01-19-2013 11:27 AM
Davo17 wrote:
the 2nd has NOT A THING to do with hunting you tool.
Not true, but keep saying it like you actually KNOW something about the 2nd amendment, why don't you....
01-19-2013 11:28 AM
01-19-2013 11:31 AM
01-19-2013 11:42 AM
Davo17 wrote:
please show me ANY opinion by scotus that says hunting is at all a part of the second. make it quick, i have work.
From Justice Scalia's opinion in the Heller decision.
Justice Stevens points to a study by amici supposedly showing that the phrase “bear arms” was most frequently used in the military context. See post, at 12–13, n. 9; Linguists’ Brief 24. Of course, as we have said, the fact that the phrase was commonly used in a particular context does not show that it is limited to that context, and, in any event, we have given many sources where the phrase was used in nonmilitary contexts. Moreover, the study’s collection appears to include (who knows how many times) the idiomatic phrase “bear arms against,” which is irrelevant. The amici also dismiss examples such as “ ‘bear arms … for the purpose of killing game’ ” because those uses are “expressly qualified.” Linguists’ Brief 24. (Justice Stevens uses the same excuse for dismissing the state constitutional provisions analogous to the Second Amendment that identify private-use purposes for which the individual right can be asserted. See post, at 12.) That analysis is faulty. A purposive qualifying phrase that contradicts the word or phrase it modifies is unknown this side of the looking glass (except, apparently, in some courses on Linguistics). If “bear arms” means, as we think, simply the carrying of arms, a modifier can limit the purpose of the carriage (“for the purpose of self-defense” or “to make war against the King”). But if “bear arms” means, as the petitioners and the dissent think, the carrying of arms only for military purposes, one simply cannot add “for the purpose of killing game.” The right “to carry arms in the militia for the purpose of killing game” is worthy of the mad hatter. Thus, these purposive qualifying phrases positively establish that “to bear arms” is not limited to military use.11
01-19-2013 11:45 AM
Davo17 wrote:
the forum started 3 days ago...and i havent sat down to mess with it yet.
way to skirt the issue...it makes you seem disengenuous.
It makes you look like an idiot when you are responding to people personally without identifying who they are or giving anyone any context for your comments. It makes your posts pointless and unreadable. If you're only talking to yourself--or only you know who you're supposedly talking to---, then why bother to type and post?
But you DO make a good argument for the need for a minimum 72-hour waiting period before people should be able to use the forum.
01-19-2013 11:48 AM
Davo17 wrote:
the forum started 3 days ago...and i havent sat down to mess with it yet.
way to skirt the issue...it makes you seem disengenuous.
Make it easy for you: when you want to reply to someone: hit reply. An empty box will appear. On the top right corner of that box are spell check and quote. Click quote and the words of the person you are replying too will appear.
01-19-2013 11:53 AM
He mentions it again here:
It is therefore entirely sensible that the Second Amendment's prefatory clause announces the purpose for which the right was codified: to prevent elimination of the militia. The prefatory clause does not suggest that preserving the militia was the only reason Americans valued the ancient right; most undoubtedly thought it even more important for self-defense and hunting.
Ultimately, Scalia identifies personal self defense as the primary purpose of the 2nd Amendment and not hunting. But basically, Scalia will embrace any non-military justifications for the 2nd Amendment in order to make his argument that the first clause of the 2nd Amendment puts no limitations on the right to bear arms.
01-19-2013 11:59 AM
Zooey wrote:But basically, Scalia will embrace any non-military justifications for the 2nd Amendment in order to make his argument that the first clause of the 2nd Amendment puts no limitations on the right to bear arms.
I think this is a bit incorrect. Scalia isn't arguing there is NO limitations on the right to bear arms. In fact, he specifically says otherwise:
Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose:
Instead, the purpose for his argument is to disprove the idea that the 2nd amendment is tied to the militia clause and the right to bear arms exists ONLY for that purpose. In order to argue for a right to bear arms for self-defense, he includes 'hunting' as another non-military purpose.
01-19-2013 02:05 PM
guido61 wrote:
Zooey wrote:But basically, Scalia will embrace any non-military justifications for the 2nd Amendment in order to make his argument that the first clause of the 2nd Amendment puts no limitations on the right to bear arms.
I think this is a bit incorrect. Scalia isn't arguing there is NO limitations on the right to bear arms. In fact, he specifically says otherwise
I didn't say that Scalia doesn't recognize restrictions on the right to bear arms. I said that he argues that the first clause of the 2nd Amendment (the part about the well regulated milita) does not impose a limitation on the right to bear arms.
01-20-2013 01:20 AM
01-20-2013 01:21 AM
moonlightin wrote:
Davo17 wrote:
the forum started 3 days ago...and i havent sat down to mess with it yet.
way to skirt the issue...it makes you seem disengenuous.
Make it easy for you: when you want to reply to someone: hit reply. An empty box will appear. On the top right corner of that box are spell check and quote. Click quote and the words of the person you are replying too will appear.
thanks. im also not on a computer rt now...just a mobile device.
01-20-2013 02:12 AM
Davo17 wrote:
try ventilating an apnic patient with a hole in his cheek. its messy.
Fake faker is fake.
01-20-2013 02:16 AM - edited 01-20-2013 02:18 AM
Gromit wrote:
Davo17 wrote:
try ventilating an apnic patient with a hole in his cheek. its messy.Fake faker is fake.
i dont think you understand what paramedics and pas do exactly. would you like to hear some stories you wont be able to forget? they might make you talk a little lower and laugh a little slower. ![]()
01-20-2013 02:26 AM
Davo17 wrote:
the forum started 3 days ago...and i havent sat down to mess with it yet.
way to skirt the issue...it makes you seem disengenuous.
You've posted enough in those three days, or are you telling us that you're just not as intelligent as the rest of us?
We've all fgured out how to use the quote function.
01-20-2013 02:30 AM
Davo17 wrote:i dont think you understand what paramedics and pas do exactly. would you like to hear some stories you wont be able to forget? they might make you talk a little lower and laugh a little slower.
Given the members of my family and friends who actually are real paramedics, or nurses, or other medics, and given the fact that I've worked developing software for paramedics I probably have a much better idea than a fake faker like you.
Now, as for those 'stories', you're probably best just keeping them to yourself until you have a clue as to how to make any of them convincing.
01-20-2013 02:39 AM
obamie is taking guns from good law abiding people, they will only end up in the bad guys hands. It's a shame people can't see that. Maybe if they pulled their heads out of obamie's **bleep**..this prez has so many people brainwashed it does not make any logical meaning. Thie man has done nothing but bring this country to its knees and it's only going to get much worse.
01-20-2013 02:42 AM
If somebody ever kicks your door down at 4am whilst you are sucking on yer thumb and farting and you are standing there with a dumb **bleep** look on yer mug you are gonna wish you had a gun.
01-20-2013 05:18 AM - edited 01-20-2013 05:24 AM
omni wrote:obamie is taking guns from good law abiding people, they will only end up in the bad guys hands. It's a shame people can't see that. Maybe if they pulled their heads out of obamie's **bleep**..this prez has so many people brainwashed it does not make any logical meaning. Thie man has done nothing but bring this country to its knees and it's only going to get much worse.
You're not a smart woman.
"Senators say they fear the N.R.A. and the gun lobby. But I think that fear must be nothing compared to the fear the first graders in Sandy Hook Elementary School felt as their lives ended in a hail of bullets. The fear that those children who survived the massacre must feel every time they remember their teachers stacking them into closets and bathrooms, whispering that they loved them, so that love would be the last thing the students heard if the gunman found them."- Gabrielle Giffords
01-20-2013 06:27 AM
omni wrote:obamie is taking guns from good law abiding people, they will only end up in the bad guys hands. It's a shame people can't see that. Maybe if they pulled their heads out of obamie's **bleep**..this prez has so many people brainwashed it does not make any logical meaning. Thie man has done nothing but bring this country to its knees and it's only going to get much worse.
You go from guns from good law abiding people to them ended up in bad guys hands? Explain.
01-20-2013 06:28 AM
omni wrote:If somebody ever kicks your door down at 4am whilst you are sucking on yer thumb and farting and you are standing there with a dumb **bleep** look on yer mug you are gonna wish you had a gun.
According to right wing bats who lways bring up the rocks and bats are dangerous too, we shouldn't have to worry about dealing with miscreants so long as we have those at hand.
About HCHarmonyCentral.com is the leading Internet resource for musicians, supplying valuable information from news and product reviews, to classified ads and chat rooms.
Advertise on HC