Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, btex said:

Would you not agree that conservatives use the Federalist papers as a go too? Do you favor a strong military? 

I believe that the federalist papers contain a lot of conservative principles. I believe a strong military is necessary to defend our nation against the evils of the world. Much of the world hates us because of the freedom we enjoy. Keep in mind that most nations don’t have the individual liberties we are afforded under the Constitution, which was written to limit the power of government. The fact that a strong military is necessary also makes the 2nd Amendment imperative to keeping government power in check. Restrictions on gun ownership are problematic because the bigger the difference in military and civilian weapons grows, the more helpless the people become against the government. Remember, the revolutionary war was won only because civilians (the colonists) had weapons equal to those of the military that was being used to oppress them (the British army). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, btex said:

Ok so please dont take what I am about to say out of context. Understand I do like the 2nd but OUR disagreement is over mentally ill and felons owning guns. 

Jefferson did not write for the Federalist papers, matter of fact he disagreed with much of it. Jefferson did not want a standing military but instead favored militias and hence the need for the 2nd amendment. This relates back to how Great Britain viewed gun ownership. So as this relates to what you said, the Federalist were the conservatives and Jefferson was in fact the more liberal. 

This quote is often used but the bold is almost always left off. 

"No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms (within his own lands or tenements)." --Thomas Jefferson: Draft Va. Constitution with (his note) added, 1776.

 

As for your comment on the revolution. Battles rested on who had cannon, not the musket. The French supplied America with the muskets needed to win the war. In fact had it not been for the French and them supplying us with musket and cannon we would have lost the war. Now you can get into the rifle units but these weapons were slow to load and had to be supported by musket units or cannon. Now as I understand what you are saying you are advocating that military weapons and civilian should be the same. No offense but the cost makes that just simply impossible. In our modern world any kind of war vs the government would require parts of the military being on the side of those revolting. 

You just made my point. Had the colonists not had access to military grade weapons (in this case, cannons) they would have been crushed by the British in short order. Your reference to cost grossly misses the point. We constantly hear about the need for an “assault weapons ban” from politicians you support. Even though what they term an assault rifle is simply a semi-automatic that LOOKS like a military grade weapon because of it’s cosmetics, people you have admitted to voting for favor banning them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, btex said:

I thought I knew the direction this would go. I didnt think you would admit I was correct on Jefferson. 

As for the revolution, the access was by in large part due to Arnold and the French, one of which became a traitor. That had nothing to do with avg joe owning a cannon. 

As for the other junk, what you want is an argument so you go with the name calling. I have not nor ever supported an "assault weapons ban" so you can just stop and have a real conversation or you can continue that troll but dont get angry when it is done in return. And just be very very clear, the vast majority of persons I have voted for have never asked for it, meaning one person is who you are referring to, but I guess you support assaulting women as trump said? So by your vote you approve of that? I didnt think so.............

C’mon man! You must be slipping. Show me proof of where Trump has ever assaulted a woman, or advocated assaulting women. And by voting for a candidate who advocated something, you supported such. So by voting for Hillary, you voted for infringing on the 2nd Amendment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, btex said:

Since you believe this to be a fact how about some evidence supporting it. Now before you go crying you dont have to do that I was told if I made a claim I needed evidence to support it or it should be removed, this was coming from mods.

 

 

Perhaps you should investigate the Transportation Act of 1718.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, btex said:

If you have something to add then show it, however what I posted as well as what you posted shows your statement is a false statement. 

 

Hey listen Einstein, while you are telling us how many came over from England, the rest of us that are half intelligent are thinking of what they did once they got here.  

 

I know it will come to you, in this life or the next.   

 

You should probably stick to PE.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TheNameIsDalton said:

 

Hey listen Einstein, while you are telling us how many came over from England, the rest of us that are half intelligent are thinking of what they did once they got here.  

 

Sign up for Government Assistance? 😱😜

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, btex said:

I thought I knew the direction this would go. I didnt think you would admit I was correct on Jefferson. 

As for the revolution, the access was by in large part due to Arnold and the French, one of which became a traitor. That had nothing to do with avg joe owning a cannon. 

As for the other junk, what you want is an argument so you go with the name calling. I have not nor ever supported an "assault weapons ban" so you can just stop and have a real conversation or you can continue that troll but dont get angry when it is done in return. And just be very very clear, the vast majority of persons I have voted for have never asked for it, meaning one person is who you are referring to, but I guess you support assaulting women as trump said? So by your vote you approve of that? I didnt think so.............

Actually many civilians did own cannons at the time, and you still can today.  However for them not to be regulated you would have to purchase what they had which is a muzzle loaded cannon.  They were used on merchant ships to protect the cargo during transportation against pirates.  While they were not owned by the lower class many middle and upper class citizens did own them to protect their homes, estates, and plantations from Indian attack.  https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2013/04/gun-rights-1780s-and-today/ .  Some states today have prohibit the ownership of cannons, but many do not.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, btex said:

When you have had your post shredded this is your typical MO. You made a false statement and then tried to play the great historian game. Your statement wasnt about what they did when they got here your statement was that MANY of us were from convicts and prostitutes. It was in fact a false statement. 

 

 

You didn’t shred anything but your own reputation in this matter.  Listen Cowboy, you were wrong and it stings.  We still love you.  When you decide to learn from those that know, you will grow as an individual.  Until then you will be stuck in this cloud we all see you in.  

 

Use this situation to grow.  Be the bigger man.  You can do it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, DaveTV1 said:

Actually many civilians did own cannons at the time, and you still can today.  However for them not to be regulated you would have to purchase what they had which is a muzzle loaded cannon.  They were used on merchant ships to protect the cargo during transportation against pirates.  While they were not owned by the lower class many middle and upper class citizens did own them to protect their homes, estates, and plantations from Indian attack.  https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2013/04/gun-rights-1780s-and-today/ .  Some states today have prohibit the ownership of cannons, but many do not.  

You got a link to a online cannon store? I think I know how I’m going to spend my bonus this year! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, trueblue82 said:

You got a link to a online cannon store? I think I know how I’m going to spend my bonus this year! 

They were made in foundries.  While at the time right before the revolution Britain had banned foundries from making cannons, similar to what the left desires to do today with guns.  However after the Declaration of Independence was declared and the Continental Congress called upon the production of them being made poste haste.  Many complied.  After that one could purchase them at the foundries.  Many of the cannons had already been transported to the colonies to protect the settlements there, even Plymouth Colony had 10 cannons to protect the settlement there.  Most were imported from Europe before the Revolution, but once we declared our Independence they began to be made here.  http://mayflowerhistory.com/militia  ,  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, btex said:

You can stop the troll. A true historian would see the evidence and admit they were wrong. You have never been able to do that and that says a lot. I admit when wrong. 

And you can stop with the attempts to question my manhood. 

Evidence.  

 

#1.  England flushed their toilets on the new world more than once.  

 

#2.  Many were women.  Many were prostitutes.  

 

#3.  Most men left their families at home when they came to the new world.  Most never sent back for them.  

 

#4.  # 3 is the reason the new world was populated with illegitimate kids spawned from the felon and women of destitute.   

 

 

This isn’t my history.  It’s history.  Please tell us your credentials so that we may take your opinion into consideration.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DaveTV1 said:

They were made in foundries.  While at the time right before the revolution Britain had banned foundries from making cannons, similar to what the left desires to do today with guns.  However after the Declaration of Independence was declared and the Continental Congress called upon the production of them being made poste haste.  Many complied.  After that one could purchase them at the foundries.  Many of the cannons had already been transported to the colonies to protect the settlements there, even Plymouth Colony had 10 cannons to protect the settlement there.  Most were imported from Europe before the Revolution, but once we declared our Independence they began to be made here.  http://mayflowerhistory.com/militia  ,  

That’s all cool, but I’m more interested in the modern market. 2A 4 life! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, btex said:

This is you attempting to make up for your failed post. I posted evidence that showed many returned to England. Your OWN evidence said the number who CAME (men and women) was around 10%. MANY returned.

Many were not women, SOME were women. You need to learn the word MANY and SOME

MOST of the convicts RETURNED to England. 

You have produced zero to back this. For this you would need to show MOST of the 10% STAYED, which was not the case, then SHOW where the FEW women prostitutes sent to America had MANY children. You have produced nothing that backs that claim. Your evidence along with what I provided showed your statement was false and this post is also false. Now you can continue to question my manhood, claim you were correct etc but fact is HISTORY has shown you were incorrect. 

 

Lets let the group decide.  This is common knowledge.  Both the Australians and Americans had massive migrations in the 1700s consisting of prostitutes and felons. This is undebatable and undeniable.   If you are angry that you may have been the product of this I understand.  I however am not.   

 

Maybe you need to ask for a refund from your chosen university and beg for forgiveness 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, btex said:

So you dont believe that people should honor subpoenas? What exactly did the GOP say about that a few years back? 

dimwits didn't honor them so the bar has been set but they probably said the same thing the democraps are saying right now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Mr. P changed the title to Portland grand jury clears two in alleged 'MAGA hat' assault

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...