Impeach Gov. Andrew Cuomo 4 violating New Yorker's 2nd Amendment

Page 5 of 12 First ... 34567 ... Last

  1. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post
    Why does what bother me?

    "There is some irony in saying that gun ownership is a god given right and cannot be taken away by man, in lieu of the fact that these documents were written by.... MEN
    ."

    Whats the big deal if someone is religious and feel rights are given by a god? Does that bother you? If not what is your purpose of that post?
    This message was paid for by the Russians


  2. Quote Originally Posted by jimbuick View Post
    Interesting. So you've posted none of your own thoughts in this thread?
    And here I thought you were in the business of inferring. I've stated my points many times over. You still have access to guns...(there it is in a nutshell)
    •   
       


  3. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post
    Lol. So who created/crafted the bill of rights? If not by governmental figures. Who crafted the Constitution? Was it not men who worked in various areas of governance? Oh I forgot ...it's the "creator."
    cheeky sarcastic bastard lol

    and yes even though it was men that crafted the bill, but the bill they crafted was to limit its powers. if that was the case why did they choose to use words like "the government SHALL NOT infringe...."? why wouldnt they say "the governments GIVES these rights?

    it was to protect the rights of the individual citizens from future tyrants that could potentially take power later down the road and want to remove these rights from the citizens. they were smart enough to understand that what the "government giveth, the government can take away" but if the government doesnt give rights, they cant remove those rights.

    bottom line is, the rights are there and they wont be taken away by anybody, the american people wont allow it, and the consitution doesnt allow it. no matter how much you or jefferson or obama bitches about it. If you dont like it, move to a country where freedoms and liberties are privelages and not rights.
    Quote Originally Posted by iparatroop View Post
    I'm usually crying when people take naked pictures of me. Fcuking childhood.

  4. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post
    And here I thought you were in the business of inferring. I've stated my points many times over. You still have access to guns...(there it is in a nutshell)
    Thats not true, not everybody (and more importantly law abiding citizens) have access to guns, look at post #7 for a real example in this thread.

    Is there "freedom of the press" if a reporters editor selectively censors certain articles and topics?
    This message was paid for by the Russians

  5. Quote Originally Posted by ax1 View Post

    "There is some irony in saying that gun ownership is a god given right and cannot be taken away by man, in lieu of the fact that these documents were written by.... MEN
    ."

    Whats the big deal if someone is religious and feel rights are given by a god? Does that bother you? If not what is your purpose of that post?
    You're inferring again. It has nothing to do with me. I'm not that self involved. I could care less one way or the other what someone believes. I'm not here to interpret. The fact is, the Constitution makes no mention whatsoever about GOD. Fact. Not opinion.
    •   
       


  6. Quote Originally Posted by MANotaur View Post
    bottom line is, the rights are there and they wont be taken away by anybody, the american people wont allow it, and the consitution doesnt allow it. no matter how much you or jefferson or obama bitches about it. If you dont like it, move to a country where freedoms and liberties are privelages and not rights.
    The problem is they already have taken our rights away. For example, the NDAA act has officially by law stripped the 5th amendment.

    Its one thing to follow the constitution, its another to preach it as a museum artifact.
    This message was paid for by the Russians

  7. Quote Originally Posted by MANotaur View Post
    cheeky sarcastic bastard lol

    and yes even though it was men that crafted the bill, but the bill they crafted was to limit its powers. if that was the case why did they choose to use words like "the government SHALL NOT infringe...."? why wouldnt they say "the governments GIVES these rights?

    it was to protect the rights of the individual citizens from future tyrants that could potentially take power later down the road and want to remove these rights from the citizens. they were smart enough to understand that what the "government giveth, the government can take away" but if the government doesnt give rights, they cant remove those rights.

    bottom line is, the rights are there and they wont be taken away by anybody, the american people wont allow it, and the consitution doesnt allow it. no matter how much you or jefferson or obama bitches about it. If you dont like it, move to a country where freedoms and liberties are privelages and not rights.
    Okay here's my point, if the government does not OFFER rights to its people as you've stated above, then who drafted/offered the Bill of Rights?

  8. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post

    Okay here's my point, if the government does not OFFER rights to its people as you've stated above, then who drafted/offered the Bill of Rights?
    INALIENABLE rights are not OFFERED to any man, by any government.

  9. Quote Originally Posted by carpee View Post
    INALIENABLE rights are not OFFERED to any man, by any government.
    And who wrote that?

  10. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post
    Okay here's my point, if the government does not OFFER rights to its people as you've stated above, then who drafted/offered the Bill of Rights?
    rights are self evident, privelages are given. nobody decided these are rights and those privelages. and my point is if the government wanted to control rights or privelages why was the language used to limit what they can and cant take away?
    Quote Originally Posted by iparatroop View Post
    I'm usually crying when people take naked pictures of me. Fcuking childhood.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by MANotaur View Post
    rights are self evident, privelages are given. nobody decided these are rights and those privelages. and my point is if the government wanted to control rights or privelages why was the language used to limit what they can and cant take away?
    Who wrote that text? "We hold these truths to be self-evident." <------Written by men in GOVERNMENT, NOT by some divine being.

  12. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post

    And who wrote that?
    who else would write it?

  13. Quote Originally Posted by carpee View Post
    who else would write it?
    Men in government...correct? Or incorrect?

  14. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post
    You're inferring again. It has nothing to do with me. I'm not that self involved. I could care less one way or the other what someone believes. I'm not here to interpret. The fact is, the Constitution makes no mention whatsoever about GOD. Fact. Not opinion.
    Usually you would find that in the preamble, and in the religion clauses. The US constitution's preamble was based off of the model of the preamble in the Articles of Confederation which did not use the word "god." It began as Articles of the Confederation and started listing the 13 states....which later was dropped to be simpler as "We The People." In 1787, it was most likely unimaginable that radical secularists groups would spin it the way they have.

    Anyways can carry on, and I know its debatable, but personally it doesnt matter to me.
    This message was paid for by the Russians

  15. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post
    Who wrote that text? "We hold these truths to be self-evident." <------Written by men NOT by some divine being.
    i never argued that i was some divine being, the point im making is that government cant take these rights away, nomatter who wrote them, man or divine being
    Quote Originally Posted by iparatroop View Post
    I'm usually crying when people take naked pictures of me. Fcuking childhood.

  16. Quote Originally Posted by ax1 View Post
    Usually you would find that in the preamble, and in the religion clauses. The US constitution's preamble was based off of the model of the preamble in the Articles of Confederation which did not use the word "god." It began as Articles of the Confederation and started listing the 13 states....which later was dropped to be simpler as "We The People." In 1787, it was most likely unimaginable that radical secularists groups would spin it the way they have.

    Anyways can carry on, and I both know its debatable, but personally it doesnt matter to me.
    I already know the document's roots, as I've researched it at length so that I'm prepared. Lol.

  17. Quote Originally Posted by MANotaur View Post
    i never argued that i was some divine being, the point im making is that government cant take these rights away, nomatter who wrote them, man or divine being
    So essentially the government can write/propose law, but it CANNOT restrict them?

  18. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post
    So essentially the government can write/propose law, but it CANNOT restrict them?
    semantics much?

    and thats what it says in the bill of rights isnt it? government SHALL NOT INFRINGE.
    and theres a difference in law and rights...again...

    law- dont kill people, its bad
    right- to own guns and protect myself

    law-dont steal, its bad
    right- to have/create a job to support myself and those that i so chose

    law-dont lie under oathe, its bad
    right- to express my thoughts and opinions openly without fear of consequence or punishment

    difference between law and right my friend. Government can write laws to protect its citizens and its citizens rights but it cannot pass legislation that removes my ability to exercise my right.
    Quote Originally Posted by iparatroop View Post
    I'm usually crying when people take naked pictures of me. Fcuking childhood.

  19. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post

    So essentially the government can write/propose law, but it CANNOT restrict them?
    restrict laws? or restrict freedoms?

    government restricts freedom every time a new law is passed.

  20. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post
    So essentially the government can write/propose law, but it CANNOT restrict them?
    and ill state it again....if you dont like the way things are structure here in the US...move to a country that fits your beliefs.
    Quote Originally Posted by iparatroop View Post
    I'm usually crying when people take naked pictures of me. Fcuking childhood.

  21. Quote Originally Posted by carpee View Post
    restrict laws? or restrict freedoms?

    government restricts freedom every time a new law is passed.
    So your position (based on the statement above) is that as a country we SHOULD NOT be ruled/governed by law? That's your position?

  22. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post

    So your position (based on the statement above) is that as a country we SHOULD NOT be ruled/governed by law? That's your position?
    that is ridiculous.

    I thought you weren't in the business of interpreting...

  23. Quote Originally Posted by MANotaur View Post
    semantics much?

    and thats what it says in the bill of rights isnt it? government SHALL NOT INFRINGE.
    and theres a difference in law and rights...again...

    law- dont kill people, its bad
    right- to own guns and protect myself

    law-dont steal, its bad
    right- to have/create a job to support myself and those that i so chose

    law-dont lie under oathe, its bad
    right- to express my thoughts and opinions openly without fear of consequence or punishment

    difference between law and right my friend. Government can write laws to protect its citizens and its citizens rights but it cannot pass legislation that removes my ability to exercise my right.
    Fair enough, good response. Although, one could argue that we have a "right" to choose what we can or cannot do with our bodies? Yet, ROE V WADE contradicts that argument entirely. So it's not exactly a black and white argument, when you examine the context.

  24. Quote Originally Posted by carpee View Post
    that is ridiculous.

    I thought you weren't in the business of interpreting...
    I'm not, thus why I framed it in the form of a question...

  25. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post

    I'm not, thus why I framed it in the form of a question...
    wether good or bad, to protect it's citizens, etc...

    more laws = less freedom.

    10 years ago you had the freedom to purchase ephedra...laws were passed, you now no longer have that freedom.

    noone ever said we should live in complete anarchy.
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. New commercial from Nyc.gov
    By lartinos in forum General Chat
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-02-2011, 10:01 PM
  2. New on TRT 2nd blood test results...
    By EPZ32 in forum Male Anti-Aging Medicine
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-03-2009, 04:54 PM
  3. New Yorkers on the mind
    By BigNemo in forum General Chat
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 06-27-2008, 05:39 PM
  4. Calling all New Yorkers
    By cliff_vtr in forum General Chat
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-20-2005, 07:02 PM
Log in
Log in