If you were correct, then tens of millions of American liberals would be opposed to the point and purpose of the "right to bear arms" clause in the Second Amendment.
And you'd be correct if the intended purpose of that same clause was no longer relevant, but it still is.
Maybe, just maybe, if you actually understood the amendment and the History, you'd understand why asking if it is still relevant is rather silly.
False equivocation. The Right to Bear Arms does not cause mass shootings, nor is it responsible for mass shootings in the US, nor is it an indirect cause.
You will not be able to spin this into "all guns are evil." While you did not directly do that, you're certainly implying it. Since you hold Australia's strict gun laws in high regard, then you can explain why your gun laws had no effect on your homicide rates and why Australia still has among the highest guns per capita in the world of any country (1 gun for ever 3 people).
This is a Begging the Question fallacy. We are first to assume that your premise, which results in your question, is true when it is not. The premise is that the Second Amendment exists solely to provide a means for the people to overthrow a tyrannical government. This is only one of the intended purposes. Alternative purposes are:
1. Also to prevent the government from taking up arms against the people (deterrence from creating the tyrannical government to begin with),
2. As a means and compromise between The Federalists and Anti-Federalists (because the right of arms was debated between the two-parties and this as seen as a compromise).
3. Provide a security framework for Militias to defend the nation and states.
4. Common uses such as hunting, defending against criminals (bad guys with ill-intentions in many places and especially frontier locations that had state enemies in addition to just simple bad guys...this was no longer Great Britain - This is the U.S.A. with a frontier and wilderness front that greatly eclipsed the British Isles). And before a proper british geographer calls me out on the British Isles having a massive perimeter length due to how many islands there are (meaning, my implied point is wrong, here), I'm clearly referring to a general outline and being land-locked on the frontier).
5. As a marked "Eff You!" to their British Oppressors who sought to disarm the people as a means of control.
The Supreme Court upheld the notion that it is a private right of the citizen to keep and bear arms. Original Intent was upheld in our highest court. So using the logical fallacy that Begs the question - "Are you overthrowing your Tyrannical Government, Lately?" - is just not an honest path of discussion. At the risk of committing a logical fallacy myself (False Dichotomy), your question implies that you're either ignorant of the context and History of the Second Amendment or you're being very dishonest in your intentions (my money is on the latter - you're hoping these yahoos are too stupid or lazy to really engage in a well-formed conversation).
LOL. So much wrong with this. I guess it depends on what kind of corruption and how far it has spread.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
It's racist? I'm just going by Elizabeth Warren's standards.
You saying Elizabeth Warren is racist, Rob?
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
Good god looking at her..its like looking back in time at native americans!!! Awesome. This is what they looked like as they roamed the plains.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
That woman see's a piece of litter on the street and a single lone(but powerful) tear drops from her eye.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
I'm hoping some high-end millionaire sets up a 100% free service for every neo-nazi, alt-right, KKK and/or white supremacist to do two separate DNA test with the caveat that the info is posted online for all to see along with their name and picture.
I'm willing to bet those crackers are not as "aryan racially pure" as they imagine they are. I bet we have more than just a few crying nazis; it would be glorious.
I have actually had a DNA test done and can prove it.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
KMC Community Forums
Mar 19th, 2018 02:02 PM
