[Ed] Jesus Guns Babies - Page 2

Mike! · 19th February 2022, 01:08 PM

Wasn't that the name of a Warren Zevon song?

Mojo · 19th February 2022, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by Armitage72

They forget, or likely never knew, that George Washington personally led troops armed under the provisions of the Second Amendment to put down a rebellion by farmers who were refusing to pay taxes.

But you have to remember that they approve of the right kind of tyranny. Probably the kind with Jesus, guns, and babies.

Stacyhs · 19th February 2022, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by Mojo

But you have to remember that they approve of the right kind of tyranny. Probably the kind with Jesus, guns, and babies.

Especially if it's led by a pathological liar, serial adulterer, racist, bigoted sociopath. You know, the kind of guy Jesus would choose.

TomB · 19th February 2022, 01:43 PM

Originally Posted by newyorkguy

I saw video the other night of a woman at a school board meeting literally screaming at the board members -- it was a budget hearing -- how about family budgets? To treat the long term damage their kids will suffer from having had to wear face masks in the classroom. Other attendees were cheering her on.

They became so unruly they finally had to be escorted out by police. Fortunately, none of them were prepared to exercise their second amendment rights, though I'm sure most believed the school board was acting 'tyrannically.'

Not to derail, but her source might be a little left than you think. I heard the information about developmental problems due to young children wearing masks in school from...NPR.

I have NPR on most of the time when I'm driving and a few days ago they had a story about this. Apparently, masks hide a lot of visual cues that children need for learning and social development.

TomB · 19th February 2022, 01:52 PM

Originally Posted by Mike!

Wasn't that the name of a Warren Zevon song?

Hmmm...it would almost work...

I went home with a waitress
And I took a little risk
Send Jesus Guns and Babies
Dad get me out of this

Norman Alexander · 19th February 2022, 02:32 PM

Originally Posted by TomB

Not to derail, but her source might be a little left than you think. I heard the information about developmental problems due to young children wearing masks in school from...NPR.

I have NPR on most of the time when I'm driving and a few days ago they had a story about this. Apparently, masks hide a lot of visual cues that children need for learning and social development.

COVID renders them dead, and that point fairly moot.

slyjoe · 19th February 2022, 02:48 PM

Originally Posted by Mike!

Wasn't that the name of a Warren Zevon song?

Lawyers, guns and money. That is what Republican politicians bring to today's contests.

d4m10n · 19th February 2022, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by Craig4

No, just no. The idea that the Founding Fathers wanted people armed to resist a central government is laughable.

Against whom did they want to have the militias armed?

Trebuchet · 19th February 2022, 04:09 PM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

Against whom did they want to have the militias armed?

Native Americans, not to mention the Brits to the north and Spanish to the south.

Lurch · 19th February 2022, 04:17 PM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

Against whom did they want to have the militias armed?

The kind of 'militias' the prepper movement puts together, to take a modern case. The militias of the time, being "well regulated" and an important adjunct to a Continental Army, would be presumed to be supportive of and loyal to the Republic. Any rabble who might raise arms against Her, or in numbers refuse their legal obligations such as paying taxes, could be the sort the then "well regulated militia" would be arrayed against.

While the Founders could envisage the eventuality for such as today's traitorous GOP to be **** out of the bowels of the nation's deplorables, and potentially needing a corrective administered by patriotic Americans, surely this could not be the sole purpose of an armed, "well regulated militia". Such a narrow remit of action against the State only would imply the 2A to be almost a suicide clause.

Craig4 · 19th February 2022, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

Against whom did they want to have the militias armed?

The native people. The French who were still on the frontier. To really understand the 2nd Amendment you have to understand the Roman early Republican period and how much the Founding Fathers saw themselves as creating the second Roman Republic. It would be difficult to overstate the impact of having an education rooted in the Roman classical period on our Founding Fathers.

The 2nd Amendment is the only one of the first ten Amendments that speaks to the duty a citizen has to the state. In the Roman Republic, a citizen owned his own military equipment and in time of war, reported for duty with his gear. That's the vision of the Founders when writing the 2nd Amendment.

Our Founding Fathers were keenly aware of the impact of a professional, full time army on the end of the Roman Republic. The Founding Fathers knew that the young country needed an army but they didn't want a standing army. So, they wanted citizens to keep arms and then be formed into a "Well regulated militia" when needed.

shemp · 19th February 2022, 04:47 PM

Originally Posted by Craig4

The native people. The French who were still on the frontier. To really understand the 2nd Amendment you have to understand the Roman early Republican period and how much the Founding Fathers saw themselves as creating the second Roman Republic. It would be difficult to overstate the impact of having an education rooted in the Roman classical period on our Founding Fathers.

The 2nd Amendment is the only one of the first ten Amendments that speaks to the duty a citizen has to the state. In the Roman Republic, a citizen owned his own military equipment and in time of war, reported for duty with his gear. That's the vision of the Founders when writing the 2nd Amendment.

Our Founding Fathers were keenly aware of the impact of a professional, full time army on the end of the Roman Republic. The Founding Fathers knew that the young country needed an army but they didn't want a standing army. So, they wanted citizens to keep arms and then be formed into a "Well regulated militia" when needed.

They certainly could have worded it better and made their intentions clearer.

lomiller · 19th February 2022, 05:18 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

The concept of resistance to tyranny has always been part of the 2A landscape. Like...since the beginning.

The people who argue for this almost exclusively turn a blind eye to actual tyranny such as police killing back Americans in absurdly high numbers.

lomiller · 19th February 2022, 05:25 PM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

Against whom did they want to have the militias armed?

My understanding is that the founding fathers considers a large standing army to represent a direct threat to freedom and that state run militia were thought of as an alternative to the large federally run army that they feared. The militia, therefor, would do all or nearly all the things a standing army would normally do.

Again, though. In today's context how many of the "gun rights" people actually support radically downsizing the US military?

bruto · 19th February 2022, 05:33 PM

Originally Posted by lomiller

The people who argue for this almost exclusively turn a blind eye to actual tyranny such as police killing back Americans in absurdly high numbers.

It goes without saying, I'd have thought, that the definition of tyranny was always equivocal, or the amendment would have excused the mass assassination of slaveowners from the start, and even if we manage to squeak out of that, excuses of excluded groups diminish after emancipation. It's not surprising that the Black Panthers are considerable contributors to the revival of attention to the amendment. One might consider it generous of them to have stuck to the literal part and not taken the interpretation as far as some right wingers have been doing.

d4m10n · 19th February 2022, 06:12 PM

Originally Posted by Trebuchet

Native Americans, not to mention the Brits to the north and Spanish to the south.

Okay, the latter two examples don't undermine the idea that militias were intended as a safeguard against monarchical tyranny.

sackett · 19th February 2022, 06:38 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

The concept of resistance to tyranny has always been part of the 2A landscape. Like...since the beginning.

And democracy IS tyranny when our side doesn't win!

newyorkguy · 19th February 2022, 07:01 PM

Originally Posted by Craig4

...The 2nd Amendment is the only one of the first ten Amendments that speaks to the duty a citizen has to the state. In the Roman Republic, a citizen owned his own military equipment and in time of war, reported for duty with his gear. That's the vision of the Founders when writing the 2nd Amendment...

Extremely well put. I'm sure that's exactly the way the courts viewed the second amendment for decades.

Originally Posted by shemp

They certainly could have worded it better and made their intentions clearer.

That's actually a frequent criticism by Constitutional scholars.

If you've been around a while you know that the emphasis on people arming themselves was an outgrowth of the crime wave of the 1960s-1980s. When I first joined this forum there were several 'gun threads' going on. The pro-gun people always mentioned crime. One post I remember from a pro-NRA poster was -- he wrote this any number of times -- you and your family are accosted in the street by thugs. Without a handgun what would you do? Cower and turn over your valuables? Try not to watch as they assault your wife or daughter? Or, newyorkguy, would you run away, leaving your family to the mercy of the thugs?

Now it's suddenly all about resisting tyranny. But who gets to define 'tyranny.'

Them? ↓

Stacyhs · 19th February 2022, 07:22 PM

The problem with strict 'originialist' interpretation of the Constitution is that times change, conditions change, threats change, technologies change. The Founding Fathers could no more envisage our times than we can envisage 300 years from now. What we can interpret is the spirit of their vision.

TragicMonkey · 19th February 2022, 07:47 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

The problem with strict 'originialist' interpretation of the Constitution is that times change, conditions change, threats change, technologies change. The Founding Fathers could no more envisage our times than we can envisage 300 years from now. What we can interpret is the spirit of their vision.

The Constitution is very clear that when it comes to apportioning Congressional representation the Borg all together only count as one person.

Tero · 19th February 2022, 08:13 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

I'm just imagining what a girls' night out with Kandiss, Lauren, and Marjorie would be like.

Kind of like Dick Cheney hunting quail.

Stacyhs · 19th February 2022, 08:57 PM

Originally Posted by Tero

Kind of like Dick Cheney hunting quail.

Dan?

dudalb · 20th February 2022, 02:25 AM

Originally Posted by Lurch

The kind of 'militias' the prepper movement puts together, to take a modern case. The militias of the time, being "well regulated" and an important adjunct to a Continental Army, would be presumed to be supportive of and loyal to the Republic. Any rabble who might raise arms against Her, or in numbers refuse their legal obligations such as paying taxes, could be the sort the then "well regulated militia" would be arrayed against.

While the Founders could envisage the eventuality for such as today's traitorous GOP to be **** out of the bowels of the nation's deplorables, and potentially needing a corrective administered by patriotic Americans, surely this could not be the sole purpose of an armed, "well regulated militia". Such a narrow remit of action against the State only would imply the 2A to be almost a suicide clause.

Historically the Miltias were not very well organized and tended to be useless on the battlefield without a lot of training by the Regulars. Huge problem in the early days of the Civil war for both sides.

Tero · 22nd February 2022, 12:34 PM

Originally Posted by shemp

It's not a lost Nirvana album:

https://twitter.com/ariehkovler/stat...32545218928642

When is Jesus going to gun the babies?

shemp · 22nd February 2022, 12:40 PM

Originally Posted by Tero

When is Jesus going to gun the babies?

Tonight on Tucker Carlson's show.

bruto · 22nd February 2022, 02:32 PM

Originally Posted by shemp

Tonight on Tucker Carlson's show.

Or Alex Jones. People don't gun babies, Jesus does!

Edited by zooterkin:

<SNIP>
Edited for rule 11 and rule 12.

ZiprHead · 22nd February 2022, 06:21 PM

JESUS GUNS BABIES

Does Jesus shoot them out of a cannon cuz I'd pay to see that?

Regnad Kcin · 22nd February 2022, 07:53 PM

Originally Posted by Warp12

The concept of resistance to tyranny has always been part of the 2A landscape. Like...since the beginning.

Well, noooo.

Regnad Kcin · 22nd February 2022, 08:08 PM

Originally Posted by Resume

I always thought Jesus was kind of a dick, but Jesus Christ, now he's gunning babies!

And in conclusion of this Master Class, let me leave you with one final example of how, with the right skill set, anyone can turn comedy into super comedy.

Thermal · 22nd February 2022, 08:12 PM

Originally Posted by ZiprHead

JESUS GUNS BABIES

Does Jesus shoot them out of a cannon cuz I'd pay to see that?

I thought it meant Jesus bequeathed rocking biceps on the little ones.

Stacyhs · 22nd February 2022, 08:17 PM

I bet this hangs on the wall of some homes in Trumplandia:

bruto · 22nd February 2022, 08:34 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

I bet this hangs on the wall of some homes in Trumplandia:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...5a737b4212.jpg

Now, for a limited time, the makers of the junior assault rifle bring you the PRINCE OF PEACEMAKER® in senior and junior sizes.

No more mister nice guy. He's coming back, and this time he's packing!

bruto · 23rd February 2022, 10:30 AM

And of course the printers are gearing up for the new sticker. Who would Jesus Shoot?

66bdfy.jpg

No union bug on me, baby!

d4m10n · 24th February 2022, 08:13 AM

Originally Posted by Warp12

The concept of resistance to tyranny has always been part of the 2A landscape. Like...since the beginning.

Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin

Well, noooo.

We've already gone through this upthread.

If the Second Amendment wasn't intended to arm the people against tyrants (e.g. George III^WP of England and Charles III of Spain^WP) what was it intended to do?

Stacyhs · 24th February 2022, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

We've already gone through this upthread.

If the Second Amendment wasn't intended to arm the people against tyrants (e.g. George III^WP of England and Charles III of Spain^WP) what was it intended to do?

To secure a free State by the use of well regulated militias? As in putting down internal rebellions like the Whiskey and Fries's Rebelllions against the government?

Quote:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Trebuchet · 24th February 2022, 07:36 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

To secure a free State by the use of well regulated militias? As in putting down internal rebellions like the Whiskey and Fries's Rebelllions against the government?

And native Americans, and rebellious slaves.

Stacyhs · 24th February 2022, 07:57 PM

Originally Posted by Trebuchet

And native Americans, and rebellious slaves.

True. They were seen as threats to a 'secure State'.

d4m10n · 24th February 2022, 08:27 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

As in putting down internal rebellions like the Whiskey and Fries's Rebelllions against the government?

What evidence can be adduced that the authors had rebellions rather than despots in mind?

Britannica seems to think that the idea was to "provide for the defense of the nation, to provide a well-trained and disciplined force to check federal tyranny, and to bring constitutional balance by distributing the power of the sword equally among the people, the states, and the federal government."

Stacyhs · 25th February 2022, 12:29 AM

Originally Posted by d4m10n

We've already gone through this upthread.

If the Second Amendment wasn't intended to arm the people against tyrants (e.g. George III^WP of England and Charles III of Spain^WP) what was it intended to do?

Originally Posted by d4m10n

What evidence can be adduced that the authors had rebellions rather than despots in mind?

Britannica seems to think that the idea was to "provide for the defense of the nation, to provide a well-trained and disciplined force to check federal tyranny, and to bring constitutional balance by distributing the power of the sword equally among the people, the states, and the federal government."

I did not say that they did not include foreign threats. I did not say it was one or the other. You limited it to foreign 'tyrants" like George III and Charles III and asked "what was it intended to do?" I expanded it to include internal rebellions and other internal threats. Or do you think militias were only meant to confront foreign threats?

MarkCorrigan · 25th February 2022, 04:02 AM

It's like a parody of the GQP. Absolutely mental.

19th February 2022, 01:08 PM	#41
Mike! Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it! Join Date: May 2010 Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not! Posts: 50,196	Wasn't that the name of a Warren Zevon song?
	__________________ "Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes... Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."

19th February 2022, 01:09 PM	#42
Mojo Mostly harmless Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Nor Flanden Posts: 37,079	Originally Posted by Armitage72 They forget, or likely never knew, that George Washington personally led troops armed under the provisions of the Second Amendment to put down a rebellion by farmers who were refusing to pay taxes. But you have to remember that they approve of the right kind of tyranny. Probably the kind with Jesus, guns, and babies.
	__________________ "You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield "The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky

19th February 2022, 01:43 PM	#44
TomB Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,565	Originally Posted by newyorkguy I saw video the other night of a woman at a school board meeting literally screaming at the board members -- it was a budget hearing -- how about family budgets? To treat the long term damage their kids will suffer from having had to wear face masks in the classroom. Other attendees were cheering her on. They became so unruly they finally had to be escorted out by police. Fortunately, none of them were prepared to exercise their second amendment rights, though I'm sure most believed the school board was acting 'tyrannically.' Not to derail, but her source might be a little left than you think. I heard the information about developmental problems due to young children wearing masks in school from...NPR. I have NPR on most of the time when I'm driving and a few days ago they had a story about this. Apparently, masks hide a lot of visual cues that children need for learning and social development.
TomB Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,565

19th February 2022, 01:52 PM	#45
TomB Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,565	Originally Posted by Mike! Wasn't that the name of a Warren Zevon song? Hmmm...it would almost work... I went home with a waitress And I took a little risk Send Jesus Guns and Babies Dad get me out of this
TomB Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,565

19th February 2022, 02:32 PM	#46
Norman Alexander Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Dharug & Gundungurra Posts: 14,963	Originally Posted by TomB Not to derail, but her source might be a little left than you think. I heard the information about developmental problems due to young children wearing masks in school from...NPR. I have NPR on most of the time when I'm driving and a few days ago they had a story about this. Apparently, masks hide a lot of visual cues that children need for learning and social development. COVID renders them dead, and that point fairly moot.
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

19th February 2022, 01:21 PM	#43
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 30,295	Originally Posted by Mojo But you have to remember that they approve of the right kind of tyranny. Probably the kind with Jesus, guns, and babies. Especially if it's led by a pathological liar, serial adulterer, racist, bigoted sociopath. You know, the kind of guy Jesus would choose.

19th February 2022, 02:48 PM	#47
slyjoe Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Near Harmonica Virgins, AZ Posts: 3,499	Originally Posted by Mike! Wasn't that the name of a Warren Zevon song? Lawyers, guns and money. That is what Republican politicians bring to today's contests.
	__________________ "You have done nothing to demonstrate an understanding of scientific methodology or modern skepticism, both of which are, by necessity, driven by the facts and evidence, not by preconceptions, and both of which are strengthened by, and rely upon, change." - Arkan Wolfshade Last edited by slyjoe; 19th February 2022 at 03:26 PM.

19th February 2022, 03:45 PM	#48
d4m10n Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 10,907	Originally Posted by Craig4 No, just no. The idea that the Founding Fathers wanted people armed to resist a central government is laughable. Against whom did they want to have the militias armed?
	__________________ Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.

19th February 2022, 04:09 PM	#49
Trebuchet Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Port Townsend, Washington Posts: 36,519	Originally Posted by d4m10n Against whom did they want to have the militias armed? Native Americans, not to mention the Brits to the north and Spanish to the south.
	__________________ Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.

19th February 2022, 04:17 PM	#50
Lurch Master Poster Join Date: Sep 2016 Location: Ottawa Posts: 2,410	Originally Posted by d4m10n Against whom did they want to have the militias armed? The kind of 'militias' the prepper movement puts together, to take a modern case. The militias of the time, being "well regulated" and an important adjunct to a Continental Army, would be presumed to be supportive of and loyal to the Republic. Any rabble who might raise arms against Her, or in numbers refuse their legal obligations such as paying taxes, could be the sort the then "well regulated militia" would be arrayed against. While the Founders could envisage the eventuality for such as today's traitorous GOP to be **** out of the bowels of the nation's deplorables, and potentially needing a corrective administered by patriotic Americans, surely this could not be the sole purpose of an armed, "well regulated militia". Such a narrow remit of action against the State only would imply the 2A to be almost a suicide clause.

19th February 2022, 04:43 PM	#51
Craig4 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: I live in a swamp Posts: 26,911	Originally Posted by d4m10n Against whom did they want to have the militias armed? The native people. The French who were still on the frontier. To really understand the 2nd Amendment you have to understand the Roman early Republican period and how much the Founding Fathers saw themselves as creating the second Roman Republic. It would be difficult to overstate the impact of having an education rooted in the Roman classical period on our Founding Fathers. The 2nd Amendment is the only one of the first ten Amendments that speaks to the duty a citizen has to the state. In the Roman Republic, a citizen owned his own military equipment and in time of war, reported for duty with his gear. That's the vision of the Founders when writing the 2nd Amendment. Our Founding Fathers were keenly aware of the impact of a professional, full time army on the end of the Roman Republic. The Founding Fathers knew that the young country needed an army but they didn't want a standing army. So, they wanted citizens to keep arms and then be formed into a "Well regulated militia" when needed.

19th February 2022, 04:47 PM	#52
shemp a flimsy character...perfidious and despised Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Where the Old Man of the Mountain used to stand Posts: 55,218	Originally Posted by Craig4 The native people. The French who were still on the frontier. To really understand the 2nd Amendment you have to understand the Roman early Republican period and how much the Founding Fathers saw themselves as creating the second Roman Republic. It would be difficult to overstate the impact of having an education rooted in the Roman classical period on our Founding Fathers. The 2nd Amendment is the only one of the first ten Amendments that speaks to the duty a citizen has to the state. In the Roman Republic, a citizen owned his own military equipment and in time of war, reported for duty with his gear. That's the vision of the Founders when writing the 2nd Amendment. Our Founding Fathers were keenly aware of the impact of a professional, full time army on the end of the Roman Republic. The Founding Fathers knew that the young country needed an army but they didn't want a standing army. So, they wanted citizens to keep arms and then be formed into a "Well regulated militia" when needed. They certainly could have worded it better and made their intentions clearer.
	__________________ "An empty void is growing between his ears. Distant screams can be heard echoing in the darkness." -- JihadJane

19th February 2022, 05:18 PM	#53
lomiller Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 12,938	Originally Posted by Warp12 The concept of resistance to tyranny has always been part of the 2A landscape. Like...since the beginning. The people who argue for this almost exclusively turn a blind eye to actual tyranny such as police killing back Americans in absurdly high numbers.
	__________________ "Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"

19th February 2022, 05:25 PM	#54
lomiller Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 12,938	Originally Posted by d4m10n Against whom did they want to have the militias armed? My understanding is that the founding fathers considers a large standing army to represent a direct threat to freedom and that state run militia were thought of as an alternative to the large federally run army that they feared. The militia, therefor, would do all or nearly all the things a standing army would normally do. Again, though. In today's context how many of the "gun rights" people actually support radically downsizing the US military?
	__________________ "Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"

19th February 2022, 05:33 PM	#55
bruto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy Posts: 34,758	Originally Posted by lomiller The people who argue for this almost exclusively turn a blind eye to actual tyranny such as police killing back Americans in absurdly high numbers. It goes without saying, I'd have thought, that the definition of tyranny was always equivocal, or the amendment would have excused the mass assassination of slaveowners from the start, and even if we manage to squeak out of that, excuses of excluded groups diminish after emancipation. It's not surprising that the Black Panthers are considerable contributors to the revival of attention to the amendment. One might consider it generous of them to have stuck to the literal part and not taken the interpretation as far as some right wingers have been doing.
	__________________ Like many humorless and indignant people, he is hard on everybody but himself, and does not perceive it when he fails his own ideal (Molière) A pedant is a man who studies a vacuum through instruments that allow him to draw cross-sections of the details (John Ciardi)

19th February 2022, 06:12 PM	#56
d4m10n Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 10,907	Originally Posted by Trebuchet Native Americans, not to mention the Brits to the north and Spanish to the south. Okay, the latter two examples don't undermine the idea that militias were intended as a safeguard against monarchical tyranny.
	__________________ Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.

19th February 2022, 06:38 PM	#57
sackett Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Detroit Posts: 8,387	Originally Posted by Warp12 The concept of resistance to tyranny has always been part of the 2A landscape. Like...since the beginning. And democracy IS tyranny when our side doesn't win!
	__________________ If you would learn a man's character, give him authority. If you would ruin a man's character, let him seize power.

19th February 2022, 07:22 PM	#59
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 30,295	The problem with strict 'originialist' interpretation of the Constitution is that times change, conditions change, threats change, technologies change. The Founding Fathers could no more envisage our times than we can envisage 300 years from now. What we can interpret is the spirit of their vision.

19th February 2022, 07:47 PM	#60
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 66,006	Originally Posted by Stacyhs The problem with strict 'originialist' interpretation of the Constitution is that times change, conditions change, threats change, technologies change. The Founding Fathers could no more envisage our times than we can envisage 300 years from now. What we can interpret is the spirit of their vision. The Constitution is very clear that when it comes to apportioning Congressional representation the Borg all together only count as one person.
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

19th February 2022, 08:13 PM	#61
Tero Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: North American prairie Posts: 3,074	Originally Posted by Stacyhs I'm just imagining what a girls' night out with Kandiss, Lauren, and Marjorie would be like. Kind of like Dick Cheney hunting quail.
	__________________ Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh! Politics blog: https://esapolitics.blogspot.com/ Parody: http://karireport.blogspot.com/ Poll: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...proval-rating/

19th February 2022, 08:57 PM	#62
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 30,295	Originally Posted by Tero Kind of like Dick Cheney hunting quail. Dan?

20th February 2022, 02:25 AM	#63
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 58,605	Originally Posted by Lurch The kind of 'militias' the prepper movement puts together, to take a modern case. The militias of the time, being "well regulated" and an important adjunct to a Continental Army, would be presumed to be supportive of and loyal to the Republic. Any rabble who might raise arms against Her, or in numbers refuse their legal obligations such as paying taxes, could be the sort the then "well regulated militia" would be arrayed against. While the Founders could envisage the eventuality for such as today's traitorous GOP to be **** out of the bowels of the nation's deplorables, and potentially needing a corrective administered by patriotic Americans, surely this could not be the sole purpose of an armed, "well regulated militia". Such a narrow remit of action against the State only would imply the 2A to be almost a suicide clause. Historically the Miltias were not very well organized and tended to be useless on the battlefield without a lot of training by the Regulars. Huge problem in the early days of the Civil war for both sides.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

22nd February 2022, 12:34 PM	#64
Tero Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: North American prairie Posts: 3,074	Originally Posted by shemp It's not a lost Nirvana album: https://twitter.com/ariehkovler/stat...32545218928642 When is Jesus going to gun the babies?
	__________________ Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh! Politics blog: https://esapolitics.blogspot.com/ Parody: http://karireport.blogspot.com/ Poll: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...proval-rating/

22nd February 2022, 12:40 PM	#65
shemp a flimsy character...perfidious and despised Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Where the Old Man of the Mountain used to stand Posts: 55,218	Originally Posted by Tero When is Jesus going to gun the babies? Tonight on Tucker Carlson's show.
	__________________ "An empty void is growing between his ears. Distant screams can be heard echoing in the darkness." -- JihadJane

22nd February 2022, 06:21 PM	#67
ZiprHead Muse Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Sag-Nasty Posts: 927	JESUS GUNS BABIES Does Jesus shoot them out of a cannon cuz I'd pay to see that?
	__________________ When conservatives realize they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy. IIDB is back, baby!

22nd February 2022, 07:53 PM	#68
Regnad Kcin Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: The old Same place Posts: 10,842	Originally Posted by Warp12 The concept of resistance to tyranny has always been part of the 2A landscape. Like...since the beginning. Well, noooo.
	__________________ My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

22nd February 2022, 08:08 PM	#69
Regnad Kcin Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: The old Same place Posts: 10,842	Originally Posted by Resume I always thought Jesus was kind of a dick, but Jesus Christ, now he's gunning babies! And in conclusion of this Master Class, let me leave you with one final example of how, with the right skill set, anyone can turn comedy into super comedy.
	__________________ My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie. Last edited by Regnad Kcin; 22nd February 2022 at 08:21 PM.

22nd February 2022, 08:12 PM	#70
Thermal Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2016 Location: In the Troll Ignoring Section Posts: 22,595	Originally Posted by ZiprHead JESUS GUNS BABIES Does Jesus shoot them out of a cannon cuz I'd pay to see that? I thought it meant Jesus bequeathed rocking biceps on the little ones.
	__________________ "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" -Mark Twain "Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

22nd February 2022, 08:17 PM	#71
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 30,295	I bet this hangs on the wall of some homes in Trumplandia:

22nd February 2022, 08:34 PM	#72
bruto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy Posts: 34,758	Originally Posted by Stacyhs I bet this hangs on the wall of some homes in Trumplandia: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...5a737b4212.jpg Now, for a limited time, the makers of the junior assault rifle bring you the PRINCE OF PEACEMAKER® in senior and junior sizes. No more mister nice guy. He's coming back, and this time he's packing!
	__________________ Like many humorless and indignant people, he is hard on everybody but himself, and does not perceive it when he fails his own ideal (Molière) A pedant is a man who studies a vacuum through instruments that allow him to draw cross-sections of the details (John Ciardi)

23rd February 2022, 10:30 AM	#73
bruto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy Posts: 34,758	And of course the printers are gearing up for the new sticker. Who would Jesus Shoot? 66bdfy.jpg No union bug on me, baby!
	__________________ Like many humorless and indignant people, he is hard on everybody but himself, and does not perceive it when he fails his own ideal (Molière) A pedant is a man who studies a vacuum through instruments that allow him to draw cross-sections of the details (John Ciardi)

24th February 2022, 08:13 AM	#74
d4m10n Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Mounts Farm Posts: 10,907	Originally Posted by Warp12 The concept of resistance to tyranny has always been part of the 2A landscape. Like...since the beginning. Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin Well, noooo. We've already gone through this upthread. If the Second Amendment wasn't intended to arm the people against tyrants (e.g. George III^WP of England and Charles III of Spain^WP) what was it intended to do?
	__________________ Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it. Last edited by d4m10n; 24th February 2022 at 08:15 AM.

24th February 2022, 07:21 PM	#75
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 30,295	Originally Posted by d4m10n We've already gone through this upthread. If the Second Amendment wasn't intended to arm the people against tyrants (e.g. George III^WP of England and Charles III of Spain^WP) what was it intended to do? To secure a free State by the use of well regulated militias? As in putting down internal rebellions like the Whiskey and Fries's Rebelllions against the government? Quote: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

24th February 2022, 07:36 PM	#76
Trebuchet Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Port Townsend, Washington Posts: 36,519	Originally Posted by Stacyhs To secure a free State by the use of well regulated militias? As in putting down internal rebellions like the Whiskey and Fries's Rebelllions against the government? And native Americans, and rebellious slaves.
	__________________ Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.

24th February 2022, 07:57 PM	#77
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 30,295	Originally Posted by Trebuchet And native Americans, and rebellious slaves. True. They were seen as threats to a 'secure State'.