maddogdrivethru.net

Open all night
It is currently Sun May 27, 2018 5:15 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 183 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Self defense incidents
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 10:30 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:43 pm
Posts: 14346
Reputation points: 1612
mdiehl wrote:
So, when you say "whatever" it comes across as a glib confession that you find the facts inconvenient, or too complex to grasp.

You then foloow with a couple of appeals to emotion, and something that looks, possibly, like an illustration of something from the "old testament." The latter actually suits you because your reasoning on most things is transparently ideology/belief oriented rather than fact/logic oriented. I think you might be the most zealous, in the sense of being locked into a narrow, faith-based world view, of any person who posts in the Drive- Thru.

Perhaps, perhaps not. :roll:

But obviously your 2nd is ambiguous whit keep and bear arms. What arms like muzzle breech muskets and pistols. Or nuclear bombs.

Where is the limit?

That is the question.

_________________
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt

Mit der Dummheit kämpfen selbst Götter vergebens.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Self defense incidents
PostPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 10:42 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:33 pm
Posts: 20183
Location: LV-426
Reputation points: 13568
For ME the practical limit is of nukes with yields greater than equivalent of 100 kg h.e. I do not know whether nukes with yields that small have been developed. My reasons are these.

1. Nukes were not foreseen when the 2nd Amendment was written. They truly were unforeseen because the physics that allowed people to imagine them (possibly excepting HG Wells imagination in the late 1800s) did not exist until the e.20th Century.

2. Nukes are not easibly deployed by a tyrant state against their own citizens because nukes generally make land unoccupiable, and because tyrants don't gain much if they kill off their human assets.

3. They have little virtue as weapons that could be used to resist a tyrannical domestic government, by a rebellion, for the same reasons as #2 above.

_________________
"Fuck the king." - Sandor Clegane

"And the story was whatever was the song what it was." - Dire Straits


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Self defense incidents
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 6:44 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 10586
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 13249
mdiehl wrote:
For ME the practical limit is of nukes with yields greater than equivalent of 100 kg h.e. I do not know whether nukes with yields that small have been developed. My reasons are these.

1. Nukes were not foreseen when the 2nd Amendment was written. They truly were unforeseen because the physics that allowed people to imagine them (possibly excepting HG Wells imagination in the late 1800s) did not exist until the e.20th Century.

2. Nukes are not easibly deployed by a tyrant state against their own citizens because nukes generally make land unoccupiable, and because tyrants don't gain much if they kill off their human assets.

3. They have little virtue as weapons that could be used to resist a tyrannical domestic government, by a rebellion, for the same reasons as #2 above.


DAYM :P
Quote:
You must spread your reputation point to other users before giving to the same user.

Return to the previous page

_________________
Anthro's NSFW Thread


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Self defense incidents
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 9:25 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 25656
Reputation points: 20000
When you understand intent and context the 2nd is NOT ambiguous.

The SCOTUS has already put the "militia" argument to rest.

The "living document" argument is not really an argument, it is simply a talking point that fills the argument void. What the Hell good is a document enshrining individual rights if some nimrod gets to invent new meanings as the political wind blows?

This "bear arms" argument is so painfully stupid it makes my head hurt.

If the "living document" crowd hates the 2nd then they can just repeal the damn thing. There is a 225 year old mechanism that has already been exercised. Damn pussies need to quit whining about the NRA and get to work.

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Self defense incidents
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 9:30 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 25656
Reputation points: 20000
Never knew about the specifics of Brandeis' argument in Dred Scott. That is excrutiatingly bad.

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Self defense incidents
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 10:51 am 
Offline
Staff Sergeant

Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 7:07 pm
Posts: 3374
Reputation points: 4769
Now we see it in all it's glory.... McNukes..... You nutballs were doing better when you were trying to argue that 30 people slaughtered in a church was no big deal.....

_________________
"You can always spot the fool. He's the one that's sure he's right."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Self defense incidents
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 11:16 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 25656
Reputation points: 20000
"The A-bomb Kid" :lol:

Princeton student constructs a Nagasaki type bomb design from public sources and the FBI shits a brick....and the Pakistanis try to buy it. :lol:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Aristotle_Phillips

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Self defense incidents
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 11:30 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:33 pm
Posts: 20183
Location: LV-426
Reputation points: 13568
jack t ripper wrote:
When you understand intent and context the 2nd is NOT ambiguous.

The SCOTUS has already put the "militia" argument to rest.

The "living document" argument is not really an argument, it is simply a talking point that fills the argument void. What the Hell good is a document enshrining individual rights if some nimrod gets to invent new meanings as the political wind blows?

This "bear arms" argument is so painfully stupid it makes my head hurt.

If the "living document" crowd hates the 2nd then they can just repeal the damn thing. There is a 225 year old mechanism that has already been exercised. Damn pussies need to quit whining about the NRA and get to work.


Damb right. +1 if I could.

_________________
"Fuck the king." - Sandor Clegane

"And the story was whatever was the song what it was." - Dire Straits


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Self defense incidents
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 11:34 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:33 pm
Posts: 20183
Location: LV-426
Reputation points: 13568
Gump plays the EMO card. Again. Take your meds, Gump. You were a happier person when you were fetishizing your, hmmm, "gladius," and imagining yourself defending your hovel with your, errrm, "sword."

_________________
"Fuck the king." - Sandor Clegane

"And the story was whatever was the song what it was." - Dire Straits


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Self defense incidents
PostPosted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 11:39 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 25656
Reputation points: 20000
Speaking of "nutballs"...the nutball constitutional lawyers advising the NRA have decided to appeal the brand new Florida 21 year old law.

Now, in fairness to the Florida legislature this at least MIGHT have worked to stop the Parkland shooting and it does make some sense in terms of prudence but constitutional lawyers pick and choose their cases carefully because they don't want to establish a negative precedent. This tells me they think they can prevail on this ...and they may be right.

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 183 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group