Raw Dawgin' it;1382021 wrote:Edit: I have no problem with amending the 2nd amendment either. It was written by slave owners.

justincredible;1382025 wrote:What purpose does the second sentence serve?

ptown_trojans_1;1382026 wrote:How do we pick targets, if you want to wage war against the U.S. Government.
Sounds like a slippery slope right?
But, explain to me how this would be any different than during the Cold War, or World War II, or even the Civil War?

justincredible;1382025 wrote:What purpose does the second sentence serve?

justincredible;1382031 wrote:You're cool with a 16 year old American citizen being murdered with a drone?

WH response? Shoulda had a better father.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/24/robert-gibbs-anwar-al-awlaki_n_2012438.html

ptown_trojans_1;1382036 wrote:I'm not cool with it, but what other options are there?
Send in a SEAL Team and risk casualties?
Rely on the Yemen Government to do the job?
It is the least bad option.

justincredible;1382025 wrote:What purpose does the second sentence serve?

Con_Alma;1382023 wrote:It's a right that would and should exist even if there was no need to be protected at all... be it from either private interests or governemntal interests. The justification doesn't exist in being able to protect.

It's why I listed the court case DC vs. Heller.

BoatShoes;1382040 wrote:Perhaps what he means that we often appeal to the irrelevant opinions of men who have been dead for two hundred years and were significantly less intelligent than our society in the aggregate in this day and age (as evidenced by their endorsement of the arcane practice of enslaving other humans) rather than discuss issues on the merits.

For instance, instead of weighing the merits of X policy proposal we say "Doesn't matter because I think Thomas Jefferson would say that's Unconstitutional and I can cite dictionaries from 1789 in support of that claim."

justincredible;1382045 wrote:Perhaps the government should try something radical. GTFO of the middle east (and every other country for that matter). They don't want us there. We shouldn't be there. We should mind our own fucking business and let them do their own thing.

Raw Dawgin' it;1382050 wrote:100% agree

(my second sentence was a poor attempt at showing it was out dated)

BoatShoes;1382044 wrote:You're acting like the jurisprudential reasoning and theories beyond why Heller endorsed it as an individual right as opposed to simply a right for armed-militia insurrection do not matter. :rolleyes:

justincredible;1382051 wrote:The 1st Amendment was written by slave owners. Outdated.

justincredible;1382045 wrote:Perhaps the government should try something radical. GTFO of the middle east (and every other country for that matter). They don't want us there. We shouldn't be there. We should mind our own ****ing business and let them do their own thing.

Con_Alma;1382056 wrote:Beingn in the middle east is our business. Although being there creates blow-back scenarios it alos lessens the impact of additional uprisings that can threaten the citizens of the U.S..

Con_Alma;1382056 wrote:Beingn in the middle east is our business. Although being there creates blow-back scenarios it alos lessens the impact of additional uprisings that can threaten the citizens of the U.S..

Raw Dawgin' it;1382065 wrote:There is no reason for us to be in any country. The money and resources we're using over there is pointless.

justincredible;1382067 wrote:Yeah, no shit. How much are we spending occupying all these countries?

justincredible;1382067 wrote:Yeah, no shit. How much are we spending occupying all these countries?

Raw Dawgin' it;1382065 wrote:There is no reason for us to be in any country. The money and resources we're using over there is pointless.

justincredible;1382067 wrote:Yeah, no ****. How much are we spending occupying all these countries?