Page 4 of 34 First 1234567814 ... Last
  1. #31
    DCS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,544
    Style
    Jits
    5
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Kravbizarre View Post
    That snopes article was ****. Didnt have alot and said the antifa connection was false but i didnt see any sources proving this (it may be who knows). It also mentions it could be an attack on a person(s) he had issue with or family member.
    As Submessenger already pointed, the proof of this fucktard being connected to antifa is a Fb post by Baxter Dimtry, a well known fake news and conspiracy nutjob so the probability of this alleged antifa connection not being more than a clickbaiting fabrication is very high.

  2. #32
    Nutcracker, sweet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    KAUS
    Posts
    5,042
    Style
    BJJ
    2
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Kravbizarre View Post
    That snopes article was ****. Didnt have alot and said the antifa connection was false but i didnt see any sources proving this (it may be who knows). It also mentions it could be an attack on a person(s) he had issue with or family member.

    I dont buy that, if i have an issue with somone and want to kill them. I will go directly to them, i wont dress in black and gear up for war then murder 26 people in hope that the person i dont like is one of them.
    Pretty remarkable for something that happened the same day. Remember, when Snopes woke up, yesterday, this hadn't even happened, yet.

  3. #33
    DCS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,544
    Style
    Jits
    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Bneterasedmynam View Post
    Which regulations do you think would have prevented this??
    Firing squad instead of dishonourable discharge.
    Last edited by DCS; 11/06/2017 10:14am at .

  4. #34
    Winning is so much better with sore losers Join us... or die
    1bad65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Wilco, TX
    Posts
    3,297
    Style
    boxing, gjj
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Tzadok View Post
    Stop displaying gross ignorance and educate yourself.
    No you didn't, you quoted part out of context of the whole. Once again demonstrating ignorance of the English language in general. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/verbatim
    I did.
    We never discussed the difference between Fundamental rights and an enumerated rights, so don't go saying I don't know the difference between them.

    If you want to be an asshole and insult me for kicks, I'm not interested. If you want to discuss this as adults, I'm game.

    Ball's in your court.

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Tzadok View Post
    No. It is the repeated findings of the USSC, which make it part of the US Constitution, and no the language isn't crystal clear.
    It's not repeated, it's actually varying depending on the make up of the Court at the time of the decisions.

    And the Court has gotten a few wrong, unless you think that blacks can be property, that the Federal Gov't can ban alcohol, and the FDR Administration could lock up without trial or even charges American citizens of Japanese descent.

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Tzadok View Post
    You don't get a more obtuse text than that, as it is not crystal clear as to whether it is discussing individual rights or those of state militia members.

    There are several versions of the text of the Second Amendment, each with capitalization or punctuation differences. Differences exist between the drafted and ratified copies, the signed copies on display, and various published transcriptions. The importance (or lack thereof) of these differences has been the source of debate regarding the meaning and interpretation of the amendment, particularly regarding the importance of the prefatory clause. One version was passed by the Congress, and a slightly different version was ratified by the States. So definitely not crystal clear.
    Again, this depends on your beliefs.

    Liberals and statists interpret it to fit their wants. While anyone not one of those who has read the writings of the Founders knows the 2nd Amendment applies to the rights of "the people".
    A succubus is a Lilin-demon in female form, or supernatural entity in folklore that appears in dreams and takes the form of a woman in order to seduce men, usually through sexual activity. Religious traditions hold that repeated sexual activity with a succubus may result in the deterioration of health or mental state, or even in death.

  5. #35
    Winning is so much better with sore losers Join us... or die
    1bad65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Wilco, TX
    Posts
    3,297
    Style
    boxing, gjj
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by submessenger View Post
    To be fair, nothing in your cited definitions specifies that verbatim equals completeness. Context is a whole different argument, which you've correctly pointed out is an ongoing debate.
    He typically resorts to insulting me when he can't come up with an effective rebuttal.

    It's how he rolls.
    A succubus is a Lilin-demon in female form, or supernatural entity in folklore that appears in dreams and takes the form of a woman in order to seduce men, usually through sexual activity. Religious traditions hold that repeated sexual activity with a succubus may result in the deterioration of health or mental state, or even in death.

  6. #36
    Nutcracker, sweet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    KAUS
    Posts
    5,042
    Style
    BJJ
    6
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Pretty much everything you need to know are in these three articles:
    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/devin-p...church-latest/
    https://patch.com/texas/sanantonio/t...-governor-says
    http://nypost.com/2017/11/06/sharpsh...church-gunman/

    Basics: he was USAF, got punted with a Big Chicken Dinner and a year of jail for beating his wife and child. Wife (now ex) and her parents are parishioners of the church that he shot up. He was denied weapons carry and purchase, he got his AR by lying at point of sale. Plumber that shot him caused the fatal wound, dude bled out as he crashed.

  7. #37
    Winning is so much better with sore losers Join us... or die
    1bad65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Wilco, TX
    Posts
    3,297
    Style
    boxing, gjj
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by submessenger View Post
    There's confusion as to how he died - I've heard he bled out from shots sustained before the chase, that he suffered trauma because of the wreck, and that he was shot after crashing: two versions, there, one was the Samaritans did it, the other is LEO did it. Good riddance in any case, I just hope it wasn't a summary execution by LEO.
    CNN is saying the shooter was shot by the Good Samaritan, but that wasn't fatal and he later shot and killed himself.

    Source:
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/05/US/tex...fSrc=permalink

    EDIT:
    I posted before I saw your latest post on this.
    A succubus is a Lilin-demon in female form, or supernatural entity in folklore that appears in dreams and takes the form of a woman in order to seduce men, usually through sexual activity. Religious traditions hold that repeated sexual activity with a succubus may result in the deterioration of health or mental state, or even in death.

  8. #38
    Michael Tzadok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Jerusalem
    Posts
    1,333
    Style
    Pramek/Sambo/BJJ
    3
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by submessenger View Post
    I do, also, take issue with this language.

    Inalienable rights were not enumerated. Some of them were listed - "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Realize that Declaration is considered fundamental law, and is incorporated at the very beginning of USC (http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?p...dence&edition=).

    Enumerated rights are fundamental rights that were so important, that the Founders decided soon after the Constitutional Convention that they needed to be explicitly listed. And, then they threw in the 9th Amendment and 10th, to make sure it was understood that there were many other rights that they couldn't get to, because there would be an ink shortage. The 14th later also attempted to deal with this concept.
    I was about to write how you are essentially wrong here, on account of a number of USSC decisions. As it turns out, the USSC ruled in McDonald Vs City of Chicago that the 2nd Amendment is indeed a fundamental and individual right. TL:DR, you are right I was wrong.

    The 2nd Amendment being a fundamental individual right however, does not make it immune to restriction or regulation so long as said restriction serves a compelling purpose. Every other right that we have under the US Constitution is subject to limitation for the public good, there is no reason that 2nd amendment rights should be any different, especially giving the escalating number of incidents where regulation could possibly have prevented blood shed.

    I would argue that licensing which would require at least minimal training, and demonstration of competency, as well as certain regulation like requiring gun safes, and firearms to be stored in said safes, with prosecution for those who failure in said matters leads to incidents would go a long way to preventing firearm deaths in the US, as well as clearly delineating between law abiding citizens and criminals. For instance in 2015 10,265 people died in impaired driving incidents, yet you don't see anyone calling for the banning of either alcohol or automobiles. Reason, this is clearly delineated criminal behavior that lead to these incidents.
    You do not have anything like that with fire arms. In fact there are no circumstances under which a person can be deprived of the firearms that they currently own. Take this shooter. He would have failed a background check for the purchase of a new firearm because of his criminal record, however, since he already owned the firearms with which he committed his crime, there is nothing to be done. These issues need to be addressed. Just like a person's ability to own and drive a vehicle can be taken away with due process of law, their ability to own and bear arms should be no different(again provided there is due process of law and right of appeal).
    Don't rely on theory if your life is at stake.

  9. #39
    Michael Tzadok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Jerusalem
    Posts
    1,333
    Style
    Pramek/Sambo/BJJ
    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by 1bad65 View Post
    We never discussed the difference between Fundamental rights and an enumerated rights, so don't go saying I don't know the difference between them.

    If you want to be an asshole and insult me for kicks, I'm not interested. If you want to discuss this as adults, I'm game.

    Ball's in your court.
    Act like an adult and I'll treat you like an adult. Until then I give as good as I get.



    Quote Originally Posted by 1bad65 View Post
    It's not repeated, it's actually varying depending on the make up of the Court at the time of the decisions.

    And the Court has gotten a few wrong, unless you think that blacks can be property, that the Federal Gov't can ban alcohol, and the FDR Administration could lock up without trial or even charges American citizens of Japanese descent.
    Demonstrating ignorance of US Constitutional law.
    Dred Scott. Sure in historical hindsight we can say that the USSC got that one wrong. However, that doesn't remove it from the realm of precedent and binding Constitutional law. A Civil War later and Constitutional Amendment later that decision was set aside.
    The 14th Amendment made the Bill of Rights and all Constitutional rights incumbent upon the States not just the Federal government. The Slaughterhouse decisions gutted the 14th Amendment and it has taken a series of USSC cases for various rights to be made binding upon the States.
    The ban on Alcohol was an Amendment not a USSC decision genius.
    Internment of Japanese Americans wasn't ruled upon by the USSC either.



    Quote Originally Posted by 1bad65 View Post
    Again, this depends on your beliefs.

    Liberals and statists interpret it to fit their wants. While anyone not one of those who has read the writings of the Founders knows the 2nd Amendment applies to the rights of "the people".
    Logical Fallacy: Black and White.
    Don't rely on theory if your life is at stake.

  10. #40
    PDA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,537
    Style
    Underground Pit Fighting
    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    The issue I see with the arguments for and against US gun control from across the pond is simply timing.

    You are both right but the timing is wrong.

    If your recent electoral candidates taught us anything is that there are still major problems with the way your commander and chief is selected and thus until that is corrected reducing the possibility of a tyrannical leader greatly to a point of near impossibility there will still be a vast number of people who will want to leave things as they are regardless of these incidents.

    An increased faith in the political system will in my opinion reduce those who wish to protect the 2nd amendment in its original form without additional regulation as MT describes to a small minority but that is going to take sometime given that it hasnt yet started.
    King without a crown

Page 4 of 34 First 1234567814 ... Last

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in