Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
Not a refutation.
still no refutation.
Still nothing to counter any of my arguments (because there is no counter that will fly logically), but you sure are managing to be rude as hell aren't you? That's a GREAT way to get people to see things your way. Insult them, and I'm sure they'll all immediately convert to your cause.
|
I can't refute something that has no sensical point to refute. I also don't care too much about being rude to people that have been rude to me. I also have no interest in trying to give people the truth about an argument if all they are going to do is continue to be willfully ignorant.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
Kindly inform us as to why they would mention a well-regulated militia if it didn't have SOMETHING to do with the bit about bearing arms.
|
They mentioned it because it's a fact. A well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state. Nowhere does it say the right of a well regulated militia to bear arms or that only the people part of a well regulated militia can bear arms. Furthermore, it plainly states 'the right of the people', which is NOT a state OR a militia. It is a right of the people, individually, and nowhere in the constitution OR the bill of rights does it say that ONLY a well regulated militia has the right to bear arms.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
No, you didn't. You indulged in a wildassed fantasy and then got upset when noone believed you.
|
I didn't get upset and SOME people believed me. Those that didn't, well they fit in to the 'willful' category.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
Where would that be?
|
Afghanistan (past and present), Iraq, Somalia, Vietnam, etc. etc. etc.