Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Logical inversions: Many prominent arguments today just don't make sense
WORLD Magazine ^ | 5/11/02 | Gene Edward Veith

Posted on 05/03/2002 9:35:57 PM PDT by Caleb1411

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280281-285 next last
To: Woahhs
Ping for your consideration. My connection died last night.

FReegards

241 posted on 05/06/2002 5:31:10 PM PDT by MileHi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: MileHi
Well done. -- But, -IF- you get any reaction at all from the gun grabbing statists, I predict some more inanities to promote further 'cite fights', rather than any attempt to refute the historical facts as outlined.

Quite simply, they would rather be known at FR as anti-gun nuts, than admit that they are wrong on this issue. Weird fellas.

242 posted on 05/06/2002 7:02:04 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
FReegards, tpain. From what I read here you must be blue in the face. {:0)
243 posted on 05/06/2002 7:06:38 PM PDT by MileHi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 242 | View Replies]

To: MileHi
Blue? How so?
244 posted on 05/06/2002 7:19:25 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 243 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
These guys are like talking to a wall. Same canned replies. Like my son (11), sometimes I can talk to him 'till I am blue in the face...
245 posted on 05/06/2002 7:25:08 PM PDT by MileHi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
than any attempt to refute the historical facts as outlined.

No these "facts" on both sides are just various legal opinions based on the interpretation of the 2nd amendment by various courts. The "facts" and history is that some states regulate the hell out of guns and some do not. That is "facts AND history". The Gun rights advocates in California have finally understood that and are now shifting their focus to amend the California State constitution. All they need are approx. 600,000 signatures to get it on the ballot. Now, tell me some more "facts and history".

246 posted on 05/06/2002 7:25:37 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 242 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
The fact is that we have always had an unalienable right to bear arms. -- Historically, its been enumerated in the constitution since the ratification of the 2nd.

Why do you insist that californians do not? Who gave the state of CA the power to prohibit that unalienable right?

247 posted on 05/06/2002 7:47:19 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 246 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
I love it when all of these "big government" haters get caught defending it. The irony is delicious.

Tex, what is the irony in an amendment that holds states to the same LIMITATIONS as the fedgov, boy. How is that "defending big government" Being a smug ass don't trump much you know. And I don't care how old you are, two years of experience repeated fourty times is still ignorence.

Site Cruikshank all you want. It is lousey case law based on Judicial racism and says more about you sweethearts than it does about RKBA

I asked you above. Answer the question, boy. Posting court cites out of context just shows rank ingnorence. Why don't you articulate why you back these findings, not just parrot the fedgov line. And why is holding states to the BoR backing big government? If the Bor LIMITS the fed, why would the same limit on states equall big government?<p.The 14th may be the only contemporary amendment that does not grant more power to government at some level, in keeping with the first ten.

248 posted on 05/06/2002 7:56:16 PM PDT by MileHi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 246 | View Replies]

To: MileHi
Tex, what is the irony in an amendment that holds states to the same LIMITATIONS as the fedgov, boy.

The Irony is that the ONLY thing the 14th amendment has done since its inception is to expand the power of tyhe Federal Government. The 14th amendment even gave you your much hated "war on drugs". You idiots lack the reasoning power of a hamster.

249 posted on 05/06/2002 8:03:04 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Why do you insist that californians do not? Who gave the state of CA the power to prohibit that unalienable right?

Because the state of california has too many nuts like you to allow for guns. Sarcasm.

250 posted on 05/06/2002 8:04:26 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
--- 'why is holding states to the BoR backing big government? If the Bor LIMITS the fed, why would the same limit on states equal big government?

The 14th may be the only contemporary amendment that does not grant more power to government at some level, in keeping with the first ten.
248 posted by MileHi

The Irony is that the ONLY thing the 14th amendment has done since its inception is to expand the power of tyhe Federal Government.

Not at all. It has curbed the states from violating individuals civil rights, and little enough of that. -- The feds & the states are co-operating on the expansion of ALL government. As you well know.

The 14th amendment even gave you your much hated "war on drugs". You idiots lack the reasoning power of a hamster.

Idiotic, unbackable claim, weasel. -- The 14th had NOTHING to do with the WOD's.

251 posted on 05/06/2002 8:34:12 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
The fact is that we have always had an unalienable right to bear arms. -- Historically, its been enumerated in the constitution since the ratification of the 2nd.

Why do you insist that californians do not? Who gave the state of CA the power to prohibit that unalienable right?

Because the state of california has too many nuts like you to allow for guns. Sarcasm.

Tex, your weaseling 'sarcasm' grows thin. -- You use it every time you're backed into a logical corner.

Get some new techniques to substitute for your lack of smarts. -- Try roscoe, he's gotum all.

252 posted on 05/06/2002 8:43:51 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 250 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Read and learn
253 posted on 05/06/2002 8:57:44 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Tex, your weaseling 'sarcasm' grows thin.

You have a point. I really wasn't being sarcastic just honest. Thanks for the correction.

254 posted on 05/06/2002 9:13:26 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: MileHi
It would seem the "children" didn't forget to bring their knives and guns after all.
255 posted on 05/06/2002 10:03:41 PM PDT by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
I always thought the primary font of pretentiousness was the northeast! Apparently it's true; they really do everything bigger in Texas.
256 posted on 05/06/2002 10:09:17 PM PDT by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
Just more of your stupid sarcasm, - and apparently, you're to dumb to realise you voiced it. Sad.
257 posted on 05/06/2002 10:19:31 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 254 | View Replies]

To: Woahhs
It would seem the "children" didn't forget to bring their knives and guns after all.

LMAO. I read his "cite". It was a litany of disagreement with a certain court decision. However the FACT is, their argument obviously failed. Now didn't it?

258 posted on 05/06/2002 10:22:19 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies]

To: Woahhs
Tex is a legend, -of sarcastic thought,- in his own mind.

Right under the big, -empty,- hat.

259 posted on 05/06/2002 10:24:18 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
However the FACT is, their argument obviously failed. Now didn't it?

Not at all. Remember your disingenuous challenge to MileHi last night. You wanted him to cite precedents you knew didn't exist. However, that doesn't discount the fact that several months ago every media outlet in the country carried the story of Ashcroft's reversal of the justice department's stance regarding the 2nd being a "collective" right. (effectively shreading your position) While he may not have had fact in hand; he wasn't wrong. Of course the weasels will refrain from any challenges until they get an AG who will support their adgenda, but that won't mean their still full of it.

Do you cheat at solitaire?

260 posted on 05/06/2002 11:09:35 PM PDT by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280281-285 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson