Progressive?

HA! Try liberal!!!

I am PROUD to call myself a liberal which I obviously am. Are YOU as proud to call yourself a moron which YOU obviously are?

The 9th Circus? Well there is your problem right there.
August 19th, 2008 at 1:39 pm

Typical troll knee-jerk response. How very predictable.

BTW, Judge Trott is well respected — left and right — and he was a Reagan appointee.

Idiot.

Regulated by whom? Again where do you get the notion that a militia is to be regulated by the government, state or federal?

Gawd Tracy, you are too obtuse to argue with. I have already explained to you that the 2nd Amendment was drafted in order to assure the states that they would be allowed to maintain their armed militias after adoption of the federal Constitution. These well regulated militia WERE REGULATED AND FUNDED BY THE INDIVIDUAL STATES YOU STUPID FOOL!

The Militia Act of 1903 organized these state militia into the current National Guard. Until that time, they were funded and regulated by the individual states.

Now, the National Guard is regulated by the National Guard Bureau.

That’s enough. I’ve laid it out plain as day. If you are too stupid to understand, then you aren’t worth my time.

Why do you insist on displaying your ignorance?

Where does the 2nd Amendment say “well regulated STATE militia”?

See folks, here is the problem with these dumbass right-wing Republicans. This one is prattling on about gun rights, and he has never read the first half of the 2nd Amendment because the gun nuts don’t accept that part.

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,”

Tracy doesn’t even know that the states had their own militia when the Constitution was written, and the 2nd Amendment was drafted in order to reassure state governments that they had the right to protect themselves with their own armed militia, as long as they were “well regulated”.

August 19th, 2008 at 3:45 pm

So you consider it reasonable to “search” a hispanic person, and not the caucasion person who were both travelling together with the exact same travelling profile?

Still waiting for you to explain how we’re not losing our constitutional rights. You do support the “you have to prove me wrong” standard that Pres. Bush started, right?

So let’s ban knives considering they kill millions each year. Why should the “ease” be a litmus test?

How many people are injured or killed from accidental misfirings of knives per year?

Dumkopf.

In the words of the Constitution?

“A well-regulated militia,” dumkopf.

August 19th, 2008 at 3:04 pm

You answered it for yourself. “unlawful detention”

Interesting how you’re bending over backwards to justify the shreding of our Constitution. Are you proud of your actions? Our founding fathers aren’t.

Still waiting to hear you explain how we are not losing our constitutional rights. Remember, you have to explain how we are not losing our rights, we only have to claim it’s happening. It’s the new standard that Pres. Bush has set when he lied about the reasons for War in Iraq.

If you complain about this new standard care of the neo-cons, then you’re only engaging in a pre-Sept 11th mindset. (Funny how that seems to work against the pro-Bush apologists now!)

So let’s ban knives considering they kill millions each year. Why should the “ease” be a litmus test?

Because the 2nd Amendment does not deal with the possesion of knives by a “well regulated State Militia”. Obviously, the founding fathers did not feel knives were so dangerous that they should be regulated.

August 19th, 2008 at 1:26 pm

Two people, exact same travelling circumatances. One was stopped, had all his posessions searched without his approval, and his laptop was copied & his digital camera contents copied & erased. The other was passed through the door with nary an eye blink.

What part of “no unreasonable search” doesn’t make sense to you?

His idea of freedom is to give free stuff to multinational corporations, free of any responsibility by those receiving the free largess from the public.

I see that you oppose regulation by the government in respect to the 2nd Amendment, which is clearly permissible.

Mr. tough on crime refuses to scale back on those guns, even though they’re the accelerant of the erupting crime wave taking place in this country.

People kill people, sure, but guns make it easier to kill people. It forces the lifestyle of owning a gun onto the person in order to defend themselves.