Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

US calls for Piers Morgan deportation


  • Please log in to reply
142 replies to this topic

#121    acidhead

acidhead

    Were Not Your Slaves!

  • Member
  • 10,570 posts
  • Joined:13 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Victoria, BC CANADA

Posted 11 January 2013 - 02:37 AM

View Postshaddow134, on 10 January 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

Well after having a Comment removed on Infowars,no regard to freedom of speech then.

Property rights

Infowars.com is a privately owned website.  You were posting on private property.  They have every right to moderate however they want to.

"there is no wrong or right - just popular opinion"

#122    shaddow134

shaddow134

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,530 posts
  • Joined:25 Apr 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Northern Ontario

  • "I have often regretted my speech, never my silence." - Xenocrates

Posted 11 January 2013 - 03:12 AM

View Postacidhead, on 11 January 2013 - 02:37 AM, said:

Property rights

Infowars.com is a privately owned website.  You were posting on private property.  They have every right to moderate however they want to.
Obviously,if it's what they want to hear.

"Don't worry about the world coming to an end today. It's already tomorrow in Australia." - Charles Schulz

#123    BaneSilvermoon

BaneSilvermoon

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 718 posts
  • Joined:13 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Louisville, KY USA

  • "You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into."

Posted 11 January 2013 - 03:20 AM

View PostHasina, on 28 December 2012 - 07:28 PM, said:

Very true. And as my dad pointed out to me during lunch, the second amendment is also in place to allow the regular citizen to protect himself from the government. He was reading from an article and if I can find it, I'll link it.

So you and my dad got me there, Amerika, my views changed on this, though personally I don't think I'll be fighting against a foreign military or my own government or my countries military, but I like that the clause is there. 'We the People' form this republic, not the government, it's there for the People.

The right to bear arms was originally written purely for the purposes of militia. It did not apply to private citizens, but as most of our laws they slowly but dramatically change over time.
For another example, go look at what the maximum annual social security contribution was originally. And see if it was mandatory or voluntary.

http://www.youtube.c.../BaneSIlvermoon

"Psychic Fayre cancelled due to unforeseen circumstances"  ~Thanks Oppono Astos!!

#124    Hasina

Hasina

    Maximillion Hotpocket Puckershuttle

  • Member
  • 3,048 posts
  • Joined:28 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Female

  • JINKIES

Posted 11 January 2013 - 03:25 AM

View PostBaneSilvermoon, on 11 January 2013 - 03:20 AM, said:

The right to bear arms was originally written purely for the purposes of militia. It did not apply to private citizens, but as most of our laws they slowly but dramatically change over time.
For another example, go look at what the maximum annual social security contribution was originally. And see if it was mandatory or voluntary.
Hardy, p. 1237. "Early Americans wrote of the right in light of three considerations: (1) as auxiliary to a natural right of self-defense; (2) as enabling an armed people to deter undemocratic government; and (3) as enabling the people to organize a militia system."

Malcolm, "That Every Man Be Armed," pp. 452, 466. "The Second Amendment reflects traditional English attitudes toward these three distinct, but intertwined, issues: the right of the individual to protect his life, the challenge to government of an armed citizenry, and the preference for a militia over a standing army. The framers' attempt to address all three in a single declarative sentence has contributed mightily to the subsequent confusion over the proper interpretation of the Second Amendment."

Merkel and Uviller, pp. 62, 179 ff, 183, 188 ff, 306. "[T]he right to bear arms was articulated as a civic right inextricably linked to the civic obligation to bear arms for the public defense."

Edited by Hasina, 11 January 2013 - 03:26 AM.

Posted Image

~MEH~


#125    shaddow134

shaddow134

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,530 posts
  • Joined:25 Apr 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Northern Ontario

  • "I have often regretted my speech, never my silence." - Xenocrates

Posted 11 January 2013 - 03:27 AM

View PostBaneSilvermoon, on 11 January 2013 - 03:20 AM, said:

The right to bear arms was originally written purely for the purposes of militia. It did not apply to private citizens, but as most of our laws they slowly but dramatically change over time.
For another example, go look at what the maximum annual social security contribution was originally. And see if it was mandatory or voluntary.

Regardless of the 2nd Amendment and what it means,any new laws should go through the law makers,you can't use executive orders to control guns it won't work and just inflame the situation even more.

More Ammunition for the Conspiracy Theorists.

Edited by shaddow134, 11 January 2013 - 03:31 AM.

"Don't worry about the world coming to an end today. It's already tomorrow in Australia." - Charles Schulz

#126    Drayno

Drayno

    Draynor's Finest

  • Member
  • 3,705 posts
  • Joined:18 Jan 2008
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 January 2013 - 05:13 AM

View Postshaddow134, on 11 January 2013 - 03:12 AM, said:

Obviously,if it's what they want to hear.

Not necessarily. People post some dumb stuff on that website.

"Let us sit upon the ground and tell sad stories of the death of kings."
- William Shakespeare, Richard II, Act III, Scene II

#127    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 11 January 2013 - 06:05 AM

How bout we deport cowards to the  moon for a few years while we work this out.


#128    acidhead

acidhead

    Were Not Your Slaves!

  • Member
  • 10,570 posts
  • Joined:13 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Victoria, BC CANADA

Posted 11 January 2013 - 06:17 AM

View PostAsteroidX, on 11 January 2013 - 06:05 AM, said:

How bout we deport cowards to the  moon for a few years while we work this out.

No... 'we' cannot do that... they may regroup, set up a base to attack from later.. it's best to eliminate them as soon as ****in possible.

lol

"there is no wrong or right - just popular opinion"

#129    OverSword

OverSword

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 13,426 posts
  • Joined:16 Oct 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle WA USA

  • When the power of love overcomes the love of power then humanity can evolve

Posted 11 January 2013 - 03:21 PM

View Postshaddow134, on 30 December 2012 - 03:30 PM, said:

If i was a serving soldier,i would never fire on my own countrymen,regardless of the consequences.
So you say, and yet time and again soldiers do just that.  It's only if the commanders refuse to give the order that soldiers wouldn't fire on thier own countrymen, and comanders achieve thier rank primarily by following orders.


#130    Hasina

Hasina

    Maximillion Hotpocket Puckershuttle

  • Member
  • 3,048 posts
  • Joined:28 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Female

  • JINKIES

Posted 11 January 2013 - 03:48 PM

People can say 'I would/wouldn't do this' till they're blue in the face, but until you're actually in that situation, you don't actually know, and you know that.


#131    ciriuslea

ciriuslea

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • Joined:08 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • CHAMP20NS

Posted 11 January 2013 - 09:12 PM

View PostHasina, on 11 January 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

People can say 'I would/wouldn't do this' till they're blue in the face, but until you're actually in that situation, you don't actually know, and you know that.
that is so true every possible human trait, action... situation exists in us all, we just have to find the right buttons to push.


#132    Drayno

Drayno

    Draynor's Finest

  • Member
  • 3,705 posts
  • Joined:18 Jan 2008
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 January 2013 - 11:24 PM



Piers Morgan versus Ben Shapiro.

Piers refers to the Constitution as a "little book" and calls the second amendment's purpose to defend against tyranny absurd.

"Let us sit upon the ground and tell sad stories of the death of kings."
- William Shakespeare, Richard II, Act III, Scene II

#133    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,912 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 January 2013 - 12:38 AM

So also according to Piers Morgan, the last four mass media stories he's citing that happen to include assault rifles are more important legislatively and philosophically than the aggregate of gun crime.

"Peace cannot be achieved by force, only by understanding."  ~ Albert Einstein
"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians.  Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." ~ Mahatma Gandhi

#134    acidhead

acidhead

    Were Not Your Slaves!

  • Member
  • 10,570 posts
  • Joined:13 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Victoria, BC CANADA

Posted 12 January 2013 - 06:42 AM



"there is no wrong or right - just popular opinion"

#135    BaneSilvermoon

BaneSilvermoon

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 718 posts
  • Joined:13 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Louisville, KY USA

  • "You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into."

Posted 13 January 2013 - 08:25 AM

View PostHasina, on 11 January 2013 - 03:25 AM, said:

Hardy, p. 1237. "Early Americans wrote of the right in light of three considerations: (1) as auxiliary to a natural right of self-defense; (2) as enabling an armed people to deter undemocratic government; and (3) as enabling the people to organize a militia system."

Malcolm, "That Every Man Be Armed," pp. 452, 466. "The Second Amendment reflects traditional English attitudes toward these three distinct, but intertwined, issues: the right of the individual to protect his life, the challenge to government of an armed citizenry, and the preference for a militia over a standing army. The framers' attempt to address all three in a single declarative sentence has contributed mightily to the subsequent confusion over the proper interpretation of the Second Amendment."

Merkel and Uviller, pp. 62, 179 ff, 183, 188 ff, 306. "[T]he right to bear arms was articulated as a civic right inextricably linked to the civic obligation to bear arms for the public defense."

Fair enough, I stand corrected.


View Postshaddow134, on 11 January 2013 - 03:27 AM, said:

Regardless of the 2nd Amendment and what it means,any new laws should go through the law makers,you can't use executive orders to control guns it won't work and just inflame the situation even more.

More Ammunition for the Conspiracy Theorists.

I agree completely, but most people who call historic laws into a conversation do so invoking the original intent, regardless of the law makers process since that time. Which is flawed as few laws that were passed then would be passed with the same intent in todays society.

http://www.youtube.c.../BaneSIlvermoon

"Psychic Fayre cancelled due to unforeseen circumstances"  ~Thanks Oppono Astos!!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users