Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Constitution scholar heard from

«13

Comments

  • WestlinnDuck
    WestlinnDuck Member Posts: 17,616 Standard Supporter
    This in in the thread. Could never happen. The aid to Ukraine is closely monitored with clear segregation of duties to insure security, just like our blue city election processes. I mean who would leave $80 billion worth of US arms lying around in Afghanistan, who would provide billions in US arms to Libyan democratic freedom fighters that ended up with ISIS in Syria. Certainly not US democrats.


  • Sledog
    Sledog Member Posts: 37,825 Standard Supporter
    An awful lot of that money is being deposited in foreign accounts for SlowJoe and crew. Obama included as he's running the show.
  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 23,963
  • PurpleThrobber
    PurpleThrobber Member Posts: 48,103
    Bob_C said:
    STFU Cenk and step into the Octagon against Rogan.

  • Bob_C
    Bob_C Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 12,709 Founders Club
    HHusky said:

    Bob_C said:
    By the other scholars, no doubt.
    Don’t need to be a scholar to know well-regulated means functioning, not needing government rules placed on it.
  • RaceBannon
    RaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 114,081 Founders Club
    Shall not be infringed means infringing

    Scholars that H follows
  • TurdBomber
    TurdBomber Member Posts: 20,041 Standard Supporter
    edited June 2022
    @HHusky is perplexed and befuddled by the term "people."

    "Shall not" also sends him into a panic.
  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 23,963
    Bob_C said:

    HHusky said:

    Bob_C said:
    By the other scholars, no doubt.
    Don’t need to be a scholar to know well-regulated means functioning, not needing government rules placed on it.
    That's not Scalia's dodge.

    Get with the program, Delores!
  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 23,963
    Sledog said:

    Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.

    Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.

    We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".

    BidenBros say control me more daddy!

    Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.

    Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.

    That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 23,963

    HHusky said:

    Bob_C said:
    By the other scholars, no doubt.
    Shocker that @HeilHusky comes out defending a guy in favor of legalizing bestiality…
    what tangent?
  • MikeDamone
    MikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    He can't be that dumb. Oh, nevermind.
  • MikeDamone
    MikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.

    Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.

    We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".

    BidenBros say control me more daddy!

    Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.

    Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.

    That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
    What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.

    Use your own words, Betty
  • HoustonHusky
    HoustonHusky Member Posts: 6,000
    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    Bob_C said:
    By the other scholars, no doubt.
    Shocker that @HeilHusky comes out defending a guy in favor of legalizing bestiality…
    what tangent?
    Which part, that you our resident bored nazi is advocating suppressing the constitutional rights of the population for stricter government control, or that you are doing it by defending a guy that has also previously advocated for the legalization of bestiality?


  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 23,963
    edited June 2022

    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.

    Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.

    We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".

    BidenBros say control me more daddy!

    Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.

    Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.

    That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
    What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.

    Use your own words, Betty
    It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.

    Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 23,963
    edited June 2022
  • MikeDamone
    MikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    HHusky said:

    *

    Finally you posted something that makes sense, madam
  • Sledog
    Sledog Member Posts: 37,825 Standard Supporter
    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.

    Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.

    We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".

    BidenBros say control me more daddy!

    Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.

    Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.

    That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
    What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.

    Use your own words, Betty
    It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.

    Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
    All I have to say is Fuck You!

    So every Supreme court ruling was wrong but you're right?

    The founders actual writings say you are a stupid POS. They say that's exactly what it's for. Maybe you missed the part about the British trying to seize arms and powder stores? That's why it says what it says dimwit. Good God your two dads wasted a lot of money on your schooling!

    You really are this dumb!
  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 23,963
    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.

    Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.

    We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".

    BidenBros say control me more daddy!

    Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.

    Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.

    That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
    What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.

    Use your own words, Betty
    It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.

    Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
    All I have to say is Fuck You!

    So every Supreme court ruling was wrong but you're right?

    The founders actual writings say you are a stupid POS. They say that's exactly what it's for. Maybe you missed the part about the British trying to seize arms and powder stores? That's why it says what it says dimwit. Good God your two dads wasted a lot of money on your schooling!

    You really are this dumb!
    We’ve already been through the shot heard round the world, lady. The founders were horrified at the idea of a standing army and preferred a militia of citizen soldiers.

    Your suggestion that there is some long line of cases supporting your gundamentalist views demonstrates your ignorance, as if that was in doubt. Heller is the case in question. It was decided in 2008. It is not an exercise in originalism.

  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 23,963

    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.

    Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.

    We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".

    BidenBros say control me more daddy!

    Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.

    Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.

    That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
    What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.

    Use your own words, Betty
    It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.

    Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
    It’s also to defend yourself and your natural rights if/when the government becomes tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson was the original originalist. You know this, you’re just being dishonest. Helen.
    TJ is but one of the founders, Beatrice. Definitely not the only one to comment on the right to bear arms.
  • MikeDamone
    MikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    edited June 2022
    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.

    Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.

    We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".

    BidenBros say control me more daddy!

    Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.

    Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.

    That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
    What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.

    Use your own words, Betty
    It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.

    Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
    It’s also to defend yourself and your natural rights if/when the government becomes tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson was the original originalist. You know this, you’re just being dishonest. Helen.
    TJ is but one of the founders, Beatrice. Definitely not the only one to comment on the right to bear arms.
    Pretty sure he is an originalist, Dorothy. More so than people you keep mentioning. So your argument is “other people said thing too”? Deep take, ma’am
  • Sledog
    Sledog Member Posts: 37,825 Standard Supporter
    edited June 2022
    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.

    Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.

    We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".

    BidenBros say control me more daddy!

    Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.

    Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.

    That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
    What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.

    Use your own words, Betty
    It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.

    Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
    All I have to say is Fuck You!

    So every Supreme court ruling was wrong but you're right?

    The founders actual writings say you are a stupid POS. They say that's exactly what it's for. Maybe you missed the part about the British trying to seize arms and powder stores? That's why it says what it says dimwit. Good God your two dads wasted a lot of money on your schooling!

    You really are this dumb!
    We’ve already been through the shot heard round the world, lady. The founders were horrified at the idea of a standing army and preferred a militia of citizen soldiers.

    Your suggestion that there is some long line of cases supporting your gundamentalist views demonstrates your ignorance, as if that was in doubt. Heller is the case in question. It was decided in 2008. It is not an exercise in originalism.

    Why yes you really are this stupid! That law school diploma from a Cracker Jack box or the Close Cover Before Striking School of Law and Heavy Machinery?

    You do realize one of the most liberal district courts in the country just ruled 18 year old's can buy any gun they want right? Struck down 21 YO bullshit. Yet the dems are all saying let's make it 21 to buy an AR! Can't make up their or your stupidity.
  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 23,963
    edited June 2022

    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.

    Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.

    We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".

    BidenBros say control me more daddy!

    Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.

    Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.

    That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
    What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.

    Use your own words, Betty
    It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.

    Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
    It’s also to defend yourself and your natural rights if/when the government becomes tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson was the original originalist. You know this, you’re just being dishonest. Helen.
    TJ is but one of the founders, Beatrice. Definitely not the only one to comment on the right to bear arms.
    Pretty sure he is an originalist, Dorothy. More so than people you keep mentioning. So your argument is “other people said thing too”? Deep take, ma’am
    Deeper than any take on Jefferson, who wasn’t even at the Constitutional Convention after all.

    “A well regulated Militia, composed of gentlemen freeholders, and other freemen, is the natural strength and only stable security of a free Government.”
    -George Mason (emphasis mine)

  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 23,963
    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.

    Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.

    We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".

    BidenBros say control me more daddy!

    Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.

    Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.

    That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
    What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.

    Use your own words, Betty
    It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.

    Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
    All I have to say is Fuck You!

    So every Supreme court ruling was wrong but you're right?

    The founders actual writings say you are a stupid POS. They say that's exactly what it's for. Maybe you missed the part about the British trying to seize arms and powder stores? That's why it says what it says dimwit. Good God your two dads wasted a lot of money on your schooling!

    You really are this dumb!
    We’ve already been through the shot heard round the world, lady. The founders were horrified at the idea of a standing army and preferred a militia of citizen soldiers.

    Your suggestion that there is some long line of cases supporting your gundamentalist views demonstrates your ignorance, as if that was in doubt. Heller is the case in question. It was decided in 2008. It is not an exercise in originalism.

    Why yes you really are this stupid! That law school diploma from a Cracker Jack box or the Close Cover Before Striking School of Law and Heavy Machinery?

    You do realize one of the most liberal district courts in the country just ruled 18 year old's can buy any gun they want right? Struck down 21 YO bullshit. Yet the dems are all saying let's make it 21 to buy an AR! Can't make up their or your stupidity.
    Heller is the law of the land now. Just like Roe.
  • MikeDamone
    MikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    edited June 2022
    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.

    Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.

    We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".

    BidenBros say control me more daddy!

    Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.

    Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.

    That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
    What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.

    Use your own words, Betty
    It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.

    Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
    It’s also to defend yourself and your natural rights if/when the government becomes tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson was the original originalist. You know this, you’re just being dishonest. Helen.
    TJ is but one of the founders, Beatrice. Definitely not the only one to comment on the right to bear arms.
    Pretty sure he is an originalist, Dorothy. More so than people you keep mentioning. So your argument is “other people said thing too”? Deep take, ma’am
    Deeper than any take on Jefferson, who wasn’t even at the Constitutional Convention after all.

    “A well regulated Militia, composed of gentlemen freeholders, and other freemen, is the natural strength and only stable security of a free Government.”
    -George Mason (emphasis mine)

    I don’t think you understand what a free government means, Boris.

    You’re a big fan of George Mason now? That’s cute.
  • PurpleThrobber
    PurpleThrobber Member Posts: 48,103

    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    Sledog said:

    Lets just agree that the founders didn't just return from a deer hunt. They had just liberated a nation from a tyrannical government! They were only able to do so because the populace had arms and militias.

    Most people don't know the shot heard around the world was due to an attempt by the Brits to disarm the colonists. They were marching to seize arms and powder stores.

    We are free because of armed men who were brave enough to say "Enough" and "Never".

    BidenBros say control me more daddy!

    Well I did know that, and I've been to the scene.

    Scalia treated "well-regulated militia" as having no effect whatsoever.

    That's not proper interpretation of any written document.
    What dies "well regulated" in the 2A.

    Use your own words, Betty
    It meant a citizen soldier militia that would avoid any necessity for a standing army. You might well be expected to defend the country; it wasn’t written to allow you to overthrow the government. It wasn’t about an individual right to own guns.

    Scalia was a selective “originalist”.
    It’s also to defend yourself and your natural rights if/when the government becomes tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson was the original originalist. You know this, you’re just being dishonest. Helen.
    TJ is but one of the founders, Beatrice. Definitely not the only one to comment on the right to bear arms.
    Pretty sure he is an originalist, Dorothy. More so than people you keep mentioning. So your argument is “other people said thing too”? Deep take, ma’am
    Deeper than any take on Jefferson, who wasn’t even at the Constitutional Convention after all.

    “A well regulated Militia, composed of gentlemen freeholders, and other freemen, is the natural strength and only stable security of a free Government.”
    -George Mason (emphasis mine)

    I don’t think you understand what a free government means, Boris.

    You’re a big fan of George Mason now? That’s cute.
    George Mason of the wouldn’t sign the Constitution Masons?