Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The beezzer's Court. On trial, The 2nd Amendment

page: 2
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


There is a pseudo trial going on in the media that has usurpers to the presidency trying to disarm America so as to completely reign this country.

Licensing was implemented to keep convicted felons from purchasing and otherwise owning modern weapons. This is allowed under the second amendment.
edit on 11-1-2013 by NightFlight because: added info




posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by NightFlight
 


The very idea of the 2nd Amendment is on trial. Call it a pseudo-trial if you wish, but the result will be massive, regardless of the legitimacy of the "trial".



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


So, you Beezer, is going to implement a monkey trial to subvert or even abolish the second amendment? Or, will you try to establish the inalienable right to keep and bear arms is correct and appropriate? Or are you to stay ambivalent and impartial?



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by NightFlight
reply to post by beezzer
 


So, you Beezer, is going to implement a monkey trial to subvert or even abolish the second amendment? Or, will you try to establish the inalienable right to keep and bear arms is correct and appropriate? Or are you to stay ambivalent and impartial?


Ambivalent and impartial.

I'm the judge.

means, motive, and opportunity. The only thing I will allow.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by NightFlight
reply to post by beezzer
 


So, you Beezer, is going to implement a monkey trial to subvert or even abolish the second amendment? Or, will you try to establish the inalienable right to keep and bear arms is correct and appropriate? Or are you to stay ambivalent and impartial?


Ambivalent and impartial.

I'm the judge.

means, motive, and opportunity. The only thing I will allow.


Will we also be looking into a trial towards free speech?

Just wondering, since this is a silly concept to actually debate our rights as if it's criminal to have them. I don't think I appreciate your angle here.
edit on 1/11/2013 by eXia7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:48 PM
link   
Could be a bit of fun and would be interesting to do this in a controlled debate/court style.

Ill volunteer to be one of the prosecution if youll have me



edit on 11/1/2013 by IkNOwSTuff because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by eXia7

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by NightFlight
reply to post by beezzer
 


So, you Beezer, is going to implement a monkey trial to subvert or even abolish the second amendment? Or, will you try to establish the inalienable right to keep and bear arms is correct and appropriate? Or are you to stay ambivalent and impartial?


Ambivalent and impartial.

I'm the judge.

means, motive, and opportunity. The only thing I will allow.


Will we also be looking into a trial towards free speech?

Just wondering, since this is a silly concept to actually debate our rights as if it's criminal to have them. I don't think I appreciate your angle here.
edit on 1/11/2013 by eXia7 because: (no reason given)


Far enough. But many here DO think that the 2nd Amendment is criminal.

Lets have a trial to determine the validity of their claims.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff
 


One for the prosecution.

Thanks.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:51 PM
link   
The 2nd Amendment best option on this trial is to be declared not guilty by reason of insanity.
edit on 11-1-2013 by Trueman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Well Your Honor, I think I can probably make a great argument on this from either side in the spirit of good debate. Although defending it would be my natural position. I'd be happy to take whatever appointment the 'court' might see fit to make for me. I'm definitely interested in participating though.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


I cannot participate in such folly. To even contemplate putting the second amendment on trial will accomplish nothing and possibly lead to lessening the meaning of such a right. If you proceed with this pseudo trial, you will soon be forced to place the first amendment on trial followed by the third through tenth amendments.

I am not sure that you are an American citizen, but if you are, please think about this long and hard before proceeding.

ATS is watched by many alphabet agencies within the US. Some of these agencies have direct ties to the Presidency. Don't write anything here you don't want happening in real life...



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


For the Defense then!



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by eXia7

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by NightFlight
reply to post by beezzer
 


So, you Beezer, is going to implement a monkey trial to subvert or even abolish the second amendment? Or, will you try to establish the inalienable right to keep and bear arms is correct and appropriate? Or are you to stay ambivalent and impartial?


Ambivalent and impartial.

I'm the judge.

means, motive, and opportunity. The only thing I will allow.


Will we also be looking into a trial towards free speech?

Just wondering, since this is a silly concept to actually debate our rights as if it's criminal to have them. I don't think I appreciate your angle here.
edit on 1/11/2013 by eXia7 because: (no reason given)


Far enough. But many here DO think that the 2nd Amendment is criminal.

Lets have a trial to determine the validity of their claims.


The "many" people you speak of are usually not even from the US, so how is MY right a criminal offense to somebody that doesn't even live in my country?

As for the other half, they can't help their view on guns, because they've never even shot one in their lives, so they live in fear of them. Most people who argue against guns do not understand how a gun works, and that it is a tool. Yes crazy people can get guns, but nobody ever looks at the other factors that contribute to tragic outcomes, they just jump on the anti gun wagon, blatantly ignoring the fact that most of these shooters are on some types of drugs for mental instability.

There are far more responsible gun owners in America than the outside population may believe. Our 2nd amendment right is not up for debate for people who don't even originate from a country that fought to have the rights it has now.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by NightFlight
 


I respect your opinion. May I offer mine?

While this "folly" ensues, I will remain impartial, but I have a strong feeling that one side will be able to prove it's point rather seamlessly. I just want a "forum" to illustrate that.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by NightFlight
reply to post by beezzer
 


I cannot participate in such folly. To even contemplate putting the second amendment on trial will accomplish nothing and possibly lead to lessening the meaning of such a right. If you proceed with this pseudo trial, you will soon be forced to place the first amendment on trial followed by the third through tenth amendments.

I am not sure that you are an American citizen, but if you are, please think about this long and hard before proceeding.

ATS is watched by many alphabet agencies within the US. Some of these agencies have direct ties to the Presidency. Don't write anything here you don't want happening in real life...


OMG


Dude are you for real???

This is a bit of harmless fun, you do realise that the "verdict" that is reached isnt going to change or affect anything, right?

I think Beez has a great idea, look at the firehose now, since SH every 2nd thread is about Guns either directly or indirectly and it always comes back to the 2nd.
Even though its farcical to have this "trial" its ironically 1 way of having the discussion without it turning into a farce or a slinging match.

Calm down mate, take a deep breath and relax. This is harmless



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by eXia7


The "many" people you speak of are usually not even from the US, so how is MY right a criminal offense to somebody that doesn't even live in my country?

As for the other half, they can't help their view on guns, because they've never even shot one in their lives, so they live in fear of them. Most people who argue against guns do not understand how a gun works, and that it is a tool. Yes crazy people can get guns, but nobody ever looks at the other factors that contribute to tragic outcomes, they just jump on the anti gun wagon, blatantly ignoring the fact that most of these shooters are on some types of drugs for mental instability.

There are far more responsible gun owners in America than the outside population may believe. Our 2nd amendment right is not up for debate for people who don't even originate from a country that fought to have the rights it has now.


Sounds like a valid argument for the Defense. Wrabbit is on board, care to join him?



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by eXia7


The "many" people you speak of are usually not even from the US, so how is MY right a criminal offense to somebody that doesn't even live in my country?

As for the other half, they can't help their view on guns, because they've never even shot one in their lives, so they live in fear of them. Most people who argue against guns do not understand how a gun works, and that it is a tool. Yes crazy people can get guns, but nobody ever looks at the other factors that contribute to tragic outcomes, they just jump on the anti gun wagon, blatantly ignoring the fact that most of these shooters are on some types of drugs for mental instability.

There are far more responsible gun owners in America than the outside population may believe. Our 2nd amendment right is not up for debate for people who don't even originate from a country that fought to have the rights it has now.


Sounds like a valid argument for the Defense. Wrabbit is on board, care to join him?


No, I don't believe I should contribute more into a faux trial that will continue to discredit any effort at trying to preserve any rights we have left.

I know others wish to continue on beating this dead horse, but I'm just gonna sit back and watch. But you're free to use my opinion as a "defense"



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012
...with guns. Now creationists are getting in on the 2nd amendment rights?



Umm, duuh!
The overwhelming majority of the Founders were deists of the One True God.
William Penn, the founder of my commonwealth dedicated it to Jesus Christ.

The Declaration of Independence

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men,

"...to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them..."
"...they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

Like it or not, this country was founded under God.


Freedom is not a gift bestowed upon us by other men, but a right that belongs to us by the laws of God and nature. ~ Ben Franklin

What good is freedom without the ability to defend it?



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by eXia7
 


So you want to defend it without having to defend it? Makes sense.
I propose that we only hear from people that either want to be on the:

1. Defense
2. Prosecution
3. Jury
4. Witness stand

All others are welcome to debate this item in the many other threads about the 2nd amendment.

This thread is about exactly what Beezzer said it is about. You don't want to participate? Watch or leave.



posted on Jan, 11 2013 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by mal1970
 


So because Man can create it, it is protected by God.
What if Man made a weapon to destroy God?





new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join