You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #42: Have the tea parties taught you nothing? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
Travis Coates Donating Member (489 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-24-10 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #36
42. Have the tea parties taught you nothing?
Edited on Sat Apr-24-10 07:52 PM by Travis Coates
If they are actually advocating that we can all own NUKES, then their idiots.

If you're going to call someone an idiot make sure the sentence in which you do so has no mispellings ( I'll let you figure out where they are)

Trying to get the damn quote tag to work
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -Why can't I own a Surface-to-Air Missile? Isn't it my 2nd Amendment Right? AnArmyVeteran  Apr-24-10 05:12 PM   #0 
  - What a silly and pointless question.  Orrex   Apr-24-10 05:14 PM   #1 
  - Why did you put me on ignore? Or is it your tag line? I thought it was a thought provoking question.  AnArmyVeteran   Apr-24-10 05:16 PM   #2 
     - Because  FreakinDJ   Apr-24-10 05:30 PM   #11 
  - Same reason you can't yell fire in a movie theater. Common sense. (nt)  The Straight Story   Apr-24-10 05:18 PM   #3 
  - Yet At the Time, Sir  The Magistrate   Apr-24-10 05:20 PM   #6 
     - What about cannons?  MattBaggins   Apr-24-10 05:27 PM   #10 
        - Cannons are not regulated. You can buy or build one now.  slackmaster   Apr-24-10 05:30 PM   #12 
        - You Can Build A Muzzle-Loader, Sir, True Enough  The Magistrate   Apr-24-10 06:00 PM   #19 
        - It Was Too Common, Sir, To Be Remarked On With Specific Examples  The Magistrate   Apr-24-10 05:44 PM   #17 
  - Silly question. Of course you can own a surface-to-air missile.  slackmaster   Apr-24-10 05:19 PM   #4 
  - In The Eighteenth And Early Nineteenth Century, Sir  The Magistrate   Apr-24-10 05:24 PM   #8 
  - No, a tank is just a vehicle. A battleship is just a vessel.  slackmaster   Apr-24-10 05:26 PM   #9 
  - A Tank And a Battleship, Sir, Are By Definition Armed, And Constitute Armaments  The Magistrate   Apr-24-10 05:41 PM   #16 
     - You pose an interesting linguistic conundrum. If "by definition"  Mother Smuckers   Apr-24-10 06:02 PM   #21 
        - Those Vessels, Sir, Are Stored With An Eye Towards Re-Arming  The Magistrate   Apr-24-10 06:13 PM   #23 
           - Of course, but if we are to accept your strict definition, a 'battleship' without arms  Mother Smuckers   Apr-24-10 06:41 PM   #28 
              - Wear It In Good Health, Sir, For All the Good It Will Do You  The Magistrate   Apr-24-10 06:46 PM   #30 
                 - Wal, yew shore tole me, Sir. Ihm just an ole nukledragger with no smarts.  Mother Smuckers   Apr-24-10 07:32 PM   #38 
  - The supreme court has held that meaning to what we today would call 'small arms'  AtheistCrusader   Apr-26-10 02:25 PM   #77 
  - No 'dumbassery' here. It's a valid question & obvious ridicule of radical the 2nd Amend proponents.  AnArmyVeteran   Apr-24-10 06:33 PM   #25 
  - Your OP lost me at "...the Constitution says it's the right of a 'well regulated militia""  slackmaster   Apr-25-10 09:41 AM   #64 
  - But what about...  EvilMonk   Apr-24-10 08:06 PM   #45 
     - Due process  slackmaster   Apr-25-10 09:42 AM   #65 
  - this is the real question for gun rights people.  bullimiami   Apr-24-10 05:20 PM   #5 
  - We accept due process of law  slackmaster   Apr-24-10 05:23 PM   #7 
  - The only question is what gun manufacturers can sell. They are the backers of 2nd amendment rights  live love laugh   Apr-24-10 05:38 PM   #14 
  - Your claim is not supported by facts  slackmaster   Apr-24-10 05:40 PM   #15 
  - Oh? Where, exactly? Not in the USA.  Mother Smuckers   Apr-24-10 05:48 PM   #18 
  - Here, I'll fix that for ya..  pipoman   Apr-24-10 06:01 PM   #20 
  - "People are dying at record rates due to gun violence"? What nonsense is that?  Euromutt   Apr-24-10 09:32 PM   #50 
  - Misconceptions/corrections ...  SteveM   Apr-25-10 01:30 PM   #68 
  - Congratulations, you are one of the few who actually 'got' the intent of my post...  AnArmyVeteran   Apr-24-10 06:35 PM   #27 
  - No, your  pipoman   Apr-24-10 07:46 PM   #41 
     - Yep. I noted the lack of response as well. Smells like tag-team to me. nt  SteveM   Apr-25-10 02:10 PM   #70 
  - I understand the 2nd Amendment as providing arms to the individuals militiamen (person)  aikoaiko   Apr-24-10 07:05 PM   #33 
  - Arms are what the individual infantry soldiers of the day carry  DissedByBush   Apr-24-10 08:19 PM   #46 
  - The context of the Second Amendment was that "arms" were small...  SteveM   Apr-25-10 01:23 PM   #67 
  - Okay. Just as long as you're not Muslim.  Jakes Progress   Apr-24-10 05:32 PM   #13 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Apr-24-10 06:05 PM   #22 
  - It's quite simple  krispos42   Apr-24-10 06:21 PM   #24 
  - I can own landmines, grenades, machine guns, rocket propelled grenades, tanks, fighter jets..  X_Digger   Apr-24-10 06:35 PM   #26 
  - That List, Sir, Sounds Like a :Pretty Drastic Restriction Of Your Rights  The Magistrate   Apr-24-10 06:44 PM   #29 
  - Sure.. but the OP's *ahem*cough* attempt *cough*..  X_Digger   Apr-24-10 06:55 PM   #31 
  - In Most Jurisdictions, Sir, Being Naked In Public Is A Crime, Whatever Else One Is Attempting  The Magistrate   Apr-24-10 08:04 PM   #44 
     - Pick many nits, lately?  X_Digger   Apr-24-10 09:50 PM   #51 
        - So You Acknowledge, Sir, Your Analogy Fails  The Magistrate   Apr-24-10 10:11 PM   #52 
           - No, just that times have changed.  X_Digger   Apr-24-10 10:21 PM   #54 
              - Times Have Indeed Changed, Sir, To the Point the Amendment is A Curiosity, Viewed Coldly  The Magistrate   Apr-24-10 10:32 PM   #55 
                 - It's a good thing, then, that the right protected by the second amendment isn't limited to militias.  X_Digger   Apr-24-10 10:47 PM   #57 
                    - You Want To Settle Meaning And Intent By Contemporary Polling, Sir?  The Magistrate   Apr-24-10 11:00 PM   #58 
                       - Your obsequiousness grows tiring  X_Digger   Apr-24-10 11:08 PM   #59 
                       - The Idea Behind It, Sir, Is As Obsolete As A Crucible Steelworks  The Magistrate   Apr-24-10 11:25 PM   #60 
                          - The "militia clause" as has been used by controllers is "obsolete"...  SteveM   Apr-25-10 02:04 PM   #69 
                             - Where Do You Find Me In Disagreement With the View The Right Is Individual, Sir?  The Magistrate   Apr-25-10 02:58 PM   #73 
                                - Are you in "disagreement with the view the right is individual?"...  SteveM   Apr-26-10 11:14 AM   #75 
                                   - The Text Is Clear Regarding An Individual's Right, Sir  The Magistrate   Apr-26-10 11:32 AM   #76 
                       - Well, language *is* a tool that is shaped by its users  Euromutt   Apr-25-10 05:15 AM   #62 
                          - Argumentum ad populum is still fallacious in interpreting documents  TPaine7   Apr-25-10 02:38 PM   #72 
  - Machine guns have been so-taxed and registered since 1934.  AtheistCrusader   Apr-26-10 02:30 PM   #78 
  - Don't forget the MONEY!!!  oneshooter   Apr-24-10 06:56 PM   #32 
  - Dull and pointless.  proteus_lives   Apr-24-10 07:05 PM   #34 
  - This is an intriguing line:  Igel   Apr-24-10 07:13 PM   #35 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Apr-24-10 07:18 PM   #36 
  - No, they don't.  X_Digger   Apr-24-10 07:31 PM   #37 
  - Well  pipoman   Apr-24-10 07:39 PM   #40 
  - Have the tea parties taught you nothing?  Travis Coates   Apr-24-10 07:49 PM   #42 
     - -snick-  pipoman   Apr-24-10 08:02 PM   #43 
        - guess I'm just a morAN NNTO  Travis Coates   Apr-24-10 09:24 PM   #48 
  - blatant falsehood 3rd paragraph  paulsby   Apr-24-10 07:34 PM   #39 
  - Not to mention that the OP presupposes that its author is capable of  TPaine7   Apr-24-10 09:00 PM   #47 
     - You cant "bear" a 90mm either  Katya Mullethov   Apr-24-10 09:28 PM   #49 
  - I think you should be able to own anything you can afford.  PavePusher   Apr-24-10 10:12 PM   #53 
  - agree  rusty_rebar   Apr-24-10 10:37 PM   #56 
  - Certain types of weapons systems can be subject to international arms limitation treaties  Euromutt   Apr-25-10 04:20 AM   #61 
  - The modern intent of the 2nd has changed from the original.  GreenStormCloud   Apr-25-10 08:22 AM   #63 
  - Just get one. If they try to take it away, there will be dozens of guys on your lawn waving signs...  onehandle   Apr-25-10 09:44 AM   #66 
  - Back on the ranch, herding has begun. The herding of cats. nt  SteveM   Apr-25-10 02:22 PM   #71 
  - Its called strict scrutiny. Then again you weren't really looking for an answer were you?  Statistical   Apr-25-10 05:10 PM   #74 
  - SAMs are indiscriminate weapons.  gorfle   Apr-26-10 03:15 PM   #79 
  - Hard to debate original intent apart from individual firearms  Francis Marion   Apr-30-10 02:24 AM   #80 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC