Virginia, MLK day, Accelerationists, Trump, GOP

#277
#277
ClearwaterVol said:
non-sequitur.

The 2A was written at a time when the word arms did not include weapons that could destroy the world. Therefore, I think a reasonable interpretation would be to place certain "arms" outside of the rights granted under 2A. Hence my comment about limits.
Click to expand...

The 1A was written at a time when the word press did not include the ability to reach around the world in seconds. So do you also think a reasonable interpretation of the 1A should include limitations on the internet?
 
  • Like
Reactions: volinbham, BennesseeVols, Orange_Vol1321 and 2 others
#279
#279
ClearwaterVol said:
non-sequitur.

The 2A was written at a time when the word arms did not include weapons that could destroy the world. Therefore, I think a reasonable interpretation would be to place certain "arms" outside of the rights granted under 2A. Hence my comment about limits.
Click to expand...

There it is .. YOUR INTERPRETATION of what it SHOULD say. Do you also reinterpret what all the other rights we have based on the same ideology , or nah ?
 
#283
#283
hog88 said:
The 1A was written at a time when the word press did not include the ability to reach around the world in seconds. So do you also think a reasonable interpretation of the 1A should include limitations on the internet?
Click to expand...

How does that effect the intent and effect of 1A. I'd say the difference in a musket and nuclear weapon makes your comparison a little off the mark.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Purple Tiger
#284
#284
ClearwaterVol said:
non-sequitur.

The 2A was written at a time when the word arms did not include weapons that could destroy the world. Therefore, I think a reasonable interpretation would be to place certain "arms" outside of the rights granted under 2A. Hence my comment about limits.
Click to expand...
This is the most reasonable position to take about the 2A
 
  • Like
Reactions: Purple Tiger
#290
#290
hog88 said:
Look Luther, when you bring in the hysteria of nuclear weapons to a 2A debate you have lost.
Click to expand...

Do explain? If 2A is limitless then my argument should be easy to defend by simply saying, "Yes, I believe that all Americans should be able to own a nuclear device of their own."
 
#291
#291
ClearwaterVol said:
How does that effect the intent and effect of 1A. I'd say the difference in a musket and nuclear weapon makes your comparison a little off the mark.
Click to expand...

Your party isn’t after our nuclear weapons , it’s after our muskets . At the time it was written , muskets were the weapon of choice for governments and citizens . Reasonable and rational arguments would be if the weapons of the governments advanced so should the weapons of the citizen just to be able to hold to their intended purposes .
 
#294
#294
USAFgolferVol said:
This is the most reasonable position to take about the 2A
Click to expand...

It's the most illogical position. By taking that position on the 2A one must take into account advances in technology vs what was available at it's writing in interpreting the entire BORs
 
  • Like
Reactions: vols40
#295
#295
hog88 said:
Look Luther, when you bring in the hysteria of nuclear weapons to a 2A debate you have lost.

What's next sarin gas, biological weapons?
Click to expand...

It's all they have fear mongering. They cannot argue issues because the facts do not support them.
 
#296
#296
0nelilreb said:
Your party isn’t after our nuclear weapons , it’s after our muskets . At the time it was written , muskets were the weapon of choice for governments and citizens . Reasonable and rational arguments would be if the weapons of the governments advanced so should the weapons of the citizen just to be able to hold to their intended purposes .
Click to expand...

But you have argued there is no interpretation necessary. Either the right is not limitless like you argue or you believe in private ownership of nuclear weapons.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top