This "Marine" exercised his 2nd amendment rights!

[DaBurglar]

DaBurglar there you go again, saying that was a "stupid" analogy.

If you UNDERSTAND the analogy it is actually a quite good comparison. If you need a parachute because you are falling out of the sky but if you don't have said parachute when you are falling out of the sky; you will die because you didn't have a parachute.

If you are ever in a situation where a person with evil intent had a gun pointed at you but you didn't have a gun to point back at them; you will die because you didnt have a gun.Oh knock it off already ...... you are not as stupid or thick as you try to portray yourself just for the sake of making some bogus argument.    I said the ANALOGY is stupid (which it is), not the person....you say incredibly dumb things all the time, yet you are not as DUMB as all that.....even myself sometimes do stupid things (which might even include taking the time to respond to your pointless dreck) but I know I am not stupid.When did you all of a suddent become so incredibly "sensitive"?  And yet you are the one who will be the first to lament all the "POLITICAL CORRECT NESS"  and similar BS that exists today......again, HYPOCRISY.    I am beginning to think you have no clue at all what Hypocrisy is, either that or you simply do not care and think it does not apply to you.And DB cooper did not use the parachute to either rob the bank or kill anyone, and all evidence points to the fact that the parachute he (ALLEGEDLY) used to jump out of a plane traveling more than 350 MPH did NOT....repeat, NOT save him from the massive forces applied to his human body;  obviously the guy never took either basic physics or a class on aerodynamics.And finally there is this point......many people, myself included, have personal (and religious) views on such situations as being threatened with violence and what not......if someone is pointing a gun at me, chances are they want something of mine, in which case they can have it......i personally own or possess NOTHING that is either worth my own life, OR taking someone else's life even if "justified"......so there is that scenario, and it applies to the vast majority of situations in which a gun is pointed at someone.Now for all the "OTHER" situations.......if some RADICAL TERRORIST who happens to have co-opted some religion (like Islam, or even some perverted form of christianity like David Koresh) or some philosophy (like Nazism or Communism) or some nihilistic anarchistic point of view (like any of today's young gang bangers) and is pointing a gun at me because they want to take my life, well then I am of the belief that (as the Bible says) Vengeance is the Lord's, and as a christian I am required to turn the other cheek.    That's just me.....I refuse to take anyone's life.     Now that does not mean I will not try to escape harm by getting away or talking myself out of something, OR even submitting if that will help (while living to escape another day.)For the 88th time let me reiterate.....I have NO PROBLEM with responsible, law abiding people owning a gun.    While I do not believe the 2nd Amendment applies to the same extent in TODAY's world as it did 250 years ago (the WORLD changes and the constitution must be adjusted to reflect those changes), I do believe citizens have the right to gun ownership barring any exclusionary factors.     What is wrong with that?This continued, pointless opposition to any, ANY attempt to keep guns OUT of the hands of mentally ill or criminal people is beyond my comprehension, other than it simply reinforces the perception that a small virulent minority of unreasonable people have co-opted the NRA and "gun lobby" to their own extremist view point.

[Tedlark]

By calling the poster's analogy stupid you are calling the poster stupid.

So DaBurglar; what other constitutional amendments do you feel don't apply to the same extent in TODAY'S world as they did 250 years ago?

[DaBurglar]

By calling the poster's analogy stupid you are calling the poster stupid.
No, see that's what YOU think, and that's how YOU interpret things.....sorry, I dont agree, ergo I will continue to say what I want to say.
So DaBurglar; what other constitutional amendments do you feel don't apply to the same extent in TODAY'S world as they did 250 years ago? Nice try to once again either over simplify, missapply or flat out distort what I am trying to say....My point is/was that the US Constitution (and all its amendments)  is a DYNAMIC Charter/document (please note this is NOT merely my own personal take on things, but in fact it is the commonly held point of view of any Academic authority/scholar on the US Constitution, that it is a DYNAMIC Document).....that means it is literally ALIVE, and its APPLICATION & INTERPRETATION,not to mention its actual MAKE UP and CONTENT,  is forever evolving in sometimes subtle, sometimes overt ways in response to a constantly changing and evolving world.....I seriously doubt you are going to dispute that aspect of this discussion.The various amendments of the US Constitution are open to interpretation in how and where they apply (which is why we have a Supreme Court and something called JUDICIAL REVIEW, and which is why any Supreme court Nomination is SUCH a big deal, because the potential impact such nominations have is huge and one of the more long term, lasting, important aspects of being elected president....)To answer your original question concerning WHAT else besides the 2nd Amendment has changed , consider the MANY ways in which the US Constitution has evolved and changed throughout its history....changed in its actual content, changed in its interpretation and changed in its application.  Since the final Constitutional Convention at which the final draft was created with the first 10 Amendments (the Bill of Rights), followed by the ratification  process among the original 13 states (colonies) in 1787, there have been no fewer than 17 ADDITIONAL Amendments to the US Constitution in the 228-1/2 years since then....one of those amendments (the 21st) was specifically meant to repeal a preceding amendment (the 18th, a.k.a.  "PROHIBITION")   Again, all the subsequent 17 Amendments AFTER the original Constitution was ratified were the result of a CHANGING and evolving world.....a famous example obviously is the 13th Amendment Abolished SLAVERY....Slavery itself was something which the ORIGINAL Constitution overtly acknowledged and sanctioned through its use of calculating each state's representation in Article 2 where it allows "3/5. three fifths, of a slave" to be counted when figuring exactly how many representatives are due each state in the House of Representatives!   The aforementioned 18th amendment, Prohibition, crafted, drafted and ratified in a very short period of time between 1918 thru 1920, was the result of a DRASTIC (and dynamic) change in the USA's gender and cultural mores;   the Women's Christian Temperance Movement succeeded in getting BOOZE banned, which had been around for a long time, seized upon the circumstance that World War One (WWI) provided with MANY American Men far away (or otherwise preoccupied with in Military life) and thus unable to do anything to effectively oppose it!That the 2nd amendment's application and interpretation is DIFFERENT today than when it was first drafted and applied back in the 1780s is self evident.....the need for guns, and the reason(s) for each citizen having a gun were all too clear in America's early days.

[Tedlark]

What a long moronic, stupid, idiotic, diversionary speech that didn't at all, address my original query.

I didn't ask "what, besides the 2nd Amendment has changed." I asked: "what other constitutional amendments do you feel don't apply to the same extent in TODAY'S world as they did 250 years ago?"

Instead, you gave a 2nd grader's cut and paste Wikipedia dribble cup answer about US Constitutional history that was covered in my 6th grade history class.

[DaBurglar]

What a long moronic, stupid, idiotic, diversionary speech that didn't at all, address my original query.

I didn't ask "what, besides the 2nd Amendment has changed." I asked: "what other constitutional amendments do you feel don't apply to the same extent in TODAY'S world as they did 250 years ago?"

Instead, you gave a 2nd grader's cut and paste Wikipedia dribble cup answer about US Constitutional history that was covered in my 6th grade history class.

Sure I addressed it....unless you really want to try and define how different "What's Changed?" is to  "What applied back then that''s different Today?"    That's called....um, "CHANGE" Ted.....   I win again......poor Ted.    Keeps bangin' that Monstrous sized head of his against the wall that is my superior intellect....no one knows why he does it, except him.Pssst....I graduated from the ABSOLUTE BEST SCHOOL IN THE WORLD with a Degree in Government (with heavy concentration in, among other things.....the US CONSTITUTION......

[Tedlark]

Pssst.....I graduated from the ABSOLUTE BEST SCHOOL IN THE WORLD with a Degree in Government (with heavy concentration in, among other things...the US Constitution.



Coulda fooled us...

And this is why you were in marketing for a box company in Los Angeles, huh???

[DaBurglar]

Pssst.....I graduated from the ABSOLUTE BEST SCHOOL IN THE WORLD with a Degree in Government (with heavy concentration in, among other things...the US Constitution.



Coulda fooled us...

And this is why you were in marketing for a box company in Los Angeles, huh??? You really are stupid enough to think that's an insult........True colors once again folks.....I win another round.     I love the fact I incite you to sink to lower and lower levels of NASTY and spiteful behavior the more we post and the more I come out on top, because it makes it clear to the rest of the viewing public just what kind of person you really are inside (even though I already knew this a long time ago.....)