Terrorists In WI Assault Citizens With Violence And Extortion

reply to post by mnemeth1


The militia clause thing is the only exchange we have had in this thread? You have not been arguing with for the ENTIRE thread about my not wanting open carry on my property?

What the hell are you arguing with me about then?

Originally posted by Curiousisall


For that matter, the 2nd ammendment does not even give you the right to open carry but that is a whole other ball of wax.

Sorry but the definition of bear is,

to hold or support and transport somebody or something

So, how does that not give you the right to carry your gun?

According to, For the Defense of Themselves and the State: The Original Intent and Judicial Interpretation of the
Right to Keep and Bear Arms, Clayton Cramer, out of 300 cases in state and federal courts only ten have ever found that the second ammendment (or it's state analogs) is not an individual right. That means that only about 3.3% of judicial minds believe the second ammendment doesn't allow you the right to own and carry weapons as an individual.

In the last year the supreme court has decided in cases against Chicago and Washington DC tha the second ammendment gives the individual the right to own a gun.

Originally posted by MikeNice81

Originally posted by Curiousisall


For that matter, the 2nd ammendment does not even give you the right to open carry but that is a whole other ball of wax.

Sorry but the definition of bear is,

to hold or support and transport somebody or something

So, how does that not give you the right to carry your gun?

Try reading what I wrote again. This time pay attention to the words I used. There is a reason I used all of them.

reply to post by Curiousisall


Just answer the question. If you have the right to bear arms, why can you not open carry. How does it not allow you that right? Answer the question.

reply to post by Nivcharah


Are you referring to the report that was generated by the City? I read it, over and over again. You trust that to be objective? Perhaps you missed the part about what transpired in the ACTUAL 911 CALL, top of page 10, post by mnemeth1...

The dispatcher actually told her open carry was legal, and then the caller out-right apologized for calling and emphatically stated the men were doing nothing wrong and she didn't want to get them in trouble or waste the cops time.

Now if that's true, the Police have some explaining to do, IMO.

Originally posted by MikeNice81
reply to post by Curiousisall

 

Just answer the question. If you have the right to bear arms, why can you not open carry. How does it not allow you that right? Answer the question.

It is a false question because it is not based on what I actually said. Show me where it specifies the right to OPEN carry or move along.

Originally posted by Curiousisall

For that matter, the 2nd ammendment does not even give you the right to open carry but that is a whole other ball of wax. I was just pointing out that property owners have rights too.

Prove this statement. Why do you believe the 2nd ammendment does not allow for the right to open carry? To bear arms means to carry those arms. Are you saying it doesn't allow for carrying arms or that it only disallows certain types of carry.

Give your interpretation. You have made a statement justify that statement through evidence or interpretation. It isn't up to me to prove anything since you made the original statement.

Originally posted by MikeNice81
Prove this statement. Why do you believe the 2nd ammendment does not allow for the right to open carry? To bear arms means to carry those arms. Are you saying it doesn't allow for carrying arms or that it only disallows certain types of carry.

Do you have a hard time reading English? This is not an insult but a real question. You keep re-arranging what I actually said in order to make some point. I guess at this point I need to understand just how best to communicate with you because so far just writing what I mean in plain English is not working.

Give your interpretation. You have made a statement justify that statement through evidence or interpretation. It isn't up to me to prove anything since you made the original statement.

I really think you need to read what I actually wrote a few more times or tell me what your native language is and I will do my best to find some middle ground where you can understand me, ok?

Let's all turn the hostility down a little. I will do my best. No need for us to start today off all heated.

reply to post by Curiousisall


Maybe you need a refresher course in English. I am asking you to justify the statement you made. I quoted it directly so that you would have it in front of you. Prove or justify the statement you made regarding the second ammendment and open carry.

I'm not trying to pick a fight. I'm trying to understand why you made the statement. You keep saying that some how I am twisting your words. Yet, I quoted you twice.

Why do you believe that, the second ammendment does not grant the right to open carry?

Originally posted by MikeNice81
reply to post by Curiousisall

 

Maybe you need a refresher course in English. I am asking you to justify the statement you made. I quoted it directly so that you would have it in front of you.

I know, that is what I find so perplexing. You quote it and then go on to ask a question that makes no sense if you actually read it.

Prove or justify the statement you made regarding the second ammendment and open carry.

I do not really have to. Look at the 2nd ammendment. Need me to quote it here for you or do you know what it says? It does not anywhere specify that you are guaranteed the right to OPEN carry.

I'm not trying to pick a fight. I'm trying to understand why you made the statement. You keep saying that some how I am twisting your words. Yet, I quoted you twice.

Yes, you quoted them but do not seem to understand them at all. Your questions twiste what it is in the quotes. Why are you doing that? You must be trying to pick a fight because you have no real argument. The 2nd ammendment does not grant you the right to OPEN carry. It does not specifically address open or concealed in any fashion at all.

Why do you believe that, the second ammendment does not grant the right to open carry?

Because it does not. Need me to quote it for you?

reply to post by Curiousisall



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.

No it does not stipulate a particular type of carry. However it does say the right to keep and bear arms. To bear arms means to carry them. So while it does not stipulate a form of carry it does give the right to carry.

Are you disputing the fact that it gives the right to carry weapons because it fails to stipulate a type of carry? If it fails to out right allow for concealed or open carry then what form of carry is meant by the word bear?

I just want your interpretation.

reply to post by hippomchippo


There are plenty of reasons to carry your firearm EVERYWHERE. This includes FAMILY RESTURANTS. I will carry into a chuckie cheese. I dont care. Violent crime can and may happen ANYWHERE at ANYTIME, thus me wanting to be ready at ANYTIME and ANYWHERE.

You think that the American people and their families should be completely vulnerable to criminals just because it makes a few uncomfortable? If American firearm tradition and culture, makes you uncomfortable, move to China or the UK. You'll be much more comfortable there.

Originally posted by mamabeth
reply to post by Nivcharah

 

A prime example of mass paranoia.
One of many excuses used to try
and curtail gun ownership!

Originally posted by AzoriaCorp
reply to post by hippomchippo

 

There are plenty of reasons to carry your firearm EVERYWHERE. This includes FAMILY RESTURANTS. I will carry into a chuckie cheese. I dont care. Violent crime can and may happen ANYWHERE at ANYTIME, thus me wanting to be ready at ANYTIME and ANYWHERE.

You think that the American people and their families should be completely vulnerable to criminals just because it makes a few uncomfortable? If American firearm tradition and culture, makes you uncomfortable, move to China or the UK. You'll be much more comfortable there.

You were saying something about mass paranoia to manipulate something? BE SCARED ALL THE TIME! BE SCARED EVERYWHERE YOU GO. The following is a list of Chuckee Cheeze shooting deaths...


Mass paranoia indeed.

Originally posted by MikeNice81
reply to post by Curiousisall

 

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.

No it does not stipulate a particular type of carry.

And that is what I said. Why are you all so argumentative here? I point out that the right to bear does not trump private property rights and people argue with me, BASELESSLY. I point out the the 2nd does not specify you have a right to carry a certain way and you argue with me, BASELESSLY.

What is the problem? This is why AS A GUNOWNER MYSELF, I am not a huge fan of a lot of the gun owners I have met. You all seem a bit angry.

However it does say the right to keep and bear arms. To bear arms means to carry them. So while it does not stipulate a form of carry it does give the right to carry.

I
never
said
it
did
not.

Are you disputing the fact that it gives the right to carry weapons because it fails to stipulate a type of carry?

Back to twisting my words already? I never disputed the fact that it gives the right to carry. Not once. Not in one of the times you quoted me, not ever. Stop twisting what I said in order to just argue with me.

If it fails to out right allow for concealed or open carry then what form of carry is meant by the word bear?

You are adding a negative where I never put one and that is where you are getting confused. I never said you do not have the right to carry, I just said it does not GIVE YOU THE RIGHT TO OPEN CARRY. It does not specify. That is not the same thing as saying it DENIES THAT RIGHT. Jesus.

I just want your interpretation.

It does not specify you have a specific right to carry one way or the other. It does not even specify handguns or grenade launchers. I suppose you feel it grants you the right to bear nuclear weapons too.

reply to post by MikeNice81


In my opinion,I feel the member you are "debating" with
should be dealt with in the following manner.Proverbs26:4
Answer not a fool according to his folly,lest thou be like
unto him.

Originally posted by Curiousisall
You were saying something about mass paranoia to manipulate something? BE SCARED ALL THE TIME! BE SCARED EVERYWHERE YOU GO. The following is a list of Chuckee Cheeze shooting deaths...


Mass paranoia indeed.

No there has not been a mass shooting at a Chuk E. Cheese yet. However there have been enough melees and assorted mayhem. The show Infomania on the Current network recently did a comic bit about Chuck E. Cheese. Why? Because in the matter of a couple of weeks there were more than a dozen melees reported at Chuck E. Cheese locations across the country.

I find it ironic that you have a gun under your register but believe other people are fetishistic, and parnoid because they want to protect their family.

I mean we all know something like three woman being attacked in broad daylight never happens. The world is so safe, and the criminals will always be nice enough to give you advance warning. I mean we know nobody would dare try to attack an elderly woman in an elevator. There has never been an incident of a whole family getting attacked by a gang of youths in a park.

You can become a victim any where. The best thing is to use situational awareness and avoid iffy situations. However, sometimes that isn't enough. In those cases you need to be prepared to use the fullest measure of force allowed by law to protect your life and your health.

reply to post by Curiousisall


I was not twisting your words. I was asking if that was your belief. I never said that you believed in anything besides what I quoted. If you notice, I repeatedly used a question mark instead of a period. That means it was a question and not a declaritive statement.

I love how you think that because I want clarification on your point that I must want nuclear weapons. All I am asking is what do you believe the word bear means. Does that mean the right to carry the gun from your car to your house? Is it the right to carry for personal protection? What is your interpretation?

By the way I do not believe the average person should have nuclear weapons. However, that is arguing off of the point.

reply to post by MikeNice81


On to your next pointless argument? Why are some of you so worried about how I live my life? I have not told one person what they can and cannot do but you spend pages arguing with me over what I choose to do? You just spent a page yourself arguing with me over something I never said. You even quoted it and still argued over something I NEVER SAID. Now, instead of admitting you would have been better off not bothering, you just find something else to argue about? Stop.

I made two points. The assertion that the 2nd ammendment trumps private property rights is FALSE, as stated in the OP. Even the OP who admitted I was write argued with me for saying it 11 TIMES!
Then I pointed out that it does not specify you have the right to open carry so relying on it to back up the OPEN CARRY argument is a bit false.

That is it. Look how much time you have all wasted arguing with me over those two simple things. Why? They are still correct. Is it because I do not agree you need to take your guns to every childrens birthday party you go to? Do I not have the right to feel that way?

Originally posted by MikeNice81
reply to post by Curiousisall

 

I was not twisting your words.

Yes, you were. Over and over again.

Originally posted by MikeNice81
Are you disputing the fact that it gives the right to carry weapons because it fails to stipulate a type of carry?

I never once disputed that it gives you the right to carry. Not once. Never. That is what twisting my words is, RIGHT THERE.

I was asking if that was your belief. I never said that you believed in anything besides what I quoted. If you notice, I repeatedly used a question mark instead of a period. That means it was a question and not a declaritive statement.

If you notice it is a false question that twists what I said over and over again. I said it does not grant you the right to OPEN CARRY. You keep asking why I think it denies you the right to carry. Stop. Please for the love of god, stop. If you cannot address what I actually said, just stop.

I never said what you keep asking me so I cannot actually answer it. I have told you what I believe it says about 3 times now. STOP, PLEASE STOP just arguing for no reason.

Either show me where it DOES INDEED GUARANTEE THE RIGHT TO OPEN CARRY or stop, just stop. I never said it DENIED anything.

What would be more dangerous for a tyrannic leader, then an armed population? The next step will soon be gun control.