Suffer the little children.. American Style

Discussion in 'BS Forum' started by Cman68, Mar 14, 2018.

  1. Antoni

    Antoni Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    2,185
    Likes Received:
    437
    The Founding Fathers did not live in 2018 and drafted the Constitution in the 1700s. Maybe we should consult goat herders and voodoo men for infinite wisdom?
     
    #61 Antoni, Mar 15, 2018
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2018
    nyjetsmets89 likes this.
  2. NotSatoshiNakamoto

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2011
    Messages:
    16,349
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    No shit. If you're not a fucking moron you can read an article from any source and determine pretty quickly how biased or fake it is.

    Maybe give it a try.
     
  3. NotSatoshiNakamoto

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2011
    Messages:
    16,349
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    Maybe we should consult emotional windbags?
     
  4. Antoni

    Antoni Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    2,185
    Likes Received:
    437
    Your precious Founders had no problem with enslaving an entire race of people and most if not all owned slaves. You live in a la-la land of a bunch of disorganized redneck hillbillies challenging the side that will have the US military on it. Is that critical enough for you?
     
  5. NotSatoshiNakamoto

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2011
    Messages:
    16,349
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    Explain the relevance of slavery to the conversation.

    I appreciate your take on our chances King George. The US military has never lost a conflict to an under manned and out gunned opponent btw.
     
    JetBlue likes this.
  6. Antoni

    Antoni Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    2,185
    Likes Received:
    437
    The relevance is that the Founders lived in a different time and age. They had no problem with enslaving an entire race of people. Most owned slaves. You know of any slave owners in 2018 chief? Your 1 sentence line of the right to bear arms shall not be infringed may as well come from goat herders, they had more humanity at least.
     
  7. NotSatoshiNakamoto

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2011
    Messages:
    16,349
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    So let's throw out the bill of rights because slavery. Got it chief.

    That doesn't speak to the reasoning for the 2nd amendment or why it still applies today.
     
  8. Antoni

    Antoni Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    2,185
    Likes Received:
    437
    Your precious Founding Fathers counted human beings in fractions. Not a 1/1 of a human being but 3/5 of a human being. Their archaic views of guns in the 1700s should have zero bearing in 2018.
     
  9. Greenday4537

    Greenday4537 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,721
    Likes Received:
    3,181
    The Constitution needs to be updated with the times. 1700s Americans didn't hold the values we do and thank God we don't because some of them were messed up.
     
  10. NotSatoshiNakamoto

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2011
    Messages:
    16,349
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    Using slavery as an argument to discredit the reasoning for the 2A is not convincing. The same reasons for the 2A still exist today despite the founding fathers being wrong on slavery. If you want to say the 2A isn't relevant anymore, attack the reasons for the 2A.

    An example of how your reasoning is silly: The founding fathers believed in slavery. The archaic views of freedom of religion in 1700 should have zero bearing in 2018. * mic drop *.

    If it sounds stupid it's because it is.
     
    #70 NotSatoshiNakamoto, Mar 16, 2018
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2018
  11. Petrozza

    Petrozza Administrator

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    14,215
    Likes Received:
    3,889
  12. HomeoftheJets

    HomeoftheJets Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2016
    Messages:
    15,178
    Likes Received:
    22,332
  13. Antoni

    Antoni Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    2,185
    Likes Received:
    437
    Freedom of religion does not result in a massive loss of life every month/year, so your example is flawed.

    You can keep your muskets, like your Founders intended. Reload every shot. But these assault rifles have to go, and will go.
     
  14. NotSatoshiNakamoto

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2011
    Messages:
    16,349
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    My example is not flawed, it is pointing out the pure stupidity of your reasoning. It's completely illogical to point out the flaw in one thing and turn around and say see - so this other thing cannot be taken seriously because of the other thing. That's exactly what you did.

    Muskets were WEAPONS OF WAR at the time.

    You can't even define what an assault rifle is but you're sure they have to go.
     
  15. Greenday4537

    Greenday4537 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,721
    Likes Received:
    3,181
  16. Antoni

    Antoni Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    2,185
    Likes Received:
    437
    How many people have died as a result of the freedom of religion? Can you answer this without dodging it? How many people die in school shootings and other gun crimes because of the flawed 2nd amendment because small dicks need to have big weapons? Your example really is flawed.


    You don't need assault rifles to hunt. You don't need them for self defense. I am not a gun not so I'm not sure how you want me to define them, but anything with a ridiculous rate of fire has no place in modern society. Want to play with these toys? Go join the fucking military. Get out of Call of Duty and shooting plastic targets at the range.
     
  17. NotSatoshiNakamoto

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2011
    Messages:
    16,349
    Likes Received:
    7,607
    You're completely missing the point and I'm not going to explain it a second time. You're fucking dense.
    The second amendment wasn't created because they were worried about getting invaded by fucking deer. If you want to ban something you should be able to clearly state what it is you're wanting to ban. You don't even know. The media told you it's an assault weapon is all you know. It's not and you don't even know what an assault weapon is.

    Explain what the fuck it is you want to ban without using the term "assault rifle".
     
  18. Ralebird

    Ralebird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Messages:
    14,035
    Likes Received:
    8,637
    Sometimes it helps to read more than the headlines, and if you claim something is a quote it's customary to show the source.

    The kid wasn't suspended for refusing to leave the classroom, he was suspended because he wanted to stay in an area that was unsupervised. Participating in the walkout was permitted as was going to a study hall, both of which had faculty supervision. No suppression of different opinions, no "new American style," but plenty of drama on the kid's part...and yours.
     
  19. Antoni

    Antoni Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    2,185
    Likes Received:
    437
    Still can't answer the question from your flawed mongoloid example. I see. Have a nice day.
     
  20. Dierking

    Dierking Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    16,300
    Likes Received:
    15,235
    The second amendment was enacted because private ownership of firearms was the way states ensured that they could stock their militias in the days before there were standing national armed forces. The concept has zero validity today, but a constitutional amendment to correct it will never happen. That doesn't mean in any way that firearms cannot be regulated, they already are, and can be even more tightly regulated, and it will not run afoul of the second amendment.
     
    Ralebird likes this.

Share This Page