Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

A fun comeback when anti's bring up the Supreme Court's ruling on the 2nd Amendment

Discussion in 'Legal' started by GuyWithQuestions, Jun 17, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. GuyWithQuestions

    GuyWithQuestions Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Messages:
    451
    I couldn't help but share this once I found this out and started using it on those who argue against firearms. I figured that this would be most appropriate in the Legal section. You hear arguments about whether the 2nd Amendment refers to individuals' right to bear arms or the National Guard's right, and how the U.S. Supreme Court ruled it's the National Guard's right. Well, I found something interesting that may not be effective in convincing the other side, but is fun to bring up (if you do it the right way) in your arguments with the anti's when they say "The U.S. Supreme Court said...." You know how there's all those arguments out there on whether a tomato is a vegetable or a fruit and how botanists and other scientists say it's a fruit because it comes from the ripened ovary of a flowering plant? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomato#Controversies The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that tomatoes are vegetables (Nix v. Hedden, 149 U.S. 304), even though they were given evidence that it's a fruit from dictionaries. It was over a tariff issue, where imported vegetables were charged a tariff, while fruits were not. The U.S. Supreme Court said:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden

    Again, it probably won't convince the anti's and doesn't prove anything, but it's fun to bring it up in anti conversations (if you do it the right way). When they say, "The U.S. Supreme Court ruled..." you respond with, "In Nix v. Hedden, the U.S. Supreme Court also ruled that tomatoes are vegetables, not fruit, although scientists say that they're fruit."
     
  2. Quiet

    Quiet Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,064
    Location:
    bouncing between the 909 & the 702
    When did SCOTUS rule that the 2nd Amendment applied only to the National Guard?

    Because, US v Miller did not rule that.

    The US attorney's argued 4 points.
    1. The NFA is intended as a revenue-collecting measure and therefore within the authority of the Department of the Treasury.
    2. The defendants transported the shotgun from Oklahoma to Arkansas, and therefore used it in interstate commerce.
    3. The Second Amendment protects only the ownership of military-type weapons appropriate for use in an organized militia.
    4. The "double barrel 12-gauge Stevens shotgun having a barrel less than 18 inches in length, bearing identification number 76230" was never used in any militia organization.

    The Court indicated that only military type arms are constitutionally protected.

    The Court also indicated that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. And further, that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.

    So, basically, it was all about how the NFA was not unconstitutional and did not violate the Second Amendment.
     
  3. 1911Tuner

    1911Tuner Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Messages:
    18,550
    Location:
    Lexington,North Carolina...or thereabouts
    re:

    A tomato is actually a berry...

    Cheers
     
  4. gunsmith

    gunsmith member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Location:
    Reno, Nevada
    you know your into political debate

    When arguments like this one are "fun".....

    I would counter, yes, scotus said it is a "to mat toe" but I know the 9th circuit said "tah may toe":neener:
     
  5. jselvy

    jselvy member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    518
    It matters not. Our right to to keep and bear produce shall not be infringed!!!!!



    Jefferson
     
  6. TallPine

    TallPine Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    7,734
    Location:
    somewhere in the middle of Montana
    Why do you need tomatoes, anyway ...? :p
     
  7. Zundfolge

    Zundfolge Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    10,756
    Location:
    Colorado Springs
    You can have my tomatoes when you take them from my cold, dead gazpacho!
     
  8. Wheeler44

    Wheeler44 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2007
    Messages:
    962
    Under the Reagan administration schools were allowed to count a ketchup package served with lunch " a serving of vegetables"
     
  9. jselvy

    jselvy member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    518
    Tomatoes in a SCHOOL!!!!
    Somebody think of the CHILDREN!!!


    Jefferson
     
  10. GuyWithQuestions

    GuyWithQuestions Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Messages:
    451
    I love tomatoes! And it's actually kind of weird, on my research on vegetables and fruits in Wikipedia, although scientifically a carrot is not a fruit, the European Union defines carrots as fruit in the commercial world for the purposes of measuring the proportion of "fruit" contained in carrot jam. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit#Botanic_fruit_and_culinary_fruit
     
  11. sacp81170a

    sacp81170a Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2004
    Messages:
    2,410
    Location:
    Farmington, AR
    Specifically, the right to keep and bear fruit has been around since the Garden of Eden. Eve ate the fruit, kept it, and bore the fruit to Adam, and Adam ate it. Nuthin' but trouble ever since, I tell ya... :neener:
     
  12. ServiceSoon

    ServiceSoon Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,404
    Location:
    Michiana
    Too funny
     
  13. DWARREN123

    DWARREN123 Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,749
    Location:
    Between TN & KY
    I like the Right to Arm Bears!
     
  14. AZRickD

    AZRickD Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2003
    Messages:
    1,684
    "...a drive-by fruiting..."

    Robin Williams as Mrs. Doubtfire.

    Rick
     
  15. jaytex1969

    jaytex1969 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    206
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Tomatoes rank up there with coffee and RKBA, as far as I'm concerned. I'm watching a very special one ripen on the vine right now. I have big plans for that one....
     
  16. Beachmaster

    Beachmaster Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2006
    Messages:
    117
    Location:
    Arizona
    I just put up a "Tomato Free Zone" sign at the local school. That will solve all the problems.

    :)
     
  17. High Planes Drifter

    High Planes Drifter Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    1,204

    You beat me to it. LOL. One of the funniest moments on the big screen in recent times.
     
  18. AZRickD

    AZRickD Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2003
    Messages:
    1,684
    ...spoiled years of left-wing activism by Mr. Williams. I'm sensitive, that way.

    Rick
     
  19. Technosavant

    Technosavant Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Messages:
    2,011
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    Other things to bring up:

    Dred Scott v. Sandford
    Plessy v. Ferguson

    Both cases are today recognized as major mistakes by the SCOTUS, and ultimately harmful to the health of the nation. Supreme Court decisions are not infallible, and it is possible for the Court to go against the words and intent of the Constitution if they have a personal bias in the matter.
     
  20. jerkface11

    jerkface11 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Messages:
    5,499
    Location:
    Arkansas
    As I've said before tomatoes are an assault vegetable. All you produce nuts will jump all over me saying "it isn't a vegetable" but i think we all know what the term assault vegetable means. It splatters easily has more than 10 seeds and is sized properly for throwing.
     
  21. xd9fan

    xd9fan Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,858
    Location:
    Under tyranny in Midwest
    couldnt agree more
    asking a branch of Govt what my Rights are is.....unamerican....at least in the eyes of America's first generation.
     
  22. MEH

    MEH Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Messages:
    214
    Location:
    Lancaster County PA
    Don't forget you can throw it from the hip.:what:

    At least they don't have that shoulder thing that goes up.:neener:
     
  23. USAFNoDAk

    USAFNoDAk Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2004
    Messages:
    486
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Did you ever see "The Little Rascals" episode where they had the fight against Butch and his gang? Butch was firing tomatoes at the Rascals with a contraption that had some big rubber bands and what looked to be a tin can to hold the tomato being fired. Then the Little Rascals started putting watermelons on the teeter totter and Chubby would jump on the other end, launching the watermelons at Butch and his gang. They took out the tomato launcher and the battle was about over. Too funny.
     
  24. Sam Adams

    Sam Adams Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2003
    Messages:
    2,035
    Location:
    South Texas
    Gee, what happens when the law (Title 18, Section 922(o), passed in 1986) FORBIDS the collection of the $200 for the registration of full autos? Has that issue ever been litigated? It would seem to cut the NFA off at the knees.
     
  25. ghschirtz

    ghschirtz Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2007
    Messages:
    71
    Another comeback...

    WHY THE GUN IS CIVILIZATION written by Marko Kloos

    http://munchkinwrangler.blogspot.com/2007/03/why-gun-is-civilization.html

    "Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

    In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

    When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

    There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

    Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

    When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act."
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page