The beezzer's Court. On trial, The 2nd Amendment

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by eXia7

 

So you want to defend it without having to defend it? Makes sense.
I propose that we only hear from people that either want to be on the:

1. Defense
2. Prosecution
3. Jury
4. Witness stand

All others are welcome to debate this item in the many other threads about the 2nd amendment.

This thread is about exactly what Beezzer said it is about. You don't want to participate? Watch or leave.

I see no point in contributing anymore, I presented what I thought, and I will say it again. There is no point in creating a faux trial, that will ultimately be dominated by outside opinion against a right that the American founding fathers fought tooth and nail to enact and preserve.

reply to post by eXia7

Personally, it seems a great idea to me. It's a creative way for the best and most solid points of either side to be made as forcefully as either desires....without the consideration of personal conflict or strife ever coming into it.

Who knows...with each side vying to pick a Jury. The Judge here may be confident in which way it may go by logical deduction but volunteering for a side myself, I sure don't feel as confident.

Everyone may see if different of course.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by eXia7

 

Personally, it seems a great idea to me. It's a creative way for the best and most solid points of either side to be made as forcefully as either desires....without the consideration of personal conflict or strife ever coming into it.

Who knows...with each side vying to pick a Jury. The Judge here may be confident in which way it may go by logical deduction but volunteering for a side myself, I sure don't feel as confident.

Everyone may see if different of course.

Well, I respect your opinion, but I just feel it's another attempt for people to express overbearing opinions on a subject they on average lack understanding. Life isn't about funny memes and buzzwords.

reply to post by eXia7


I'm sure you aren't the only one with this opinion...but what are you and others afraid of? This is a conspiracy website, we don't write laws here. This is a good exercise. Both sides get to present their case and we get to watch, agree/disagree, and maybe learn a few things we didn't know.

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by eXia7

 

I'm sure you aren't the only one with this opinion...but what are you and others afraid of? This is a conspiracy website, we don't write laws here. This is a good exercise. Both sides get to present their case and we get to watch, agree/disagree, and maybe learn a few things we didn't know.

Yeah, I'm not "afraid" I've argued my position in like 10 of the 150 threads about the 2nd amendment and gun control, and you're right this is a conspiracy site, but lately it has become a bash the Americans because they wanna keep their rights site.

reply to post by eXia7

I respect your opinion as well...and isn't all Court about overbearing opinions and pushing as hard as possible to win the case? That's what makes it valuable in real life as well as Mock trials, which is the very high dollar and commercial term for Beezzers idea here. More formal when done for 5 figure fees of course, but same idea. When both sides are equally passionate, the truth, in theory, is what survives in-between.

I'll take my participation seriously and folks know me as one to not throw out half baked evidence. If I'm with others like minded and a couple equally forceful were to represent the other side with the kitty who already volunteered? The Jury, as such, would have something worthy of calling a deliberation.

Indeed.. I'm kinda excited at the idea. It's certainly a different way to examine one of the most pressing issues of the day.

Originally posted by eXia7

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by eXia7

 

I'm sure you aren't the only one with this opinion...but what are you and others afraid of? This is a conspiracy website, we don't write laws here. This is a good exercise. Both sides get to present their case and we get to watch, agree/disagree, and maybe learn a few things we didn't know.

Yeah, I'm not "afraid" I've argued my position in like 10 of the 150 threads about the 2nd amendment and gun control, and you're right this is a conspiracy site, but lately it has become a bash the Americans because they wanna keep their rights site.

If you are well versed and practiced then, why not join the defense? This has nothing to do with "bash Americans because they wanna keep their rights" and everything to do with an exercise in litigation and a civil debate on the 2nd Amendment.
Don't use the Anti-American card, it is as old and passe as using the race card when there is no logical argument to be heard.

reply to post by eXia7


But how valid is your argument?

How valid was mine on the threads I participated in?

This is not some thread that will decide it all, this is just a forum to rationally explain means, motive, and opportunity for the validity of the Amendment.

Originally posted by superman2012

Originally posted by eXia7

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by eXia7

 

I'm sure you aren't the only one with this opinion...but what are you and others afraid of? This is a conspiracy website, we don't write laws here. This is a good exercise. Both sides get to present their case and we get to watch, agree/disagree, and maybe learn a few things we didn't know.

Yeah, I'm not "afraid" I've argued my position in like 10 of the 150 threads about the 2nd amendment and gun control, and you're right this is a conspiracy site, but lately it has become a bash the Americans because they wanna keep their rights site.

If you are well versed and practiced then, why not join the defense? This has nothing to do with "bash Americans because they wanna keep their rights" and everything to do with an exercise in litigation and a civil debate on the 2nd Amendment.
Don't use the Anti-American card, it is as old and passe as using the race card when there is no logical argument to be heard.

Well, if you convince me to contribute more, then can we bring your right to free speech up to the chopping block? or would that be too sensitive of a subject to cover?

reply to post by eXia7


Sure! I don't mind. No subject is taboo for me. If you want to have a logical and civil discussion about something, let me know.

Star for you!

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by eXia7

 

Sure! I don't mind. No subject is taboo for me. If you want to have a logical and civil discussion about something, let me know.

Star for you!

edit on 11-1-2013 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)

Well, with that in mind, I will consider more contributions here, but right now it seems only 4 people have contributed to this thread, and honestly that's a small group to present the second amendment to be debated on a "criminal" level. So I will watch for more opinions, but right now I gotta run some errands

reply to post by eXia7


Sounds good, I look forward to hearing from you. You have remained civil and respectful even though I was putting you under pressure and asking questions/making statements that would have made lesser people make a quick comeback. I think you will do great in this thread!
Let's hope more people like you decide to participate.

reply to post by beezzer


I know that you love to hold court.

I would even act as prosecution just to exercise my brain (though I admit it would be hard as I am a ardent supporter of the 2nd)

And while it would be fun, I believe it would degenerate quickly as have most of the gun threads.

I would whole heartedly back a new ATS poll though. As long as the one question, "Do you own any weapons and what type?" was not asked.

It should be more 2nd amendment, along with current and proposed law specific.

It could start out with;

Do you support the 2nd Amendment? Yes or No

And from there delve into magazine capacity, types of weapons, taxation on ammo (or not) etc, etc. The list can go on and on.

Maybe even a sub-poll regarding primitive weapons such as crossbows or bow and arrows.

If ya like the idea, I’ll give you a hand with the questionnaire.

So your honor hows this gonna work?

How many for the prosecution and defence?
How many jurors?
how will witnesses be called?
Can we get a mod involved so unjust and irrelevant points can be stricken from the record?

Will you truly be able to remain impartial and judge the trial based on the facts given or will you revert to your pre trial ideas?

Hey, Intrepid! You still around? (or aboot? Since you're Canadian )

Just an idea.

We get a team of people on defense, and a team for prosecution, but in the end, ATS does one of their polls for a yay or nay vote on their presentations?

Whatdoyathink?

reply to post by TDawgRex


Dang, I just posted about a poll.

Great minds. . .

Originally posted by beezzer
Hey, Intrepid! You still around? (or aboot? Since you're Canadian

)

Just an idea.

We get a team of people on defense, and a team for prosecution, but in the end, ATS does one of their polls for a yay or nay vote on their presentations?

Whatdoyathink?

We must have been typing the poll idea at the same time.

What a coi-inky-dink!

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
So your honor hows this gonna work?

How many for the prosecution and defence?
How many jurors?
how will witnesses be called?
Can we get a mod involved so unjust and irrelevant points can be stricken from the record?

Will you truly be able to remain impartial and judge the trial based on the facts given or will you revert to your pre trial ideas?

As a judge I will concern myself with means, motive, oppourtunity. Everyone knows my opinion, but opinions are like elbows, everyone has 7.

I would hope that the mods DO involve themselves, though it can be time consuming for a single thread.

I'd like to see teams on both sides so it isn't a sole opinion/interpretation fest.

reply to post by beezzer

Who runs the Debate Forum here? The actual "Debate" forum. Would that be Skyfloating or ADVISOR? That might be a spot to start for the technical venue if such a thing could be done seriously without 30 pages of outbursts from the court gallery, so to speak.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I love