I have access to firearms

[Exquisition]

and since he fancies himself such an intellectual of this Board

Ah, the squeals of the intellectual snob. I so get you now Eyer.

You just feel out of your depth...

 

[Ishmael]

Ah, the squeals of the intellectual snob. I so get you now Eyer.

You just feel out of your depth...

And of course you can give us the well reasoned thoughts as to why the populace at large should be disarmed, being sure to cite notable thinkers over the centuries.........right?

Ishmael

 

[Exquisition]

And of course you can give us the well reasoned thoughts as to why the populace at large should be disarmed, being sure to cite notable thinkers over the centuries.........right?

Ishmael

I'm sure eyer can take care of his own hard on Ishy, although nice of you to offer.

 

[Ishmael]

I'm sure eyer can take care of his own hard on Ishy, although nice of you to offer.

I didn't quote Eyer, I quoted you.

Ishmael

 

[Exquisition]

I didn't quote Eyer, I quoted you.

Ishmael

Never said you did.

 

[Byron In Exile]

Russian, Chinese, Brits, and Aussies are among that list. I'm waiting to see what happens in S. Africa after Mandella dies.

It's a sad state of affairs.

 

[Byron In Exile]

^^^^^^^^^post 223.

There are a few real rebels, there.

But they're hopelessly outnumbered.

Mostly they're just sheep.

 

[Byron In Exile]

Ah, the squeals of the intellectual snob. I so get you now Eyer.

You just feel out of your depth...

Eyer is sometimes out of his depth, but not on this subject.

Reset and try again.

 

[Exquisition]

Eyer is sometimes out of his depth, but not on this subject.

Reset and try again.

Less about the subject myore about the mentality of his words. I smell a theme.

 

[Ishmael]

Less about the subject myore about the mentality of his words. I smell a theme.

Get up and go wipe your ass.

Ishmael

 

[BotanyBoy]

I believe, you'll get your majority for that, if you pray every day for it.

Meanwhile....back in reality, America is setting record gun sales this week, there isn't an AR, AR lower receiver, AK or a single round of ammo for either to be had in the entire fucking country.

9mm, .45ACP, .308, .223/5.56mm ammo is ALL GONE, they literally cannot generate and stock the shelves fast enough.

Democrats saying ignorant ass shit, best gun salesmen of all fucking time.

 

[Exquisition]

Get up and go wipe your ass.

Ishmael

Ish, you're on my pet list.

Congratulations.

Here, have a

 

[islandman]

About the same as it was before, occluded. The inclusion of the 2nd amendment had nothing to do with 'game hunting.'

Ishmael

Exactly.

It's been 15 years, so I had to go back and google:

The earliest published commentary on the Second Amendment by a major constitutional theorist was by St. George Tucker. He annotated a five-volume edition of Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, a critical legal reference for early American attorneys published in 1803.[107]

In footnotes 40 and 41 of the Commentaries, Tucker stated that the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment was not subject to the restrictions that were part of English law: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Amendments to C. U. S. Art. 4, and this without any qualification as to their condition or degree, as is the case in the British government" and "whoever examines the forest, and game laws in the British code, will readily perceive that the right of keeping arms is effectually taken away from the people of England." Blackstone himself also commented on English game laws, Vol. II, p. 412, "that the prevention of popular insurrections and resistance to government by disarming the bulk of the people, is a reason oftener meant than avowed by the makers of the forest and game laws."[107]

Blackstone's Commentaries:
with Notes of Reference (1803)
St. George Tucker

 

[koalabear]

Meanwhile....back in reality, America is setting record gun sales this week, there isn't an AR, AR lower receiver, AK or a single round of ammo for either to be had in the entire fucking country.

9mm, .45ACP, .308, .223/5.56mm ammo is ALL GONE, they literally cannot generate and stock the shelves fast enough.

Democrats saying ignorant ass shit, best gun salesmen of all fucking time.

I just happen to have all the above in stock.

 

[Ishmael]

It's been 15 years, so I had to go back and google:

The earliest published commentary on the Second Amendment by a major constitutional theorist was by St. George Tucker. He annotated a five-volume edition of Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, a critical legal reference for early American attorneys published in 1803.[107]

In footnotes 40 and 41 of the Commentaries, Tucker stated that the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment was not subject to the restrictions that were part of English law: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Amendments to C. U. S. Art. 4, and this without any qualification as to their condition or degree, as is the case in the British government" and "whoever examines the forest, and game laws in the British code, will readily perceive that the right of keeping arms is effectually taken away from the people of England." Blackstone himself also commented on English game laws, Vol. II, p. 412, "that the prevention of popular insurrections and resistance to government by disarming the bulk of the people, is a reason oftener meant than avowed by the makers of the forest and game laws."[107]

Blackstone's Commentaries:
with Notes of Reference (1803)
St. George Tucker

So, this is all based on some rejected foreigners who, rather than believe what the colonial commentators of the time had to say, extrapolated what 'they really meant.' Marvelous Iman, utterly marvelous.

I never knew that the Battle of Lexington and Concord were fought over deer hunting.

Ishmael

 

[BotanyBoy]

I just happen to have all the above in stock.

I wasn't scrambling for a damn thing either....
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m20t0nLEPJ1qk0cveo1_500.jpg

 

[eyer]

It's been 15 years, so I had to go back and google:

The earliest published commentary on the Second Amendment by a major constitutional theorist was by St. George Tucker. He annotated a five-volume edition of Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, a critical legal reference for early American attorneys published in 1803.[107]

In footnotes 40 and 41 of the Commentaries, Tucker stated that the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment was not subject to the restrictions that were part of English law: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Amendments to C. U. S. Art. 4, and this without any qualification as to their condition or degree, as is the case in the British government" and "whoever examines the forest, and game laws in the British code, will readily perceive that the right of keeping arms is effectually taken away from the people of England." Blackstone himself also commented on English game laws, Vol. II, p. 412, "that the prevention of popular insurrections and resistance to government by disarming the bulk of the people, is a reason oftener meant than avowed by the makers of the forest and game laws."[107]

Blackstone's Commentaries:
with Notes of Reference (1803)
St. George Tucker

That won't even get your big toe to the first rung of the ladder you need...

...here, allow me to refocus your effort to climb out of the hole of your own making:

Actually, if I recall correctly, the Framers included the Second Amendment to reflect an opposition to game laws in England that precluded the everyday person from killing game in the forest, the sum of which was owned by the King.

So perhaps it's fair to say that the right to bear arms is "inherent" to Americans insofar as it is a reaction to King George III and his forest friends.

In your useless offering above, St. George Tucker does not even attempt to imply what you claim to "recall"...

...additionally, "the Framers" did not utter nor did they write a single word in relation to your recollection that they" included the Second Amendment to reflect an opposition to game laws in England that precluded the everyday person from killing game in the forest, the sum of which was owned by the King.as they championed the 2nd to ratification."

So...

...St. George didn't imply any basis for your ridiculous recollection, nor did the Framers.

What can you pull out of your azz next?

 

[islandman]

That won't even get your big toe to the first rung of the ladder you need...

...here, allow me to refocus your effort to climb out of the hole of your own making:



In your useless offering above, St. George Tucker does not even attempt to imply what you claim to "recall"...

...additionally, "the Framers" did not utter nor did they write a single word in relation to your recollection that they" included the Second Amendment to reflect an opposition to game laws in England that precluded the everyday person from killing game in the forest, the sum of which was owned by the King.as they championed the 2nd to ratification."

So...

...St. George didn't imply any basis for your ridiculous recollection, nor did the Framers.

What can you pull out of your azz next?

You've just learned about Tucker for the first time.

You're welcome.


My memory was faulty. It was he that offered - {EYER READ THIS}not the Framers{EYER STOP READING NOW] - that the 2nd was in part motivated by English game laws. I apologize for my faulty memory.

And, it's spelled 'ass'. You can't pretend to be intellectually superior if you spell it with two zees instead.

 

[islandman]

So, this is all based on some rejected foreigners who, rather than believe what the colonial commentators of the time had to say, extrapolated what 'they really meant.' Marvelous Iman, utterly marvelous.

I never knew that the Battle of Lexington and Concord were fought over deer hunting.

Ishmael

He was a contemporary of Madison's and was one of Virginia's "colonial commentators."

What else to you have?



ETA: also a signatory to the Declaration. Marvelous indeed, Ishmael.

 

[eyer]

My memory was faulty. It was he that offered - not the Framers - that the 2nd was in part motivated by English game laws. I apologize for my faulty memory.

Now that you've admitted your "faulty memory" is responsible...

...perhaps you can explain your way out of still blaming St. George for any involvement in this absurdly hapless offering:

Actually, if I recall correctly, the Framers included the Second Amendment to reflect an opposition to game laws in England that precluded the everyday person from killing game in the forest, the sum of which was owned by the King.

So perhaps it's fair to say that the right to bear arms is "inherent" to Americans insofar as it is a reaction to King George III and his forest friends.

 

[islandman]

Now that you've admitted your "faulty memory" is responsible...

...perhaps you can explain your way out of still blaming St. George for any involvement in this absurdly hapless offering:

St. George is his first name. You meant 'Tucker'.

Things out of your purview are "absurdly hapless"? Is that your primary defense when not understanding something?

You are comical, little buddy. I'll give you that.

 

[unregistered]

 

[islandman]

Did vette say something substantive?

Or is he post-flooding so as to not appear the sub-human he's been painted as?

Someone tell me as I have him on iggy.


TIA.

 

[eyer]

St. George is his first name. You meant 'Tucker'.

Things out of your purview are "absurdly hapless"? Is that your primary defense when not understanding something?

You are comical, little buddy. I'll give you that.

No...

...I "meant" St. George - that's why I posted it, dorkmeat.

"the Framers" never even insinuated it - now, please provide any reference whatsoever where St. George Tucker ever insinuated that...

...the Framers included the Second Amendment to reflect an opposition to game laws in England...

You admit you were wrong to assign "the Framers" your lie...

...now show us where St. George supports your ongoing lie since you're intentionally choosing to lay it at his feet now.

And since you think you know such much about your new "source"...

...read a bit more how he felt about the inherent right of American citizens to bear arms - and for what primary, precise reason - and then come back and tell us how much your hysterical rantings sync with a individual arms-right lover who'd have no use for a whiny-azz playgrounder as yourself.

 

[Ishmael]

He was a contemporary of Madison's and was one of Virginia's "colonial commentators."

What else to you have?



ETA: also a signatory to the Declaration. Marvelous indeed, Ishmael.

It is still not germane to the discussion of that period, or now. To somehow attribute the reasoning behind the 2nd amendment English game laws to a people that were 150 years removed from same at the time, laws that were NEVER enacted in the colonies, is a stretch in the extreme. It's no wonder that that shallow thinker is not widely known, or quoted by any other than the graspers of straws.

Regardless, the entire attempt on your part, and others that you quote, is to frame the amendment in terms of 'hunting.' All of which couldn't be further from the truth.

To surrender the right to defend yourself, from either your government or the thug on the street, is to declare yourself a serf at best and a slave at worst. The government has no legally bound duty to protect you from anything and are rarely there to protect you unless the whim and time suits them. If you are unwilling, or unable, to protect yourself then you are at the mercy of those that either profess to protect, and most certainly those that are intent on causing you harm.

Ishmael