“....VETS”

Level 9

Since: Jan 08

WELCOME HOME

#813 Jan 9, 2013
info:

Article V of the U.S. Constitution establishes the means for amending that document according to a two-step procedure: proposal of amendments, followed by ratification. Amendments may be proposed in two ways: by a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress or by a special convention summoned by Congress on the petition of two-thirds (34) of the state legislatures.

In the long history of the U.S. Constitution, over 5,000 amendments have been introduced in Congress. Only 33 of these have been formally proposed by Congress, and none has ever been proposed by a special convention.

No matter which method is used for the proposal of a constitutional amendment, Congress retains the power to decide what method will be used for ratification: approval of three-fourths (38) of the state legislatures, or approval of three-fourths (38) of special state conventions. Congress may also place other restrictions, such as a limited time frame, on ratification.

Of the 33 amendments proposed by Congress, 27 were ratified. Of the amendments ratified, only one—the Twenty-First Amendment, which repealed a Prohibition on alcohol—was ratified by the state convention method. The rest have been ratified by three-fourths of the state legislatures

“ASPIRE 2 INSPIRE B4 U EXPIRE”

Level 8

Since: Jul 08

USA

#814 Jan 9, 2013
from Tally:
quotes and opines are not facts and law

from RH: 1st time I asked.
Quotes and opines became LAW, or is that not how its done in the Supreme Court. Their opinions become law.

from T: Question not answered
better remember this 2nd amend. is a copy of the identical Article of the Magna Carta ... of England....

the quote are after the bill of rights were drafted , but not approved until 1787-89...

from RH: 2nd time I asked
So, are the opinions of the great and mighty Supreme Court not used to validate or invalidate laws, interpret or refine laws. They are just opinions after all, some even dating back hundreds of years, but the accumulated "wisdom" of the judges is utilized to formulate the interpretation of the laws of the land.
If so, then would not the accumulated writings of our forefathers in regards to the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States have some bearing on the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment.Or should we just ignore their words, after all, they are ancient and have no relevancy to the life we face today. Why not just scrap the whole worthless document and write something more relevant, something with a beat, something with soul, something that really speaks to the people today.

from T: Still not answered
don't be silly ....the constitution dealt with the rights of the individual.... the only crime at the time of the Constitution was treason we no longer need a state militia , outdated

with the evolutions in arms . we need re-definement and control

but we have not lost one right , not one

from RH: 3rd time I asked
Dodging the question I see. Are the OPINIONS of the Supreme Court of the land not used to legalize laws of the land. Are the OPINIONS of the Supreme Court not used to modify the laws of the land. Are the OPINIONS of the Supreme Court of the land not used to strike down laws of the land. So, would not the OPINIONS of the founding fathers, whether before or after the creation of the Constitution of the United States be of some value in determining the intent of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Treason was not the only crime during the creation of the Constitution of the United States. Otherwise, there would be no need for more than a one paragraph Constitution. We need a CIVILIAN militia to remind those in Washington that we are not serfs, we are free men. As long as the government has arms, the citizens need comparable arms.

from T: still not answering
please you have been this route several times before the United States Supreme Court deals with civil rights ,

the individual's right not law .

from RH: 4th time I asked
Still dodging the question.
The Judicial Branch
The judicial branch consists of the United States Supreme Court and lower federal courts. Its primary function is to hear cases that challenge legislation or require interpretation of that legislation. The U.S. Supreme Court has nine Justices, who are chosen by the President, confirmed by the Senate, and have a lifetime appointment.
So instead of deflecting, answer the question. Do the OPINIONS of the judges of the Supreme Court count as more than just opinions. Are they, or are they not used to interpret legislation. Are the OPINIONS, used to change legislation, validate legislation and make legislation unlawful.
The OPINIONS of the judges of the Supreme Court have been collated since the courts inception and used as precedent to establish the interpretation of the legislation. So, therefore, the OPINIONS of the founding fathers, whether before or after the ratification of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United states, should be used when interpreting the 2nd Amendment.

from T: Still not answering
you are wrong . but hell , no trial in the world has 9 judges

stop with the bull

“ASPIRE 2 INSPIRE B4 U EXPIRE”

Level 8

Since: Jul 08

USA

#815 Jan 9, 2013
from RH:
OH GREAT AND MIGHTY RETIRED JUDGE, SHOW ME WHERE I AM WRONG.
While you are at it, answer my original question, or do you not have an answer. Quit trying to deflect and ANSWER THE QUESTION.
Give me your OPINION Judge

from T: Still no answer
ok show me a court transcript where the supreme court has sentence anyone to a sentence , nay kind of sentence

why is your civil rights so hard for you to understand ,

Lets see if you have the cognitive ability to do more than dissemble and deflect.
ANSWER THE QUESTION.
GIVE US THE BENEFIT OF YOUR VAST WISDOM.
GIVE US YOUR OPINION.
OR ARE YOU INCAPABLE.

your civil rights are preserved by the supreme court not tried
the rights are already etched in stone ,

but hell have it your so you will feel better
UidfiotRaceMakew orldpeace

United States

#816 Jan 9, 2013
[QUOTE who="REDNECK HIPPIE"
So, are the opinions of the great and mighty Supreme Court not used to validate or invalidate laws, interpret or refine laws. They are just opinions after all, some even dating back hundreds of years, but the accumulated "wisdom" of the judges is utilized to formulate the interpretation of the laws of the land.
If so, then would not the accumulated writings of our forefathers in regards to the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States have some bearing on the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment.Or should we just ignore their words, after all, they are ancient and have no relevancy to the life we face today. Why not just scrap the whole worthless document and write something more relevant, something with a beat, something with soul, something that really speaks to the people today.
from T: Still not answered
don't be silly ....the constitution dealt with the rights of the individual.... the only crime at the time of the Constitution was treason we no longer need a state militia , outdated
with the evolutions in arms . we need re-definement and control
but we have not lost one right , not one
from RH: 3rd time I asked
Dodging the question I see. Are the OPINIONS of the Supreme Court of the land not used to legalize laws of the land. Are the OPINIONS of the Supreme Court not used to modify the laws of the land. Are the OPINIONS of the Supreme Court of the land not used to strike down laws of the land. So, would not the OPINIONS of the founding fathers, whether before or after the creation of the Constitution of the United States be of some value in determining the intent of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Treason was not the only crime during the creation of the Constitution of the United States. Otherwise, there would be no need for more than a one paragraph Constitution. We need a CIVILIAN militia to remind those in Washington that we are not serfs, we are free men. As long as the government has arms, the citizens need comparable arms.
from T: still not answering
please you have been this route several times before the United States Supreme Court deals with civil rights ,
the individual's right not law .
from RH: 4th time I asked
Still dodging the question.
The Judicial Branch
The judicial branch consists of the United States Supreme Court and lower federal courts. Its primary function is to hear cases that challenge legislation or require interpretation of that legislation. The U.S. Supreme Court has nine Justices, who are chosen by the President, confirmed by the Senate, and have a lifetime appointment.
So instead of deflecting, answer the question. Do the OPINIONS of the judges of the Supreme Court count as more than just opinions. Are they, or are they not used to interpret legislation. Are the OPINIONS, used to change legislation, validate legislation and make legislation unlawful.
The OPINIONS of the judges of the Supreme Court have been collated since the courts inception and used as precedent to establish the interpretation of the legislation. So, therefore, the OPINIONS of the founding fathers, whether before or after the ratification of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United states, should be used when interpreting the 2nd Amendment. from T: Still not answering
you are wrong . but hell , no trial in the world has 9 judges
stop with the bull
[/QUOTE]our obnoxious soldiers help coporatist/corrupted govt to step on US constitutions, ruined our civil liberties, bankrupted US financially and morally, created a police state ... as US illicit overseas wars and the macroeconomic Wars is what did US in and incite growth of enemies, and what u have to say war mongering /war-for-profitering ruining US and the world!

“ASPIRE 2 INSPIRE B4 U EXPIRE”

Level 8

Since: Jul 08

USA

#817 Jan 9, 2013
UidfiotRaceMakeworldpeace wrote:
<quoted text>our obnoxious soldiers help coporatist/corrupted govt to step on US constitutions, ruined our civil liberties, bankrupted US financially and morally, created a police state ... as US illicit overseas wars and the macroeconomic Wars is what did US in and incite growth of enemies, and what u have to say war mongering /war-for-profitering ruining US and the world!
hahahahaha oh lord, now I get to hear from the ignoranus georgie/wolfie. This thread has absolutely nothing to do with war, the military, profiteering etc. get a grip child
UidfiotRaceMakew orldpeace

United States

#818 Jan 9, 2013
REDNECK HIPPIE wrote:
<quoted text>
hahahahaha oh lord, now I get to hear from the ignoranus georgie/wolfie. This thread has absolutely nothing to do with war, the military, profiteering etc. get a grip child
Wars involve guns, you biggest ignoramus ignorant war-for-profiterring War/arms/weapons manufacturers supporters/investors. u can fool the many but not the few, you love guns, violence, wars...all are interrelated, you warring gun lovers/wARMONGERS ARE ruining the US and the world with you assualt/warring weapons/guns! you guns cause more death around the world and in the US, you disingenous peabrain warring scvmbaggers!

“....VETS”

Level 9

Since: Jan 08

WELCOME HOME

#819 Jan 9, 2013
REDNECK HIPPIE wrote:
<quoted text>
hahahahaha oh lord, now I get to hear from the ignoranus georgie/wolfie. This thread has absolutely nothing to do with war, the military, profiteering etc. get a grip child
you don't like the fact you know zip about your courts ,

pssssssssssssst : don't you think before you call someone , one ,shouldn't you spell it correctly yourself
..........ignoramus

“ASPIRE 2 INSPIRE B4 U EXPIRE”

Level 8

Since: Jul 08

USA

#820 Jan 9, 2013
tallyho wrote:
<quoted text>
you don't like the fact you know zip about your courts ,
pssssssssssssst : don't you think before you call someone , one ,shouldn't you spell it correctly yourself
..........ignoramus
shows what you know judge
the word ignoranus is a combination of ignorant and anus, meaning he is like you, an ignorant azz.

pssssssssssssst: still deflecting come on judge, give us your opinion, try to at least answer my query. Or is it beyond your capacity as a judge to form and relay an opinion. Maybe we should poll the nine supreme court justices, so that they can give you your opinion.
donzie

Hopkinsville, KY

#821 Jan 10, 2013
I have always heard that saying "Blowing your brains out is the cowards why out." I don't agree that only cowards need guns.
Dozerman

Danville, WV

#822 Jan 10, 2013
UidfiotRaceMakeworldpeace wrote:
<quoted text>our obnoxious soldiers help coporatist/corrupted govt to step on US constitutions, ruined our civil liberties, bankrupted US financially and morally, created a police state ... as US illicit overseas wars and the macroeconomic Wars is what did US in and incite growth of enemies, and what u have to say war mongering /war-for-profitering ruining US and the world!
If you don't like the U.S.A then leave i spent six years protecting worthless pieces of sh@t like you and i like many other soldiers id our duty to protect you and your freedoms. so before you go running your pie hole about American soldiers remember who keeps safe
Dozerman

Danville, WV

#823 Jan 10, 2013
By the way Uidiot Rangers lead the way!!!!!!!
Donzie

Hopkinsville, KY

#824 Jan 10, 2013
Thank you Dozerman for the 6 years of duty you choose . The FREEDOMS me and my love-ones have had and kept enjoying are because of you and those like you that . God Bless and again I myself thank you from the bottom of my heart.

“....VETS”

Level 9

Since: Jan 08

WELCOME HOME

#825 Jan 10, 2013
REDNECK HIPPIE wrote:
<quoted text>
shows what you know judge
the word ignoranus is a combination of ignorant and anus, meaning he is like you, an ignorant azz.
pssssssssssssst: still deflecting come on judge, give us your opinion, try to at least answer my query. Or is it beyond your capacity as a judge to form and relay an opinion. Maybe we should poll the nine supreme court justices, so that they can give you your opinion.
yep you make up words , like you do knowledge ...

call me stupid , but unlike you I know that the earth is round , some people walk in the dark even when there is light , come out of the darkness ,

“....VETS”

Level 9

Since: Jan 08

WELCOME HOME

#826 Jan 10, 2013
the freedoms we of the past/present/tomorrow are right here in front of you.....

you can post/criticize/speak out against our government ... try this in other countries

“To contract new debts...”

Level 6

Since: Apr 08

is not the way to pay old ones

#827 Jan 10, 2013
Old Sam wrote:
...s'ok...for the record....i despise them all....
I hear ya, no incumbent of any party will be getting my vote the next time around.

“I know where you are,”

Level 8

Since: Jun 08

Right here under my thumb

#828 Jan 10, 2013
Steevi wrote:
<quoted text>
Jack the ripper used a scalple so please, if you are going to use an analogy at least get it right!
Jack the Ripper terrorized London in the 1880's - long before modern-day surgical instruments were developed. That being said - there is little evidence to support the murderer used any medical instruments to kill and slash his victims. I do believe you are assuming that since authorities believed the murderer to had some sort of medical background or training (given the surgical precision of the wounds), you made the assumption that he used a scalpel. All evidence pointed to a sharp instrument, but a murder weapon was never found, hence the wording "knives" is appropriate.

“'" Always Thinking '"”

Level 8

Since: Nov 12

Greensburg, IN

#829 Jan 10, 2013

Level 9

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#830 Jan 10, 2013
Guns are the weapon of choice for most people because you don't have to get close to the victim, like with a knife or a baseball bat.

Since: Jun 09

Location hidden

#831 Jan 10, 2013
The romantics here will argue that these two crazy kids would have killed each other with hammers but, they chose to go out with the weapons they loved...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33220258/ns/us_ne...

“Grab all the good”

Level 5

Since: Jul 10

Rowlett Tx

#832 Jan 10, 2013
Ferrerman wrote:
The romantics here will argue that these two crazy kids would have killed each other with hammers but, they chose to go out with the weapons they loved...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33220258/ns/us_ne...
Hammers or blunt objects kill more people than rifles each year

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 8 min SLY WEST 149,005
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 16 min Chimney1 120,875
Make a Story / 4 Words Only (Nov '08) 38 min Rose of Tralee 24,573
topix.com describe in one word (Apr '13) 39 min Enzo49 143
If you could live in a book ~ 47 min Emerald 4
Keep a Word.....Drop a Word Game (Sep '13) 50 min Princess Hey 6,239
Cops: Woman Tries to Break Into Ex's House, Get... 58 min wichita-rick 7
Truck containing 36,000 pounds of Crisco stolen 2 hr beatlesinthebog 38
True or False Game 3 hr SLY WEST 383
During Obama's Speech at Democratic Campaign Ra... 3 hr SLY WEST 32
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 4 hr -Lea- 22,231

Weird People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE