to tear the house down before the answer could be 100% definitive.

 

Yet, we can prove mass shootings didn't happen because an armed citizen prevented it. Obviously, your claim is incorrect.

 

I got well roasted in a thread where I dared to suggest that firearm's education from early youth "might" help, along with that I suggested funding preventative counseling and education on how to get it. I suggested addressing poverty and underemployment; all of which were lambasted or ignored. I know some mass shootings have been stopped in progress, I don't think "hundreds". I think you're being unfair saying "gun laws have stopped exactly zero"; I'm pretty sure that's false.[/QUOTE]

i'm ignoring the npc to whom you are replying for precisely this reason.

very few people want to (or consider practical) eliminate all guns. in fact, the current model tends towards "red flag"laws removing the means of obviously insane and antisocial persons to kill innocents, while ignoring the precious possessions of normal citizens.

 

No, not "obviously incorrect" ... obviously we need to be open minded enough to try things that have a logical chance of helping. Like education, like funding counseling and counseling awareness, like addressing systemic poverty, like reestablishing care for the mentally ill that has gone bye, bye over the last 40 years. All those thing will help society in general and "MAY" have the additional benefit of stopping mental illness before it manifests itself as a mass shooting.

 

Feel free to show us one mass shooting that was prevented by any gun law, Federal, state, or local.[/QUOTE]

Since they were stopped how would you know?

 

Since they were stopped how would you know?[/QUOTE]
We know when an armed citizen stops one.

 

We know when an armed citizen stops one.[/QUOTE]

Yep, after at least ONE person has been killed.

 

BUT! Armed citizen's don't keep them from happening, they stop them in progress; no doubt saving lives, but NOT stopping them.

While on the other hand laws that have been implemented "may" actually have, un-provably, stopped them before they ever occurred.

 

If you are saying that the Constitution should not be interpreted, then you are saying there is no such thing as a "right to privacy" because it is not explicitly in the US Constitution? This may also include executive orders, congressional districts, judicial review, US Air Force, the right to vote, the right to travel, and the list goes on. Link

However, the official justice website, it says, " As the final arbiter of the law, the Court is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law and, thereby, also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution." The US Constitution is not exactly written in precise language, not even the 2a. And if you read the Heller decision, even Scalia would disagree with you here.

 

That is not what it says. 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." That comma, between free state and the right of the people, is what is the whole argument is about. Like the First amendment for religion, where there are two clauses, the free establishment and the no offical religion is the same. Both must be equal. In the past, the militia was every man between the ages of 16 and 60. Your rifle was your weapon in the militia. It was good for hunting, but not combat if you lined up in formation as was the norm in the 18th and 19th centuries.

 

If you were correct, it wouldn't say "the right of the people".