I have access to firearms

[islandman]

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...



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.

Oh, didn't realize you were on a first-name basis with him...

You're right, he didn't insinuate it. He wrote it in his footnotes to page 412, Vol. II of Blackstone's Commentaries.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Peregrinator]

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.

Worth a click and skim.

 

[eyer]

From Heller:

The operative clause being "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

c. Meaning of the Operative Clause. Putting all of these textual elements together, we find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation. This meaning is strongly confirmed by the historical background of the Second Amendment . We look to this because it has always been widely understood that the Second Amendment , like the First and Fourth Amendment s, codified a pre-existing right. The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it “shall not be infringed.” As we said in United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 553 (1876) , “[t]his is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed … .”16

“[t]his is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed … .”

The inherent negative right acknowledged by the Constitution omitting it from all concern of government by not mentioning it at all...

...and then good men trying their best to underline the unalienable message with the 2nd.

And bozos like islandman still disingenuously scheme to provide false witness...

 

[islandman]

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

Somehow be attributed?

The English Bill of Rights was used in the drafting of the Constitution. Surely you must know that.


So, the right to bear arms is 'inherent' to man. So is the "right to life." Yet the right to bear arms trumps life.

Why is that?

 

[islandman]

“[t]his is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed … .”

The inherent negative right acknowledged by the Constitution omitting it from all concern of government by not mentioning it at all...

...and then good men trying their best to underline the unalienable message with the 2nd.

And bozos like islandman still disingenuously scheme to provide false witness...

Ah, changing the goalposts, a time-honoured tradition. Comparing my 1803 "false witness" to a 2008 case.

How intellectually noble of you, eyer.

 

[eyer]

You're right, he didn't insinuate it. He wrote it in his footnotes to page 412, Vol. II of Blackstone's Commentaries.

No...

...you're lying again: he did not write what you claimed

But, go ahead...

...pick whatever words of his you'd like, post 'em and let's all see how close it comes to your:

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

Again:

- "the Framers" did no such thing

- St. George Tucker did not write that "the Framers" did such a thing

- you posted that "the Framers included the Second Amendment to reflect an opposition to game laws in England"

...why are you having such difficulty of owning up to the lie you - and only you - continue to champion?

 

[unregistered]

 

[islandman]

No...

...you're lying again: he did not write what you claimed

But, go ahead...

...pick whatever words of his you'd like, post 'em and let's all see how close it comes to your:



Again:

- "the Framers" did no such thing

- St. George Tucker did not write that "the Framers" did such a thing

- you posted that "the Framers included the Second Amendment to reflect an opposition to game laws in England"

...why are you having such difficulty of owning up to the lie you - and only you - continue to champion?

Ah, so a reading comprehension problem it is.

Go back to post #243. I added language to draw your attention, after which I'll take your apology for claiming that I continue to champion something correct many a post ago.

Go!

 

[Disgustipated]

The self promoting and allegedly educated Lit scholar IM fails again to fortify his argument with facts. I stated a while back the simple language of the Second clearly indicates the right existed prior to the founding and was excoriated for it by the ignorant.

The idiot eyer thinks you're an idiot, idiot.

 

[eyer]

Ah, changing the goalposts, a time-honoured tradition. Comparing my 1803 "false witness" to a 2008 case.

How intellectually noble of you, eyer.

...the Framers included the Second Amendment to reflect an opposition to game laws in England...[/quote0

That's your false witness, "intellectual" one...

...now: use that same "intellectual" expertise of yours to tell us what St. George would've thought of those same words from Heller?

And quite worrying about "goalposts"...

...you haven't even made it out of the locker room yet.

 

[Ishmael]

Somehow be attributed?

The English Bill of Rights was used in the drafting of the Constitution. Surely you must know that.


So, the right to bear arms is 'inherent' to man. So is the "right to life." Yet the right to bear arms trumps life.

Why is that?

So was a portion of the Iroquois compact.

Trump life? Only if you are unwilling or unable to protect yourself.

You are going to die, not a matter of if, only when, how, where, and by what means. You weren't born with a USDA stamp on your ass, a guarantee, a set of instructions.

You seem to think that with some simplistic, poorly thought out, laws, which are in the end nothing more than pieces of paper, you can build this Utopian world. You can't, no one can. But I do understand, even if you don't, that you are engaging in an "If only I could rule the world" complex. And quite frankly it is because of people like you that the 2nd amendment needs to exist at all.

Ishmael

 

[islandman]

So was a portion of the Iroquois compact.

Trump life? Only if you are unwilling or unable to protect yourself.

You are going to die, not a matter of if, only when, how, where, and by what means. You weren't born with a USDA stamp on your ass, a guarantee, a set of instructions.

You seem to think that with some simplistic, poorly thought out, laws, which are in the end nothing more than pieces of paper, you can build this Utopian world. You can't, no one can. But I do understand, even if you don't, that you are engaging in an "If only I could rule the world" complex. And quite frankly it is because of people like you that the 2nd amendment needs to exist at all.

Ishmael

If you're referring to the Iroquois Constitution, given that it was codified in the 1100s, you've just invalidated your own argument against me. The age of the documents in relation to the our BoR is irrelevant.

So, what's your point anyway?


When you assume things, you make an ass out of you. No one is talking about a utopian society or a world ruled by me.

I want a world where six year-old kids don't have to worry about getting killed. You seem to think they died because they didn't carry guns to school. Or because their teachers didn't carry guns as they do in Israel. Or some other silly reason. I want a world in which responsible gun owners are exactly that.

You just want a world in which you're not scared to live, and your gun is your blankie.

 

[islandman]

The idiot eyer thinks you're an idiot, idiot.

Eyer is a funny man. I've only recently taken him off of iggy because I would peek now and then and he made some interesting points.

But evidently he believes vette when he called me "the smartest man on Lit".

...but islandman evidently "knows" something that none of us do, and since he fancies himself such an intellectual of this Board,

I wonder what I wrote to make him so insecure azzzzzzzz to lash out.

Cause now that I know it's personal and not itellectual, I'd like the opportunity to do it again.

 

[Ishmael]

When you assume things, you make an ass out of you. No one is talking about a utopian society or a world ruled by me.

I want a world where six year-old kids don't have to worry about getting killed. You seem to think they died because they didn't carry guns to school. Or because their teachers didn't carry guns as they do in Israel. Or some other silly reason. I want a world in which responsible gun owners are exactly that.

You just want a world in which you're not scared to live, and your gun is your blankie.

Of course you are, regardless of your denials.

You and I want the same thing re. the 6 yr old. Even if you seem to think otherwise. The difference is how to go about that goal.

Pretend I'm but 6 yrs of age and come try to take my 'blankie' away.

Ishmael

 

[islandman]

Of course you are, regardless of your denials.

You and I want the same thing re. the 6 yr old. Even if you seem to think otherwise. The difference is how to go about that goal.

Pretend I'm but 6 yrs of age and come try to take my 'blankie' away.

Ishmael

Please see the edit to my post.

Re your blankie...Responsible gun owners should be able to own guns. You don't strike me at all as responsible and certainly not with that veiled threat. Here's hoping someone figures that out and takes your blankie away for good.

 

[eyer]

I want a world where six year-old kids don't have to worry about getting killed.

I want no more bubbles in my bathwater...

...can you make that happen, too, Mr. Wizard?

BTW:

That "reading comprehension problem" I must have?

When your starving ego stops driving you back to edit more of your words so the wounds stabbing its "intellectual" self-image seem better plugged...

...let me know so I can read your latest back pedal attempt.

 

[Ishmael]

Please see the edit to my post.

Re your blankie...Responsible gun owners should be able to own guns. You don't strike me at all as responsible and certainly not with that veiled threat. Here's hoping someone figures that out and takes your blankie away for good.

LMFAO

Call Homeland Security little girl.

Ishmael

 

[nonfictional]

Islandman, I agree with you. The reasons for not owning guns are plain as day: a person who owns guns is more likely to kill than if he/she did not own a gun. Why do gun owners tend to be such morons?

 

[eyer]

Please see the edit to my post.

Re your blankie...Responsible gun owners should be able to own guns. You don't strike me at all as responsible and certainly not with that veiled threat. Here's hoping someone figures that out and takes your blankie away for good.

Did you lie when I asked you if you had reported Frizzle to Homeland Security yet for the serious threat you've publicly deemed him to be?

Are you going to now report Ishmael to Homeland Security as one whom you deem a dangerously irresponsible gun owner whose guns should be removed from him by force?

You're going to lie again and say no, right?

'Cause a if an honest man was on this Board pontificating about how much he cares and how concerned he is and how he'll do anything so six-year old kids don't have to die...

...why wouldn't that honest man report those he has rated as seriously dangerous so every six-year old (and anyone else) are safe from them?

Really, there's only one reason why he wouldn't actually walk like he arrogantly talks:

He's not an honest man.

Say hi to the mirror...

...islandman.

 

[islandman]

LMFAO

Call Homeland Security little girl.

Ishmael

Admit it, any mental evaluation requirement to gun ownership and you'd be building a moat asap.

 

[islandman]

Did you lie when I asked you if you had reported Frizzle to Homeland Security yet for the serious threat you've publicly deemed him to be?

Are you going to now report Ishmael to Homeland Security as one whom you deem a dangerously irresponsible gun owner whose guns should be removed from him by force?

You're going to lie again and say no, right?

'Cause a if an honest man was on this Board pontificating about how much he cares and how concerned he is and how he'll do anything so six-year old kids don't have to die...

...why wouldn't that honest man report those he has rated as seriously dangerous so every six-year old (and anyone else) are safe from them?

Really, there's only one reason why he wouldn't actually walk like he arrogantly talks:

He's not an honest man.

Say hi to the mirror...

...islandman.

Gave up on George, did we?

Must be your insecurity peeking through again.

 

[Ishmael]

Admit it, any mental evaluation requirement to gun ownership and you'd be building a moat asap.

There ya go bucko. Ruling the world and passing judgement. If you really feel that strongly, call HLS, they can track me down.

What a paranoid POS you are.

Ishmael

 

[eyer]

Gave up on George, did we?

Must be your insecurity peeking through again.

"Must be"...

Say:

Tell us more about what "the Framers" actual intent was with the 2nd Amendment, uncle islandman...

...you know, in your own words again.

 

[islandman]

There ya go bucko. Ruling the world and passing judgement. If you really feel that strongly, call HLS, they can track me down.

What a paranoid POS you are.

Ishmael

The words of a responsible gun owner?

More like a bully with a gun. Pathetic.