jbg Posted July 30, 2012 Report Posted July 30, 2012 Really? I seem to remember that the urgency for the war in Iraq was because Saddam Hussein gassed his own people...13 years earlier. And this has what to do with the Colorado massacre? Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Wilber Posted July 30, 2012 Report Posted July 30, 2012 I’d assume they did about as much “good” , as they did “bad”……..But the example highlights that Government, in this case State level, doesn’t always do what’s morally right…….. I'd assume that if they had been at all, they would have been used against the military that were trying to enforce the Nines right to go to school. Their rights were upheld by the federal government in spite of white public opinion in Arkansas and its racist government. Morally right has nothing to do with it. You can have ten different people with guns and ten different sets of morals. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
Guest Derek L Posted July 30, 2012 Report Posted July 30, 2012 I'd assume that if they had been at all, they would have been used against the military that were trying to enforce the Nines right to go to school. Their rights were upheld by the federal government in spite of white public opinion in Arkansas and its racist government. Morally right has nothing to do with it. You can have ten different people with guns and ten different sets of morals. Indeed, you can have ten different people, just as you can have ten different Governments made up of said people………and if the idiots get in they’ll have all those police and military members, whom all sworn oaths, ensuring their policies……. Quote
Guest American Woman Posted July 30, 2012 Report Posted July 30, 2012 You said every citizens interest. Criminals are citizens to. Yes, they are citizens too. Now that we've established that, your point is?? Bullshit, that is why we have rule of law. The police are subject to it as well. Are you seriously trying to say that no police officers are ever arrested for breaking it? When they do, they get arrested by other police officers, or haven't you noticed. You bloody well are condemning them as an institution if you say they are not accountable except to mob rule. "If" being the operative word. Try really, really hard to respond to what I actually say. My money is on you - I bet you can do it! Quote
Wilber Posted July 30, 2012 Report Posted July 30, 2012 (edited) Indeed, you can have ten different people, just as you can have ten different Governments made up of said people………and if the idiots get in theyll have all those police and military members, whom all sworn oaths, ensuring their policies……. So you think armed anarchy is better. Know something. Unless they are on an assignment which will not take them to the station at the beginning of their next shift, our cops don't take their weapons home. They leave them locked up at the station. They are work tools only. I think that is civilized. Even better if they didn't need guns at all. Edited July 30, 2012 by Wilber Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
Wilber Posted July 30, 2012 Report Posted July 30, 2012 "If" being the operative word. Try really, really hard to respond to what I actually say. My money is on you - I bet you can do it! Pretty difficult when you ignore everything that is said to you. Let me ask, how many citizens arrests of police officers are you aware of that were carried out by private citizens packing? I don't expect a coherent answer. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
Guest American Woman Posted July 30, 2012 Report Posted July 30, 2012 Pretty difficult when you ignore everything that is said to you. Let me ask, how many citizens arrests of police officers are you aware of that were carried out by private citizens packing? I don't expect a coherent answer. Looks like I lost my money. And I had such confidence in you ............ Quote
guyser Posted July 30, 2012 Report Posted July 30, 2012 (edited) I provided examples of Government expropriations of both land and firearms. Just like in the US . Fancy that.....eh? Edited July 30, 2012 by guyser Quote
Wilber Posted July 30, 2012 Report Posted July 30, 2012 Looks like I lost my money. And I had such confidence in you ............ Another question you won't or can't answer. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
Guest Derek L Posted July 30, 2012 Report Posted July 30, 2012 Just like in the US . Fancy that.....eh? To whom has the greater ability for civil recourse? An American or Canadian? Quote
jbg Posted July 30, 2012 Report Posted July 30, 2012 Just another reason why the American constitution was not thought through very well. I think the U.S. Constitution has worked out rather well compared to just about every other written or unwritten Constitution, except maybe the British one. Then again in many respects the U.S. Constitution is a written adaptation of the British Constitution. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
guyser Posted July 30, 2012 Report Posted July 30, 2012 To whom has the greater ability for civil recourse? An American or Canadian? Both equally. Eminent Domain is and has been used to wrongfully take land. It used to be for the greater good, but lately there are cases wherby its appropriated for commercial private profit. Quote
Guest American Woman Posted July 30, 2012 Report Posted July 30, 2012 Another question you won't or can't answer. Why in God's name should I waste my time answering your questions when you keep speaking for me - saying I think off-the-wall things that exist only in your imagination? You apparently can't comprehend anything I've said because you don't respond to anything I've said - except to come back claiming I said or think things I've never said or thought - and I'm sure you'd do the same with this latest question - so until you respond to what I've said, you can bet your last dollar I won't be answering any more of your questions. Quote
Wilber Posted July 30, 2012 Report Posted July 30, 2012 I won't be answering any more of your questions. Nothing new in that. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
Guest American Woman Posted July 30, 2012 Report Posted July 30, 2012 Nothing new in that. Nope. Not at all. I make it a policy not to waste any more time than I already have with posters who can't respond to what I actually say. Quote
WWWTT Posted July 30, 2012 Report Posted July 30, 2012 I think the U.S. Constitution has worked out rather well compared to just about every other written or unwritten Constitution, except maybe the British one. Then again in many respects the U.S. Constitution is a written adaptation of the British Constitution. Yes I guess you could be right. Perhaps there are flaws in how the states and even municipalities/regions have strong sometimes conflicting powers/laws. What good is a constitution if it can not be enforced? WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
Shady Posted July 31, 2012 Report Posted July 31, 2012 I think the U.S. Constitution has worked out rather well compared to just about every other written or unwritten Constitution, except maybe the British one. Then again in many respects the U.S. Constitution is a written adaptation of the British Constitution. Definitely. Especially when some parts of the constitution aren't enforced, and other parts of the constitution are trampled on by the government. Quote
bleeding heart Posted July 31, 2012 Report Posted July 31, 2012 Nothing new in that. Hey man, join the club of folks that AW has deemed unworthy! It used to be rather an elite club, but it appears the membership is growing quickly. Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
Wilber Posted July 31, 2012 Report Posted July 31, 2012 Hey man, join the club of folks that AW has deemed unworthy! It used to be rather an elite club, but it appears the membership is growing quickly. Who knew it would be so difficult to argue the reality of way our systems have and do work, against a bunch of doom and gloom hypotheses, none of which have shown any signs of coming to pass and are largely perpetuated by things like the movies and those who just want to have the biggest gun they can afford. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
GostHacked Posted July 31, 2012 Report Posted July 31, 2012 Nope. Not at all. I make it a policy not to waste any more time than I already have with posters who can't respond to what I actually say. Irony? Quote
Guest American Woman Posted July 31, 2012 Report Posted July 31, 2012 Who knew it would be so difficult to argue the reality of way our systems have and do work, against a bunch of doom and gloom hypotheses, none of which have shown any signs of coming to pass and are largely perpetuated by things like the movies and those who just want to have the biggest gun they can afford. Your way is fine for you; I couldn't care less what you do in Canada. I think it's great that you're a loyal subject. But. Who knew it would be so difficult to argue the reality of our way, what works for us? That's what this thread is about - U.S. politics and how Americans feel. If you think everything in Canada is going to stay the same from now until the end of time, good for you. I'm sure Pollyanna would agree. Quote
bleeding heart Posted July 31, 2012 Report Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) That's what this thread is about - U.S. politics and how Americans feel. According to Pew Research, since the shooting, views remain evenly divided as before: roughly half agree with you, and half don't. That's how "Americans feel" about the subject. You don't speak for Americans any more than Canadian gun control advocates do, statistically-wise. Put another way: you don't speak for something called "Americans." Americans are as divided over the issue as Canadians are. Edited July 31, 2012 by bleeding heart Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
jbg Posted July 31, 2012 Report Posted July 31, 2012 I think the U.S. Constitution has worked out rather well compared to just about every other written or unwritten Constitution, except maybe the British one. Then again in many respects the U.S. Constitution is a written adaptation of the British Constitution. Definitely. Especially when some parts of the constitution aren't enforced, and other parts of the constitution are trampled on by the government. I don't quite understand what you're getting at. Yes, there are some parts of the Constitution that are "enforced" by the political branches, not by the SCOTUS. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
bleeding heart Posted July 31, 2012 Report Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) I don't quite understand what you're getting at. Yes, there are some parts of the Constitution that are "enforced" by the political branches, not by the SCOTUS. What Shady is getting at--in fact, it's his underlying premise generally--is that the roughly liberal/left half of the United States is corrupted, sinister, and world-destructive, and that the roughly conservative/rightwing half is lovely and awe-inspiring. If his positions were precisely reversed, he would be continually disparaged here as "anti-American." Which begs some very interesting questions. Edited July 31, 2012 by bleeding heart Quote “There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver." --Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007
Guest American Woman Posted July 31, 2012 Report Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) I don't quite understand what you're getting at. Yes, there are some parts of the Constitution that are "enforced" by the political branches, not by the SCOTUS. I'm guessing that Shady thinks that Obama is trampling on the constitution. I'm guessing that you would agree. Edited July 31, 2012 by American Woman Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.