Re: If true then all Joe Biden needs to do is point out in the Constitution where he gets the delegated power to limit
BeamMeUpScotty <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | alt.politics.congress,alt.politics.corruption,alt.censorship,alt.politics.economics,alt.politics.election,alt.politics.misc,alt.politics.obama,alt.politics.scorched-earth,alt.politics.socialism.mao,alt.politics.trump,alt.global-warming,alt.conspiracy,alt.apocolypse,alt.politics.usa,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.infowars, alt.beam-me-up.scotty.there-is-no.intelligent-life.down-here,alt.politics.guns,alt.politics,talk.politics.guns |
|---|---|
| Organization | Support the "Propaganda Wars Open Source Project" to encourage less violence and hate inside America's Borders. |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 11/23/22 10:36 AM, David Hartung wrote: > On 11/23/22 08:31, Mitchell Holman wrote: >> David Hartung <[email protected]> wrote in >> news:[email protected]: >> >>> On 11/22/22 12:03, Rudy Canoza wrote: >>>> On 8/31/2022 2:20 PM, David Hartung wrote: >>>>> On 8/31/22 14:26, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote: >>>>>> On 8/31/2022 12:19 PM, #ReamMeUpTheAssSnotty, brain-damaged >>>>>> fucktard who rode his scooter into a tree while not wearing a >>>>>> helmet, stupidly bawled and lied: >>>>>> >>>>>>> https://www.infowars.com/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Lie site lies not read. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If true then all Joe Biden needs to do is point out in the >>>>>>> Constitution where he gets the delegated power to limit the RIGHT >>>>>>> of the people to keep and bear arms. >>>>>> >>>>>> The limits are, of course, inherent to the right. Ask Hartung — >>>>>> I've instructed himon this point many times. He knows it by heart >>>>>> now. >>>>> >>>>> All you have done Rudy, is to say that the limits are inherent, >>>> >>>> They are. >>>> >>>>> but you never explain just how that is. >>>> >>>> Of course I've explained it. >>> >>> No, yo have not. >>> >>>>> The truth is that you have no idea how or in what way the second >>>>> amendment may be limited. >>>> >>>> No one said the *amendment* is limited. It is the right to keep and >>>> bear arms that is limited. The amendment merely enumerates the >>>> right. It neither defines nor addresses any limits of the right. >>>> However, we know those limits are there. >>>> >>>> It is not a right to just whatever arms you may wish to have. >>> >>> The highest law of the nation states that one's right to arm oneself >>> may not be infringed. That same law places no limit on what type of >>> arms we have the right to carry, therefore there is no legal limit on >>> the types of weapons which may be possessed by a private citizens. >>> Furthermore, one who would seek to limit the ability pf the citizenry >>> to be armed, has no business in any position of legal authority. >> >> >> So you DO believe, as I have shown from >> your previous posts, that everyone has a right >> to carry whatever weaponry they want. > > So? > >> PS: Are all limitations on freedoms cited >> on the Bill of Rights an "infringement"? > > Limitations, what Rudy calls inherent limitations, involve using one's > freedom to cause harm, such as slander, and crying "fire" in a crowded > theater. That same limitation applies to the right to keep and bear > arms. That limitation does not extend to denying people the authority to > possess firearms which scare people such as you. > The RIGHT is NOT scary so carrying a gun is NOT scary. It's what the person does with it, if they use it in an intimidating way by taking it in their hand as if to use it. That might be scary but if they have it in the glove box or in a holster or under a seat or at home and NOT in their hand in a threatening way, then it can't be illegal. Beyond that it may be self defense or NOT and the courts might need to decide the use of the gun in an attempt to intimidate or hold someone against their will. But owning and carrying it while NOT pointed at or intimidating someone is just bearing arms. -- -That's karma-