Here; however, there is no mention of Congress, the government, or any other institution. Instead the phrase shall not be infringed is used. I take that as shall not be infringed period, as in by anyone.
[/quote]
By anyone?[/quote]
Do you have someone in mind?[/quote]
I just mean–literally anyone? The owner of a house? The owner of a company? Nobody?
The BOR limits government only, and even then only in particular circumstances.[/quote]
I see your point and that’s tough to answer. The constitution doesn’t to my knowledge specifically address property rights so can I as a property owner tell someone he cannot exercise his 2nd amendment rights? I would say no, but I could be swayed. Instead I would say instead I have the right to make him leave if I don’t like what he is doing. Which I believe brings us full circle to the campus situation, quite a conundrum we have here…[/quote]
I have to agree with NickViar when he says that this is illustrative of the mess we have on our hands. When public and private blend so often and so ubiquitously, it is very difficult to determine where rights and privileges begin and end. When Push and I both pretend that this is a black and white, right and wrong issue, we are both doing just that: pretending. I still think I’m right, and God knows chances are great that he thinks he’s right. But we could argue this point for another month and probably not have moved an inch in either direction.
Here; however, there is no mention of Congress, the government, or any other institution. Instead the phrase shall not be infringed is used. I take that as shall not be infringed period, as in by anyone.
[/quote]
JFC
If you are being serious right now and not just trolling, I really am curious how you get by in your day to day life…are you unemployed? Do you really waltz right into work waving your gun around harping on your second amendment rights being infringed?
You made the comment in another thread that Obama at $600k/year only makes about $500k more than you do. I find it really hard to believe someone pulling in 6 figures really struggles this hard with workplace rules and common sense.
Here; however, there is no mention of Congress, the government, or any other institution. Instead the phrase shall not be infringed is used. I take that as shall not be infringed period, as in by anyone.
[/quote]
JFC
If you are being serious right now and not just trolling, I really am curious how you get by in your day to day life…are you unemployed? Do you really waltz right into work waving your gun around harping on your second amendment rights being infringed?
You made the comment in another thread that Obama at $600k/year only makes about $500k more than you do. I find it really hard to believe someone pulling in 6 figures really struggles this hard with workplace rules and common sense.[/quote]
No, I think you are over exaggerating the exchange SMH and I are having. I live in reality, which means no I don’t, “waltz right into work waving your gun around harping on your second amendment rights being infringed.” This is called a conversation. We are having one because there are multiple perspectives on the subject.
If questioning the validity of rules I feel are counter to the meaning of the constitution then I guess I lack “common sense.”
I won’t apologize for, gasp, questioning the government.
^Also VT, your attitude is part of the problem. I have a differnt perspective than you, but instead of asking why and explaining your perspective you question my sense and in not so many words call me crazy. Thanks for adding to the conversation.
Why would I bother explaining my perspective to someone that finds it necessary to waste time philosophising (aka playing “make-believe”) on asinine interpretations of the Constitution thta have absolutely no bearing on reality? You are sitting here scratching your head and wondering whether or not a person who’s home you are entering can tell you to check your gun at HIS doorway? Really?
Sorry if my brash attitude offends you, but it is a tactical decision to make sure that no passer-by accidentally thinks I am even remotely entertaining the validity of the discussion. I would be embarassed.
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
Why would I bother explaining my perspective to someone that finds it necessary to waste time philosophising (aka playing “make-believe”) on asinine interpretations of the Constitution thta have absolutely no bearing on reality? [/quote]
I don’t know, why do you both to come on to an online discussion forum if you don’t want to discuss anything? My interpretation is asine, okay, that’s your opinion. Reality is what we say it is and reality changes. It’s not asinine to think a couple more school shootings could lead to the systematic collection and destruction of privately owned firearms. Oh, sorry though I guess I;m just playing make-believe since no one has EVER confiscated firearms before.
SMH, PUSH, and I were having a specific conversation. If you follow the comments then my comments fit right in.
[quote]
You are sitting here discussing whether or not a person who’s home you are entering can tell you to check your gun at HIS doorway? Really? [/quote] And? Is this ? with out reproach to you? Why? Is private owenership of property mentioned in the Bill of Rights? Like I said, it’s a grey area, an area worth discussing.
[quote]
Sorry if my brash attitude offends you, but it is a tactical decision to make sure that no passer-by accidentally thinks I am even remotely entertaining the validity of the discussion. I would be embarassed.[/quote]
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
It’s not asinine to think a couple more school shootings could lead to the systematic collection and destruction of privately owned firearms. [/quote]
hahahhahahahahahahahahha
Oh jesus man…you should try your hand at stand up comedy…you are getting to be a parody of yourself…
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
It’s not asinine to think a couple more school shootings could lead to the systematic collection and destruction of privately owned firearms. [/quote]
hahahhahahahahahahahahha
Oh jesus man…you should try your hand at stand up comedy…you are getting to be a parody of yourself…[/quote]
You’re right because the Newton shooting has only lead to an assualt weapns ban in my state (MD) and the registration of assault weapons in NY, that’s just off the top of my head. I know there have been other bans.
You’re right though it’s hilarious. America is SO differnt than other countries in the world we are immune to gun confiscation.
You are sitting here discussing whether or not a person who’s home you are entering can tell you to check your gun at HIS doorway? Really? [/quote]
And? Is this ? with out reproach to you? Why? Is private owenership of property mentioned in the Bill of Rights? Like I said, it’s a grey area, an area worth discussing.
[/quote]
LOL do you really have to have the Bill of Rights to guide every single thing you do in everyday life? I don’t think it tells you to breathe or eat their veggies either, but most people seem to have figured that one out pretty well on their own.
I tell you what, come down to my house and try to waltz in doing whatever the fuck you think it is the Bill of Rights and the rest of the Constitution allows you to do unimpeded–you probably won’t be wondering about your rights at all as you’re tumbling down my porch steps…
Also, I don’t think you know what “without reproach” means
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
It’s not asinine to think a couple more school shootings could lead to the systematic collection and destruction of privately owned firearms. [/quote]
hahahhahahahahahahahahha
Oh jesus man…you should try your hand at stand up comedy…you are getting to be a parody of yourself…[/quote]
You’re right because the Newton shooting has only lead to an assualt weapns ban in my state (MD) and the registration of assault weapons in NY, that’s just off the top of my head. I know there have been other bans.
You’re right though it’s hilarious. America is SO differnt than other countries in the world we are immune to gun confiscation. [/quote]
Soooooooo prohibiting people from buying new assault weapons (current owners are not affected) = systematic rounding up and destruction of all privately owned firearms?
Weird. Is English your first language? It seems like something may have gotten lost in translation there.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
You’re right though it’s hilarious. America is SO differnt than other countries in the world we are immune to gun confiscation. [/quote]
Ummmm…we are…its a little sheet of paper that resides about 3 blocks from my office that says they can’t do that…
Ya know it’s really funny…people like oyu are always hootin and hollerin’ and going on about how great and unique Murica is (Murica–FUCK YEAH!!) but all of a sudden, your belief in American Exceptionalism goes out the window when we talk about firearms. Why is that?
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
LOL do you really have to have the Bill of Rights to guide every single thing you do in everyday life? I don’t think it tells you to breathe or eat their veggies either, but most people seem to have figured that one out pretty well on their own.
[/quote]
No, please follow along, we are talking about “arms” being allowed onto certain properties. Colleges, business, etc…This conversation usually involves the 2nd amendment because the right to keep and bear arms is a part of the bill of rights. You have a natural right to self defence, but our right to keep and bear arms is only a consitutional right.
Breathing/eating veggies =/= carrying a firearm.
[quote]
I tell you what, come down to my house and try to waltz in doing whatever the fuck you think it is the Bill of Rights and the rest of the Constitution allows you to do unimpeded–you probably won’t be wondering about your rights at all as you’re tumbling down my porch steps…
Also, I don’t think you know what “without reproach” means[/quote]
This is called a CONVERSATION. The CONVERSATION went in the direction it went. I’m not interested in waltzing is some random dudes house waving my pistol around. If some random dude walked in my house I would kick his ass out too.
Again, do you have a point?
I don’t need an English lesson from some random guy on the internet, thanks though.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
It’s not asinine to think a couple more school shootings could lead to the systematic collection and destruction of privately owned firearms. [/quote]
hahahhahahahahahahahahha
Oh jesus man…you should try your hand at stand up comedy…you are getting to be a parody of yourself…[/quote]
You’re right because the Newton shooting has only lead to an assualt weapns ban in my state (MD) and the registration of assault weapons in NY, that’s just off the top of my head. I know there have been other bans.
You’re right though it’s hilarious. America is SO differnt than other countries in the world we are immune to gun confiscation. [/quote]
Soooooooo prohibiting people from buying new assault weapons (current owners are not affected) = systematic rounding up and destruction of all privately owned firearms?
Weird. Is English your first language? It seems like something may have gotten lost in translation there.
[/quote]
I’m concerned English is not you first language. After Newton these laws were created. I’m pretty sure I said after a couple more it’s entirely possible that our gov would move to round up and destroy privately owned arms. Please go back and check the quote and correct me if I’m wrong.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
You’re right though it’s hilarious. America is SO differnt than other countries in the world we are immune to gun confiscation. [/quote]
Ummmm…we are…its a little sheet of paper that resides about 3 blocks from my office that says they can’t do that…
Ya know it’s really funny…people like oyu are always hootin and hollerin’ and going on about how great and unique Murica is (Murica–FUCK YEAH!!) but all of a sudden, your belief in American Exceptionalism goes out the window when we talk about firearms. Why is that?[/quote]
Ya because the consitution has never ever been altered or infringed, right?
People like me…that’s cute. Thanks for telling me who I am.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
It’s not asinine to think a couple more school shootings could lead to the systematic collection and destruction of privately owned firearms. [/quote]
hahahhahahahahahahahahha
Oh jesus man…you should try your hand at stand up comedy…you are getting to be a parody of yourself…[/quote]
You’re right because the Newton shooting has only lead to an assualt weapns ban in my state (MD) and the registration of assault weapons in NY, that’s just off the top of my head. I know there have been other bans.
You’re right though it’s hilarious. America is SO differnt than other countries in the world we are immune to gun confiscation. [/quote]
Soooooooo prohibiting people from buying new assault weapons (current owners are not affected) = systematic rounding up and destruction of all privately owned firearms?
Weird. Is English your first language? It seems like something may have gotten lost in translation there.
[/quote]
I’m concerned English is not you first language. After Newton these laws were created. I’m pretty sure I said after a couple more it’s entirely possible that our gov would move to round up and destroy privately owned arms. Please go back and check the quote and correct me if I’m wrong.
Do you not think that’s possible? [/quote]
I give it around the same odds as the Flying Spaghetti Monster reaching out and blessing me with his noodly appendage…
But hey its great that we have guys like you parading around the internet to make sure that never happens…Im sure the nuclear armed government thta would be willing to completely dissolve the constitution would certainly back down in the face of a fearless internet warrior…
