So where is Trump on guns???

Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
WildCat
Posts: 13707
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:53 am
Location: The 33rd Ward, Chicago
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 312 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by WildCat » Wed Feb 08, 2017 5:20 pm

corplinx wrote:That's why the NRA should be _leading_ instead of just paying off congressmen to obstruct.

Eventually, some deranged shooter will spur shoddily written gun control that makes no sense.
Do you have an example of a deranged shooter who would have been thwarted if he had been better trained?
Do you have questions about God?

you sniveling little right-wing nutter - jj

User avatar
corplinx
Posts: 19920
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:49 am
Title: Moderator
Has thanked: 206 times
Been thanked: 650 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by corplinx » Wed Feb 08, 2017 5:31 pm

Well. They would have gotten a higher score for sure.

I think the point went over your head. Unless you lead on something, you get led. Pro-gun people have been dealing with crying moms on tvs whose kids were shot. You can't continue to start at "no" and look like enablers of killers even if it isn't true.

Appeal to Emotion works. Eventually there will be a tipping point where enough people say "enough is enough" .

User avatar
ed
Posts: 32834
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamp
Has thanked: 431 times
Been thanked: 736 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by ed » Wed Feb 08, 2017 5:37 pm

Thats a good point. The issue is that there is never a quid pro quo.
Wenn ich Kultur höre, entsichere ich meinen Browning!

User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 19794
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed
Has thanked: 568 times
Been thanked: 578 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by Rob Lister » Wed Feb 08, 2017 5:42 pm

WildCat wrote:
Rob Lister wrote:
WildCat wrote:
Rob Lister wrote:I thought that was obvious. I highlighted the justification because that was my subject. duh.
What leads you to believe that that was justification for the second part? Why say "the people" instead of "the militia" if they meant "the militia"?
Because it is. The first clause was justification for the second clause.

Honest to god, I'm going to kneecap you. And then I'm going to curb stomp you. And then I'm going to let ed have has way with you.

If you don't know, say you don't know.

Hell, I don't know. That's why I asked.
I think I know, and it's the interpretation that held sway since it was written. Miller excepted, but since the plaintiff died before the hearing and only the government made arguments it's bad precedent... and if it is takes as good precedent then we all have the right to full-auto military arms.
Why not, far more simply, did they not phrase it, "The right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed." No justification, just like all the other articles and amendments. It stands out.

It is just odd. Such an oddity that it demands analysis. Why the justification. These things don't happen in a vacuum. Somebody or bodies in the Continental Congress demanded that phrasing. Why?

There must be some framers arguments that exist.

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 70381
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago
Has thanked: 3058 times
Been thanked: 1137 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Wed Feb 08, 2017 5:49 pm

Perhaps the need for the 2nd amendment wasn't quite so "self evident" as the others?
Image "If I turn in a sicko, will I get a reward?"

"Yes! A BIG REWARD!" ====> Click here to turn in a sicko
Any man writes a mission statement spends a night in the box.
-- our mission statement plappendale

User avatar
ed
Posts: 32834
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamp
Has thanked: 431 times
Been thanked: 736 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by ed » Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:16 pm

The idea of "militia" has changed over the years. Back in the day it was the citizen levie and was available far more readily than any central armed force. The point, I think was that these armed farmers represented security against the red indians as well as against the government.
Wenn ich Kultur höre, entsichere ich meinen Browning!

User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 19794
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed
Has thanked: 568 times
Been thanked: 578 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by Rob Lister » Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:23 pm

ed wrote:The idea of "militia" has changed over the years. Back in the day it was the citizen levie and was available far more readily than any central armed force. The point, I think was that these armed farmers represented security against the red indians as well as against the government.
That does not address the seeming necessity to justify.

User avatar
WildCat
Posts: 13707
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:53 am
Location: The 33rd Ward, Chicago
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 312 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by WildCat » Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:30 pm

Rob Lister wrote:Why not, far more simply, did they not phrase it, "The right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed." No justification, just like all the other articles and amendments. It stands out.

It is just odd. Such an oddity that it demands analysis. Why the justification. These things don't happen in a vacuum. Somebody or bodies in the Continental Congress demanded that phrasing. Why?

There must be some framers arguments that exist.
If only there were historical documents from the era that explained what their thinking was so we wouldn't have to divine it by reading chicken entrails!

Oh, wait, there were!
"The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious, if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss. It would form an annual deduction from the productive labor of the country, to an amount which, calculating upon the present numbers of the people, would not fall far short of the whole expense of the civil establishments of all the States. To attempt a thing which would abridge the mass of labor and industry to so considerable an extent, would be unwise: and the experiment, if made, could not succeed, because it would not long be endured. Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year.

"But though the scheme of disciplining the whole nation must be abandoned as mischievous or impracticable; yet it is a matter of the utmost importance that a well-digested plan should, as soon as possible, be adopted for the proper establishment of the militia. The attention of the government ought particularly to be directed to the formation of a select corps of moderate extent, upon such principles as will really fit them for service in case of need. By thus circumscribing the plan, it will be possible to have an excellent body of well-trained militia, ready to take the field whenever the defense of the State shall require it. This will not only lessen the call for military establishments, but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist.''
That was written by Hamilton, who also wrote the 2A.

Note the differentiation between the "well regulated militia" and "the people". They are not the same thing, and both have the right to be armed. And it is "the people" who stand as a check on the military and the well-regulated militia should they ever endanger the liberties of the people.
Do you have questions about God?

you sniveling little right-wing nutter - jj

User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 19794
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed
Has thanked: 568 times
Been thanked: 578 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by Rob Lister » Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:48 pm

WildCat wrote:
Rob Lister wrote:Why not, far more simply, did they not phrase it, "The right of the people to keep and bare arms shall not be infringed." No justification, just like all the other articles and amendments. It stands out.

It is just odd. Such an oddity that it demands analysis. Why the justification. These things don't happen in a vacuum. Somebody or bodies in the Continental Congress demanded that phrasing. Why?

There must be some framers arguments that exist.
If only there were historical documents from the era that explained what their thinking was so we wouldn't have to divine it by reading chicken entrails!

Oh, wait, there were!
"The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious, if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss. It would form an annual deduction from the productive labor of the country, to an amount which, calculating upon the present numbers of the people, would not fall far short of the whole expense of the civil establishments of all the States. To attempt a thing which would abridge the mass of labor and industry to so considerable an extent, would be unwise: and the experiment, if made, could not succeed, because it would not long be endured. Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year.

"But though the scheme of disciplining the whole nation must be abandoned as mischievous or impracticable; yet it is a matter of the utmost importance that a well-digested plan should, as soon as possible, be adopted for the proper establishment of the militia. The attention of the government ought particularly to be directed to the formation of a select corps of moderate extent, upon such principles as will really fit them for service in case of need. By thus circumscribing the plan, it will be possible to have an excellent body of well-trained militia, ready to take the field whenever the defense of the State shall require it. This will not only lessen the call for military establishments, but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army,and the best possible security against it, if it should exist.''
That was written by Hamilton, who also wrote the 2A.

Note the differentiation between the "well regulated militia" and "the people". They are not the same thing, and both have the right to be armed. And it is "the people" who stand as a check on the military and the well-regulated militia should they ever endanger the liberties of the people.
Thank you. So it is your assertion that the people, well armed, were a check on the militia?

User avatar
WildCat
Posts: 13707
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:53 am
Location: The 33rd Ward, Chicago
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 312 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by WildCat » Wed Feb 08, 2017 8:12 pm

Rob Lister wrote:Thank you. So it is your assertion that the people, well armed, were a check on the militia?
Hamilton was as concerned about state-controlled militias as he was the federal military, and saw the far less organized, but far more numerous, armed body of the people as a check against them.
Do you have questions about God?

you sniveling little right-wing nutter - jj

User avatar
Grammatron
Posts: 33358
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Been thanked: 1692 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by Grammatron » Wed Feb 08, 2017 8:22 pm

WildCat wrote:
Rob Lister wrote:Thank you. So it is your assertion that the people, well armed, were a check on the militia?
Hamilton was as concerned about state-controlled militias as he was the federal military, and saw the far less organized, but far more numerous, armed body of the people as a check against them.
That's an odd statement considering Hamilton was a champion of a strong federal military.

User avatar
WildCat
Posts: 13707
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:53 am
Location: The 33rd Ward, Chicago
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 312 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by WildCat » Wed Feb 08, 2017 8:34 pm

Grammatron wrote:
WildCat wrote:
Rob Lister wrote:Thank you. So it is your assertion that the people, well armed, were a check on the militia?
Hamilton was as concerned about state-controlled militias as he was the federal military, and saw the far less organized, but far more numerous, armed body of the people as a check against them.
That's an odd statement considering Hamilton was a champion of a strong federal military.
His name is right there at the top of Federalist 29...
Do you have questions about God?

you sniveling little right-wing nutter - jj

User avatar
Grammatron
Posts: 33358
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Been thanked: 1692 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by Grammatron » Wed Feb 08, 2017 8:39 pm

WildCat wrote:
Grammatron wrote:
WildCat wrote:
Rob Lister wrote:Thank you. So it is your assertion that the people, well armed, were a check on the militia?
Hamilton was as concerned about state-controlled militias as he was the federal military, and saw the far less organized, but far more numerous, armed body of the people as a check against them.
That's an odd statement considering Hamilton was a champion of a strong federal military.
His name is right there at the top of Federalist 29...
I didn't dispute it was. It's just once in power, Hamilton had no issue with raising funds for a strong Federal army (although I think it was in part as a check on state-controlled militias). Outfitting said army and even commanding part of it for a time and if I recall correctly was really itching for a fight with the French.

User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 19794
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed
Has thanked: 568 times
Been thanked: 578 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by Rob Lister » Wed Feb 08, 2017 8:40 pm

WildCat wrote:
Rob Lister wrote:Thank you. So it is your assertion that the people, well armed, were a check on the militia?
Hamilton was as concerned about state-controlled militias as he was the federal military, and saw the far less organized, but far more numerous, armed body of the people as a check against them.
So it is your assertion that the people, well armed, were a check on the militia?

User avatar
ed
Posts: 32834
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamp
Has thanked: 431 times
Been thanked: 736 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by ed » Wed Feb 08, 2017 9:19 pm

Remember also that back then, the right of self defense was so obvious as to hardly require enunciation.
Wenn ich Kultur höre, entsichere ich meinen Browning!

User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 19794
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed
Has thanked: 568 times
Been thanked: 578 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by Rob Lister » Wed Feb 08, 2017 9:26 pm

ed wrote:Remember also that back then, the right of self defense was so obvious as to hardly require enunciation.
That's a fag word right there.

it is also refuterated by wildcat's post.

User avatar
ed
Posts: 32834
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamp
Has thanked: 431 times
Been thanked: 736 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by ed » Wed Feb 08, 2017 9:38 pm

You are just begging for a nutsac kick
Wenn ich Kultur höre, entsichere ich meinen Browning!

User avatar
corplinx
Posts: 19920
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:49 am
Title: Moderator
Has thanked: 206 times
Been thanked: 650 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by corplinx » Wed Feb 08, 2017 9:42 pm

When we get that well regulated militia going, let me know.

User avatar
Rob Lister
Posts: 19794
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:15 pm
Title: Incipient toppler
Location: Swimming in Lake Ed
Has thanked: 568 times
Been thanked: 578 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by Rob Lister » Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:09 pm

corplinx wrote:When we get that well regulated militia going, let me know.
we gotz the best in the world times ten. Problem is, we gotz the best in the world times ten. King of the mutherfucking hill. And that's an issue. everybody sez, "Okay, you do it, fag."

I'm thinking nine would be enough.

User avatar
ed
Posts: 32834
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamp
Has thanked: 431 times
Been thanked: 736 times

Re: So where is Trump on guns???

Post by ed » Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:41 pm

Its huge is all.
Wenn ich Kultur höre, entsichere ich meinen Browning!