Obama Administration's War Against The Second Amendment...Continued...

My argument is that there is no Appeal to Ignorance of our own laws as a privilege and immunity for any Person in our republic.

Only our federal Congress is delegated the (Social) Power to write words on formerly blank pieces of paper and have them enacted as laws in our republic.

 

Appeal to this: you are wrong.

The Bill of Rights is not blank.

 

So you have no argument. Got it.

- - - Updated - - -

This isn't an argument. It's incoherent babbling and blatant trolling.

 

No actual argument means you are Only appealing to ignorance.

I already stated there is no Appeal to Ignorance of our own laws.

- - - Updated - - -

simply appealing to ignorance is like trolling.

- - - Updated - - -

There are no Terms in our Second Amendment that denote Individuals. The terms Militia and the People are Collective, not Individual. Thus no rights are established for Individuals.

There is no appeal to ignorance of our own laws.

 

I know. You're like a parrot, repeating things over and over.

[video=youtube;_290em4KkHA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_290em4KkHA[/video]

 

still nothing but ad hominems and other fallacies?

Our Civil War is a Precedent regarding a Body politic being more necessary to the security of free States of the Union, than of Individuals of the Confederacy, when called out to execute the laws of the Union. The Individual right to keep and bear Arms was Infringed, for the South during their Insurrection. Our Second Amendment is clear on that.

 

Only gun lovers claim to believe even criminals and insurrectionists of the People may not be Infringed by well regulated Militias of the United States due to our Second Amendment.

 

There are no Individual rights conferred by our Second Amendment since no Individual terms are used; Militia and the People are Collective, not Individual.

Only our federal Congress can write words on formerly blank pieces of paper and have them enacted as laws in our republic.

 

I can't hardly wait for the next SCOTUS decision, it'll make him toss the ramp in the water.......

 

2 Supreme Court rulings, heller and McDonald, both refute your argument.

- - - Updated - - -

Nobody claims this.

- - - Updated - - -

Nope. Heller and McDonald refute this argument.

 

No, they don't. Our Ninth and Tenth Amendment apply. Our Second Amendment is in writing and the Judicature is not delegated the (Social) Power to change the words or their meaning.

 

They undeniably do. That's why the bans are non existent now.

.
They are as relevant as The Lord of the rings trilogy.

Which is why they didn't. It's in plain English.

 

Our supreme law of the land is always relevant. >>>MOD EDIT Off Topic Removed<<<

 

The 9th and 10h amendment are in no way relevant.

 

Sure they are. They open the door to questioning even the Judicature.

For example, your Honors; where did you find an Individual right when Only collective Terms are expressly declared in our supreme law of the land?

The terms, Militia and the People are collective and not Individual.

 

That's not constructive, friend. If I am your "enemy", then you must have many. This is sad. If it's any consolation to you, then you should know that I bear you no ill will and consider you a potentially useful member of our great society. We just need to get you to accept a little less hate and a little more reason.

No, once again you are mistaken. None of our rights are absolute and are tempered by the rights of our fellow citizens. Hence there are restrictions on free speech when it harms others and we have limitations on our 2nd Amendment rights too. I would refer you to page 54 of "Heller vs District Of Columbia" http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf to fully inform yourself on this.

Casting imagined aspersions on me won't help your argument, friend. The important thing is that you have admitted your error as to gun restrictions, but I AM still troubled, however by your continued inability to advance your flawed position on an imagined loss of liberties. I have given you repeated opportunities and yet all you have offered in response are weak fallacious distractions such as your last "Argument by Dismissal" fallacy. Pity.

Sort of an Authoritarian stance, no? I thought this was an inclusive forum for all to participate.

I welcome all viewpoints, friend.......... Even yours.

 

Then, can I assume that you also accept from those Opinions that the 2nd Amendment right is a limited right? You're not afraid to take the good with the bad, right?

 

All rights are limited. I've never suggests otherwise.

 

Good. There are many here who would not agree with you on that, yet you are perfectly correct.

 

Fine, you freedom haters, I'll take my God given right to self defense any way I see fit...like with a gun.

 

I don't have any problem with that since natural rights are recognized in State Constitutions:

 

I'm still waiting for proof that Obama has taken away any guns in his so called "war" on the 2d Amendment.

Proof, please ???

 

Let me ask you something, If Obama had a majority in both chambers, would he attempt to take away guns of any kind?

 

He had the majority for a short while though some of those Democrats were actually DINOcrats. Several of them lost their jobs in the next election because they did not support him. But none of Obama's early initiatives were to amend or delete the 2d Amendment as so many delusionals of the far right would have you believe.

While I have supported several of President Obama's initiatives, I remain a strong 2d Amendment right advocate and would be the first one to condemn any move on the part of ANYONE who dared to try to take away those rights.