Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Mass shootings at New Zealand mosques...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    I will not entertain the idiocy that there is some analogue argument as it relates to the 1st amendment and modern communications technology.
    You won't entertain it because it destroys your argument. You haven't refuted it, either.

    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    While i understand that there where some primative attempts at multishot weapons in the late 1700s, these were hardly weapons the average colonist could afford or would find even remotely practical.
    So what? That sort of weaponry still existed, the Founding Fathers knew it existed, they knew that technology wasn't static, and yet they chose not to place the sort of restrictions on the 2nd Amendment that you imagine they intended. I'm not even aware of extant writings or debate that would support your interpretation that it's what they intended.
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

    Comment


    • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post


      Jim
      Kinda sad watching you turn into the Jorge of civics.
      "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
      GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
        You won't entertain it because it destroys your argument. You haven't refuted it, either.


        So what? That sort of weaponry still existed, the Founding Fathers knew it existed, they knew that technology wasn't static, and yet they chose not to place the sort of restrictions on the 2nd Amendment that you imagine they intended. I'm not even aware of extant writings or debate that would support your interpretation that it's what they intended.
        I think he believes this adds some weight to his argument when the reality is there’s no way to know how people living 250 years ago would react to modern inventions. They may even disagree with his views since we are some of the safest and most comfortable people in history despite the existence of such weapons. It’s a bad and rather silly argument that is basically a Jorge level dumb argument.
        "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
        GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
          You won't entertain it because it destroys your argument. You haven't refuted it, either.
          There is no need to. If you can't make the argument directly, then you have no argument. Analogies are useful tools to help explain an idea to the less intelligent, they are rarely isomorphic, which means they contain elements not germane to the actual conditions they symbolize, and they are unnecessary if one has a complete argument in support of the specific idea in question.

          Engaging you or anyone else in this discussion on that rabbit trail is exactly that: A rabbit trail. I will not go there.


          So what? That sort of weaponry still existed, the Founding Fathers knew it existed, they knew that technology wasn't static, and yet they chose not to place the sort of restrictions on the 2nd Amendment that you imagine they intended. I'm not even aware of extant writings or debate that would support your interpretation that it's what they intended.
          The idea the founding fathers in 1791 could anticipate the weaponry of the 20th and 21st century and took that into account as they penned the 2nd amendment is ludicrous. And that they MIGHT have known about clumsy experiments with multi-shot weapons is NOT proof of the same. As for me, I don't have to prove it false MM, the proponent of the absurd bears the burden of proof. You have to prove it makes sense. My proof they KNEW they could not possibly anticipate the future needs of the republic is THE PROVISION TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION. Any part of the constitution can be amended. Including previous AMENDMENTS. That means that if we as a people realize some modern weaponry is too powerful to make the 2nd amendment practical in its existing form, we can modify it or if necessary repeal it.

          Fortunately, I don't think the solution need be that drastic. We can simply use existing precedent governing weapons with mass destructive power to control access to weapons that give a single person that capability.

          Jim
          Last edited by oxmixmudd; 03-26-2019, 08:34 AM.
          My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

          If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

          This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

          Comment


          • Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
            Kinda sad watching you turn into the Jorge of civics.
            sticks and stones love. You will note I don't call people names.

            I don't need to.


            Jim
            My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

            If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

            This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

            Comment


            • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
              Analogies are useful tools to help explain an idea to the less intelligent, they are rarely isomorphic, which means they contain elements not germane to the actual conditions they symbolize, and they are unnecessary if one has a complete argument in support of the specific idea in question.
              Your first mistake is thinking that it's an analogy when it is, in fact, a direct application of your argument to the First Amendment. You claim (rather speciously) that our Founding Fathers never envisioned a time when people would be able to possess guns that could be quickly and efficiently deployed against a large number of targets. By that same logic, they never envisioned a time when one could instantly transmit an idea to millions of people simultaneously and that they only intended the First Amendment to apply to speech that traveled slowly and could be actively challenged along the way. You reject the second argument for the exact same reason that I reject the first argument. Q.E.D.
              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
              Than a fool in the eyes of God


              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

              Comment


              • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                sticks and stones love. You will note I don't call people names.

                I don't need to.
                You don't call people names, but you condescendingly refer to lilpixie as "love".

                Were you being deliberately ironic? Or was this just your usual brand of rank hypocrisy?
                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                Comment


                • So Jim, I reject your specious argument about what the founding fathers would have thought about modern weapons since you have no idea what they would have thought. You are forcing your personal views upon people dead for two centuries. All we have are their writings and those support the idea that citizens should be able to own firearms and the government should not be able to abridge that right.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                    So Jim, I reject your specious argument about what the founding fathers would have thought about modern weapons since you have no idea what they would have thought. You are forcing your personal views upon people dead for two centuries. All we have are their writings and those support the idea that citizens should be able to own firearms and the government should not be able to abridge that right.
                    If he could present even a single writing, or transcript of a debate where lethality of a weapon in question was ever a consideration when writing the Second Amendment then he might have a leg to stand on.
                    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                    Than a fool in the eyes of God


                    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                      sticks and stones love. You will note I don't call people names.

                      I don't need to.


                      Jim
                      No, you just give passive aggressive back handed slaps and pretend it’s somehow better for some reason. Carry on with your train wreck. Can’t stop someone determined to plow 100 MPH into a brick wall while claiming it isn’t there.
                      "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                      GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                        You don't call people names, but you condescendingly refer to lilpixie as "love".

                        Were you being deliberately ironic? Or was this just your usual brand of rank hypocrisy?
                        Sexist insults are only wrong when they come from Trump or his ‘supporters’.
                        "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                        GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                          You don't call people names, but you condescendingly refer to lilpixie as "love".
                          It is a quote from "Pirates of the Caribbean" and it simply means that her name calling will be ignored. And I have used it in reply to name calling by both men and women.

                          Were you being deliberately ironic? Or was this just your usual brand of rank hypocrisy?
                          And the name calling continues. "Sticks and Stones luv"


                          Jim
                          Last edited by oxmixmudd; 03-26-2019, 02:55 PM.
                          My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                          If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                          This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                            It is a quote from "Pirates of the Caribbean" and it simply means that her name calling will be ignored. And I have used it in reply to name calling by both men and women.
                            Right, and you don't intend it to be the least bit condescending.

                            You must think we're pretty stupid to believe that one.
                            Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                            But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                            Than a fool in the eyes of God


                            From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                              So Jim, I reject your specious argument about what the founding fathers would have thought about modern weapons since you have no idea what they would have thought. You are forcing your personal views upon people dead for two centuries. All we have are their writings and those support the idea that citizens should be able to own firearms and the government should not be able to abridge that right.
                              You have every right to reject my argument, wrong though you may be

                              Jim
                              My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                              If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                              This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                                Right, and you don't intend it to be the least bit condescending.

                                You must think we're pretty stupid to believe that one.
                                It’s okay because reasons or something...
                                "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                                GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                45 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                231 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                32 responses
                                176 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                73 responses
                                293 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X