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

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


The only source that will be necessary for my arguments will be the 2nd itself.

Im more than happy to provide a link if needed

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


So we agree to put all sources at the end of our arguments? Are we going to have a back and forth in order to address eachothers points with the defense having the last word? How many times back and forth?

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

So we agree to put all sources at the end of our arguments? Are we going to have a back and forth in order to address eachothers points with the defense having the last word? How many times back and forth?

Cross examination, objections to assertions are commonplace in any trial.

I wouldn't place a limit, but as judge, I may over-rule if "beating a dead horse" occurs.

reply to post by superman2012


I would venture to say that those on the prosecution should be 2d Amendment supporters, while those on defense are not. Force each side, to argue the opposing viewpoint.

That would be interesting. Though I don't think there would be many takers. Previous posts by members on this topic would be the benchmark on where they stand.

reply to post by TDawgRex


I'll support any side. Like I have stated before. I like arguing and I don't know much about this topic.

reply to post by TDawgRex

I could honestly have started that way, if I started from scratch. I've already built enough to make arguing from the other side too easy to win by knowing the weakness from the inside now though.

Next time I wouldn't mind trying a major issue from an opposite side though, It would be fun.

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

The only source that will be necessary for my arguments will be the 2nd itself.

Im more than happy to provide a link if needed

Okay, your argument is for the restriction of gun rights, correct? I just want to make sure I'm clear on that.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


My argument is the 2nd is redundant and needs to be scrapped

Or to keep with the "On trial" theme, should be sentenced to death LOL

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


The 2nd is an antiquated amendment that shouldn't be observed today. Is that the stance we are taking? Against it?

I'm just sitting over here in the Jurors box, knitting gun warmers. Let me know when I'll be called for qualifying questioning....

Des

Originally posted by Destinyone
I'm just sitting over here in the Jurors box, knitting gun warmers. Let me know when I'll be called for qualifying questioning....

Des

LOL. Challenge?

reply to post by superman2012


I think it's Court protocol, for the Judge to be present for Juror Challenges...yes....

Des

reply to post by Destinyone


Preemptive challenge. Bias has been admitted and confirmed.
I still love you though Des.

reply to post by superman2012


Does that mean, you don't want the lovely magenta gun warmer, I've lovingly knit for you....

Des

I don't think we get our single challenge unless we have a juror count that won't mistrial by numbers on the spot, do we? I thought that was just in case we got more than 12 at least... +2 alternates to be safe.

Of course, I think Des makes a fine juror and ought to bring a warm glow of contentment to the Jury box.

(I figure the prosecution will be out recruiting jurors for numbers after this...lol)

I think your in trouble if they get the numbers Des..

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I will get my friends and family to join ATS.

ATS member drive...COMMENCE!!!

reply to post by Destinyone


I don't own a gun, so I'll have to use it to warm something else.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Worry not Wrabbit...I too, have low friends in high places....

Des

So when does this trial Start?


Monday?

Oh, point of clarification. Each side gets an opening and closing statement, right?

It's the details that make the process, right?