“It’s interesting to actually take the time and see what the fact say as opposed to what I personally feel.”
Now there’s an idea.
“It’s interesting to actually take the time and see what the fact say as opposed to what I personally feel.”
Now there’s an idea.
Good, but just present the facts. Too much editorializing.
Convincing people that we need ARs will still be hard, or impossible.
“need”?
I tell my wife I need them. She’s not convinced.
Really all a person *needs* is food, water, air and shelter. Remind her of that next time she’s going shopping.
Yes, we “need” AR-15s. It says so right there in the 2A: “A well regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state, . . . ”
The matter of “need” or “necessity” is established by the Constitution, in black-letter supreme law-of-the-land.
The phrase “well regulated” – when used in the 2A – meant “effective” or “fit-for-purpose”. The AR-15 is effective and fit-for-militia-purposes as is evidenced by the universal use by US regular forces in the models M-16 and M-4. These models are comparable except, of course, for the fact that the AR-15 is semi-automatic whereas the M-16 and M-4 are select-fire.
In contemporary doctrine, the M-16 and M-4 are almost always used in semi-automatic mode; and, to this extent, they are comparable. (AR-15 owners might not object to a repeal of the Hughes Amendment allowing them to register their AR-15s under the NFA.)
It baffles me why PotG seem to shrink from this “need” / “necessary” issue. Yes, it’s true, that the 2A guarantees the “right” whether we the People “need” the AR-15 for hunting/fowling/practice/amusement/collecting/or-any-other-lawful-purpose. We are not being asked about our “right”; we are being asked about “need”; and, there – right in front of us – is the answer determined by We the People when they ratified the 2A. Why? Because the AR-15 is of a type of arm “necessary for the security of a free state”.
Now, the question seems to become: “Why do we the People really ‘need’ a ‘free state’?”
please understand that the “well regulate militia” clause is a subordinate clause. what does that mean?
“A subordinate clause cannot stand alone as a sentence because it does not provide a complete thought. The reader is left wondering, “So what happened?” A word group that begins with a capital letter and ends with a period must contain at least one main clause. Otherwise, you will have written a fragment, a major error.”
so what is the main clause?? why it is the “right to keep and bear arms…”
http://www.chompchomp.com/terms/subordinateclause.htm
here are two more links to help you
http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/index.php?itemid=451
http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/12/it-being-necessary-to-cut-through-the-blather-about-the-second-amendment-before-we-lose-our-rights/
PeterTX52: While accurate, I can’t imagine any progressives/ marxists/ communists willing to follow any thinking that doesn’t fit on a bumper sticker.
“Willing”? How about “able”?
MarkPA: Excellent point, to counter militia arg with “Why don’t YOU want a secure free state, just like it says?”
Gun grabbers really hate it when I ask questions like “what does hunting have to do with defending a free State?” or “What the does word ‘of’ mean in the context of ‘right of the people’?”
They have a tendency to either run away or throw out a red herring. Not one has ever attempted to answer these questions, let alone doing so honestly.
It’s the Bill of Rights, not the Bill of Needs.
Click my name to see a quote from JFK.
WHY DID YOU MAKE ME DO THAT?!!
I can’t come to terms with it. Now, my only choice is to remain obtuse, reject reality and substitute my own.
There. That’s better.
https://youtu.be/2WXCUGxEK0s
Very powerful, especially around 19 minutes in.
See Actors Reading Gun Facts for the First Time On Camera. Why?
I’m reminded of the “Dick and Jane” reader from my youth after listening to this. I think I just regressed to the first grade after listening that babbling.
Handguns weren’t responsible for [whatever percentage] of mass murders: murderers _with_ handguns were. Otherwise , pretty good.
People are responsible for almost all of their own problems, unless they happen to live in Africa or South Asia where they have lions and tigers.
Lions and tigers aren’t the biggest problem you have in South Africa if you happen to be white and own land.
There are those there that want to, and this is a *direct* quote, “Cut the throat of whiteness.”…
https://www.dailywire.com/news/27896/south-african-politician-we-are-cutting-throat-paul-bois
Just look at what happened in Rhodesia with black rule. Many white farmers were murdered, the perps taking what they wanted and then just leaving. They only cared about their immediate gratification, they were not interested in taking over the farms, just looting them.
At least the wise people in the non-white side in South Africa realize that they need the expertise of the old government to keep from barbarism of the non-white groups.
@rt66paul: Read the news, The newly seated South African president, long a supporter of the killings of whites, has promised “his people” that a law will soon be passed allowing the government seizure of white owned farms without compensation as reparations for apartheid and the white invasion of “their” country, with the farms and equipment being turned over to black farmers. Anyone voting against such a law will be deemed a traitor to the African peoples. The killing of white farmers has greatly increased. Australia has already passed a law streamlining the emigration of South African whites as “refugees.” Rhodesia redux.
Yet they want to ban assault weapons why? I don’t want to ban pistols either, but the logic…I can’t say that… Lack of logic… Nevermind, there just isn’t anything more to say.
Sorry but when I glanced at this I thought it read “gun fags”…😄😎😏
I started to click on the video, then I thought better.
Why give them another number to count. I know they are going to spout some garbage that’s not true.
You should give it a watch, it’s not what you think. The only fact they got wrong was that handguns are responsible for the vast majority of mass shootings (the correct statement would be handguns are USED in the majority of mass shootings).
If we could get more fence sitters and those who protest what they don’t understand to read these types of facts, we could potentially sway a few of them, at least those willing to follow up and do their own research.
Same here, but a good ad-blocker can help if you want to suffer through it.
As Steven Crowder has pointed out many times, there are two sides to the gun control debate: the pro 2a side that owns/have used/understand basic function of firearms, and the grossly uninformed anti 2a side. Just skim Dana Loesch’s twitter comments to view the myriad of ” NOBODY NEEDS FULLY AUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS OF WAR LIKE THE ONE USED IN PARKLAND!!!” Comments. When corrected respectfully they usually devolve to ad hominem or they choose to disengage from the debate rather than concede that they are ignorant of basic facts.
Ad hominem attacks are usually all they really have anyway. That the MSM does not hold them to facts speaks volumes for the position of the US over the past 3 decades but thankfully, a fairly large amount of people are seeking to educate themselves on issues away from them.
It’s a bit difficult to debate without any facts or convictions based in them once you are away from the herd. That’s why we need to keep taking it to them and learn to express ourselves in manners that don’t screw things up with the vast uncommitted people on the outside looking in. Hold everyone accountable but be damn sure you know what you’re talking about and be able to back it up.
I have, BTW, seen many comments fly around this site that do exactly the same thing. We have to be better than they are. Think before you send.
A liberal asked me when does the violence stop. I said when the police arived with guns. (THE GOOD GUYS)But by then the damage and the killing had allready Ben done.
The liberal had NOTHING to say.
Then I asked the liberal wouldn’t it be nice if the good guys or good lady where already there with a gun, to stop the violence from ever happening in the first place. Again the liberal had nothing to say.
They protest all day long about gun control and vilance but they haven’t a clue or an effective idea about how to stop it. Typical liberal!!!!!!!!!!
The Tweet eventually backfired on Gortat, because not only did the game go beyond 48 minutes into ov.
It’s a very small sample size, but advanced stats like FIP (7.
After a breakout 2016, in which he combined to hit.
Unfortunately, Osweiler seemed to be a wee bit nervous going against a team he had already beaten once in his career.
This was Zucker’s 17th multi-point game of the year.
While Hicks did feel something during Thursday’s game, there was no pain.The Division Series matchups are a best of five contest, with the top seed hosting the first two, and fifth game as needed.On the way to their 9-1 victory over Oakland in the series opener, the Twins hitters managed to overshadow Santana’s amazing start.
derrick rose 6 Grey
puma flip flops for men
The Minnesota Gophers defeated the Washington State Cougars, 17-12.Earlier in his career, he was a national college football writer and Team writer for Husker Corner.
8 runs the South Siders averaged in their first five games (all on the road) and solid 3-2 start to the season.
I’d like to find out more? I’d like to find out some additional information.
Comments are closed.