Political Forums  

Go Back   Political Forums > Politicalchat.org discussion boards > Conspiracy theory corner

We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 09-22-2015, 12:43 PM
Boreas's Avatar
Boreas Boreas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
Quote:
Originally Posted by donquixote99 View Post
It's between the lines for those who want it to be, and it isn't for those who don't. This is by design.
I profoundly disagree. Armed revolt is utterly antithetical "to the security of a free State".
__________________
Smoke me a kipper. I'll be back for breakfast.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 09-22-2015, 12:49 PM
nailer's Avatar
nailer nailer is offline
Rational Anarchist
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: DFW
Posts: 7,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boreas View Post
Please read the following.





No logical reading of this exchange could fail to interpret your response as being in support of the "armed insurrection" Steve refers to. By pointing out that we owe our existence as a country to an armed insurrection and following with the "responsible citizens" comment, you have positioned yourself in support of the violent overthrow of the US government.

Period. End of story.

Because this exchange between you and Steve was, despite the thread title, about the 2nd Amendment, I asked you to tell me where the right to armed insurrection was expressed in the text of the Amendment. So far, you've avoided answering. Will you answer now? "It isn't" would be an acceptable answer.


I do not answer to tyrants!
__________________
"We have met the enemy and he is us."
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 09-22-2015, 12:51 PM
donquixote99's Avatar
donquixote99 donquixote99 is offline
Ready
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 19,122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boreas View Post
I profoundly disagree. Armed revolt is utterly antithetical "to the security of a free State".
That just puts you in the "don't" camp.

What you find antithetical just doesn't matter to those who want to 'believe in insurrection.' Indeed, they would argue that the 'security of a free state' means 'the security of a free state,' and that if a state isn't free, its security is irrelevant and actually undesirable. Thus, the security of a free state may actually require insurrection.
__________________
If you Love Liberty, you must Hate Trump!
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 09-22-2015, 01:00 PM
nailer's Avatar
nailer nailer is offline
Rational Anarchist
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: DFW
Posts: 7,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boreas View Post
I profoundly disagree. Armed revolt is utterly antithetical "to the security of a free State".
What if the State is no longer free?
__________________
"We have met the enemy and he is us."
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 09-22-2015, 01:09 PM
Boreas's Avatar
Boreas Boreas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
Quote:
Originally Posted by nailer View Post
What if the State is no longer free?
Then the militia has failed.

The point isn't whether or not armed insurrection is ever justified. It's whether or not it's licensed by the 2nd Amendment.
__________________
Smoke me a kipper. I'll be back for breakfast.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 10-08-2015, 01:20 AM
BlueStreak's Avatar
BlueStreak BlueStreak is offline
Area Man
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boreas View Post
What other purpose do you see in an armed citizenry standing against a tyrannical government? So, yes, I have answered which is more than you have.



The ongoing conversation in this thread, and the post you initially replied to, concern the 2nd Amendment. Your reply was as follows.

"Our revolution was a successful armed insurrection. Responsible citizens have the right to arm themselves as a deterrent to tyrants."

So, it was legitimate to ask you how a rebellious populace was specifically licensed by the 2nd Amendment. So far, you haven't answered and I don't think you can in anything resembling a satisfactory manner.
I remind everyone that the bolded statement isn't entirely true. Not under the contextual notion that a bunch of armed colonials successfully rebelled against the British military entirely on their own. Would the revolutionaries have won their revolution without the help of powerful allies? I'm not so sure.

Also; Who is it that determines what constitutes a "responsible citizen"? What is the criteria?
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa

Last edited by BlueStreak; 10-08-2015 at 01:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:44 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.