Murders and Shootings

tad10 · Dec 14, 2012

Araysar_sl said:
Nah, its just you. You see, you're a fucking moron and that's a problem for the rest of us who are trying to discuss things. You interrupt our conversations with your moronic, uninformed andunsubstantiatedopinions every fucking time.

Still trying to defend your college's grant of a history degree on you I see.

You always get so pissed off when you're wrong and confused. What's that about?

General Antony · Dec 14, 2012

I hope one of these dudes visit the schools of Araysar and Tad's children in the future. This forum fucking blows.

Tarrant · Dec 14, 2012

I wonder how many more pages of Tad and Araysar saying "no you, no you, no you" we're going to get.....

Gravel · Dec 14, 2012

Sorry to derail your argument, but something more constructive:

Araysar · Dec 14, 2012

tad10_sl said:
By knowing full well that Madison like to fuck with the language and having some knowledge of the shit that went down in the 18th Century.

Asking for the 7th time now about how Madison "liked to fuck with the language" since according to you, you "know full well" that Madison actually intended for 2nd amendment to be as measure against home invasions rather than having an armed populace to defend against tyranny of the government.

Are you ready to end this charade and just admit that you don't know what the fuck you are talking about as usual?

I had a trump in my sleeve waiting for you to finally fess up to the fact that you said something profoundly fucking stupid, but I don't feel like playing this game anymore since I was clearly right.

So I'll just toss it out here and be on my merry way.

Federalist Paper #46 written by James Madison.

http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa46.htm

That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism. Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it. Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it.

Go back and get a refund on your "law degree", ya moron.

Laedrun · Dec 14, 2012

In Texas we have a law requiring every public and private school district, college campus, and university to maintain a full state accredited police department. They must also have officers with training in active shooter scenarios stationed on any campus with students or faculty present, even for after-hours extra curricular activities.

One of my cop friends was a campus police officer here in Austin and was considering quitting his job a few years ago because the liberal majority of teachers and students at the college had successfully convinced the college higher-ups to take the guns from the officers and arm them only with mace, a walkie-talkie and feel-good officer friendly polo shirts. They were outraged that people with meany police uniforms and guns were desecrating their sacred halls of learning, their wittle feewings were intimidated. The Virgina tech shootings happened just before they were going to put the policy into effect, so yeah, the policy change was dropped, the liberal cunts dropped their campaign, and my friend kept his job and sidearm.

You guys think armed campus police might have helped here?

tad10 · Dec 14, 2012

Araysar_sl said:
Asking for the 7th time now about how Madison "liked to fuck with the language" since according to you, you "know full well" that Madison actually intended for 2nd amendment to be as measure against home invasions rather than having an armed populace to defend against tyranny of the government.

I already mentioned that buddy:

tad10_sl said:
Now that's not the only purpose for the Second Amendment - defense against tyranny and etc.

Federalist papers were written after the constitution and were posthoc justifications for the already existing language.

Thumbs High!

You would have done better by reminding me that Madison himself said that Morris had the biggest impact as part of the CoS&A than he himself. Second Amendment was written to ensure people got to keep their guns. People used guns in the 18thC mainly to protect themselves and shoot deer and game, defending against Tyranny was a little lower on the totem pole of actual everyday concerns.

Zombie Thorne_sl · Dec 14, 2012

Elurin_sl said:
Sorry to derail your argument, but something more constructive:

I shoot with the department that was consulted for that video, it's actually pretty good.

tad10 · Dec 14, 2012

Tarrant_sl said:
I wonder how many more pages of Tad and Araysar saying "no you, no you, no you" we're going to get.....

My fault for making an offhand comment when someone suggested that the Second Amendment existed solely for national defense. Guys like Araysar, Duppin, Erronious, Lost Ranger, & Etc. apparently live to try and spot a mistake in anything I post. I'm flattered of course, and maybe even a little curious... but you're right, I should have just let it pass this time.Mea Culpa.

headspace · Dec 14, 2012

Absolutely. I don't think anyone in their right mind would argue we should take guns from law Enforcement. No one here has implied that either.

Tuco · Dec 14, 2012

General Antony_sl said:
I hope one of these dudes visit the schools of Araysar and Tad's children in the future. This forum fucking blows.

Araysar · Dec 14, 2012

tad10_sl said:
I already mentioned that buddy:

Yeah, I saw your backpedaling.

tad10_sl said:
Federalist papers were written after the constitution and were posthoc justifications for the already existing language.

This argument is laughable because the assumption here is that Madison went out of his way to write some long screed later on (FP # 46) under a pseudonym about the importance of arming citizens against tyranny of the government to conceal his true intent: giving people the right to defend themselves against home invasions and bears. You know, as opposed to actually believing that 2nd amendment's primary intent was to defend against tyranny and later on supporting that intent with multiple writings.

Anyways, I'll play along.

Was FP46 written after the constitution? Yes.

Was FP46 written after the Bill of Rights? LOL NO.

Federalist paper #46 was published on January 29, 1788
Bill of Rights (of which the 2nd amendment was a part of if you were not aware) was created on September 25, 1789

Keep digging deeper, ya putz.

Flunklesnarkin_sl · Dec 14, 2012

What in the world happened to this thread.

Maybe just move the discussion of guns to the Gun Control thread and rickshaw this one.

Voyce · Dec 14, 2012

Aryasar and Tad are both equally awful posters, most people already knew this. I suppose it was inevitable they'd argue with each other.

Fyro · Dec 14, 2012

Laedrun_sl said:
In Texas we have a law requiring every public and private school district, college campus, and university to maintain a full state accredited police department. They must also have officers with training in active shooter scenarios stationed on any campus with students or faculty present, even for after-hours extra curricular activities.

One of my cop friends was a campus police officer here in Austin and was considering quitting his job a few years ago because the liberal majority of teachers and students at the college had successfully convinced the college higher-ups to take the guns from the officers and arm them only with mace, a walkie-talkie and feel-good officer friendly polo shirts. They were outraged that people with meany police uniforms and guns were desecrating their sacred halls of learning, their wittle feewings were intimidated. The Virgina tech shootings happened just before they were going to put the policy into effect, so yeah, the policy change was dropped, the liberal cunts dropped their campaign, and my friend kept his job and sidearm.

You guys think armed campus police might have helped here?

Sorry that my reply is lacking in content, but Jesus titty Chirst. Your post is just dripping in cuntiness.

LadyVex_sl · Dec 14, 2012

Just wanted to comment; I know this is foh, and have a thick skin, but I'm sort of sad to see what this post became. Adults being shot is terrible, high school/middle is worse, but elementary? This guy shot babies; I don't often cry, but reading about this stuff, seeing it unfold...I misted up several times.

There's no way I can explain the depth of sadness this causes. Crazy people are crazy, but there is a special circle of hell reserved for people who shoot babies - those that could not be anymore innocent if they tried.

My thoughts are with all of those hit by this tragedy. I was upset the other day thinking of my best friend who just recently died, and how his family just had their first thanksgiving without him, and how they are about to have their first christmas. I don't think I ever want to be a mom, but just the thought that some parents will come down on christmas morning, with a bright tree, laden with tinsel, glowing lights and brilliant ornaments; presents stuffed under the branches and red stockings over the fireplace...and then know that their child won't be opening his tonka truck, or her barbie. They won't be drinking milk and the rest of the leftover cookies from santa, or emptying their stocking and asking to eat the candy that falls out.

Think of that. I don't have any fancy observations on life, or some ten step plan to reducing gun violence, or even thoughts on mental health care in this country. They're all very relevant topics, but degenerating into who is right and who is wrong is taking something away from what happened.

Babies died, and your forum post count isn't going to suddenly turn that around.

Sorry to be so morose, but that is some devastating news.

BrutulTM · Dec 14, 2012

LadyVex_sl said:
Just wanted to comment;

Well said. I had hoped we could keep the part where we all copy and paste from Wikipedia and call each other retards over in the gun control thread given how gut wrenching this incident was but no such luck.

Araysar · Dec 14, 2012

LadyVex_sl said:
Just wanted to comment; I know this is foh, and have a thick skin, but I'm sort of sad to see what this post became. Adults being shot is terrible, high school/middle is worse, but elementary? This guy shot babies; I don't often cry, but reading about this stuff, seeing it unfold...I misted up several times.

There's no way I can explain the depth of sadness this causes. Crazy people are crazy, but there is a special circle of hell reserved for people who shoot babies - those that could not be anymore innocent if they tried.

My thoughts are with all of those hit by this tragedy. I was upset the other day thinking of my best friend who just recently died, and how his family just had their first thanksgiving without him, and how they are about to have their first christmas. I don't think I ever want to be a mom, but just the thought that some parents will come down on christmas morning, with a bright tree, laden with tinsel, glowing lights and brilliant ornaments; presents stuffed under the branches and red stockings over the fireplace...and then know that their child won't be opening his tonka truck, or her barbie. They won't be drinking milk and the rest of the leftover cookies from santa, or emptying their stocking and asking to eat the candy that falls out.

Think of that. I don't have any fancy observations on life, or some ten step plan to reducing gun violence, or even thoughts on mental health care in this country. They're all very relevant topics, but degenerating into who is right and who is wrong is taking something away from what happened.

Babies died, and your forum post count isn't going to suddenly turn that around.

Sorry to be so morose, but that is some devastating news.

I see that you didn't mention anywhere that you were going to pray for them, so this post only gets a 9/10 on the bleeding heart scale.

Better luck at the next shooting.

I saw this being posted on facebook and i immediately thought of a person just like you who would post that

tad10 · Dec 14, 2012

Araysar_sl said:
Keep digging deeper, ya putz.

You know what you made me look - the Second Amendment was proposed after the convention. I'm right about Madison and the meaning of the Amendment but the CoSA was a Convention Committee and, AFAIK, not involved with the Bill of Rights, so my bad there - that's what I get for trying to play TSW while simultaneously arguing with an idiot on rerolled.

Anyway the original wording of what became the Second Amendment was:

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed, and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person."

The first clause of which is mostly the personal right of self defense. See District of Columbia v. Heller note. 7,

See, e.g., 3 A Compleat Collection of State-Tryals 185 (1719) ("Hath not every Subject power to keep Arms, as well as Servants in his House for defence of his Person?"); T. Wood, A New Institute of the Imperial or Civil Law 282 (1730) ("Those are guilty of publick Force, who keep Arms in their Houses, and make use of them otherwise than upon Journeys or Hunting, or for Sale . . ."); A Collection of All the Acts of Assembly, Now in Force, in the Colony of Virginia 596 (1733) ("Free Negros, Mulattos, or Indians, and Owners of Slaves, seated atFrontier Plantations, may obtain Licence from a Justice of Peace, for keeping Arms,&c."); J. Ayliffe, A New Pandect of Roman Civil Law 195 (1734) ("Yet a Person might keep Arms in his House, or on his Estate, on the Account of Hunting, Navigation, Travelling, and on the Score of Selling them in the way of Trade or Commerce, or such Arms as accrued to him by way of Inheritance"); J. Trusler, A Concise View of the Common Law and Statute Law of England 270 (1781) ("if [papists] keep arms in their houses, such arms may be seized by a justice of the peace"); Some Considerations on the Game Laws 54 (1796) ("Who has been deprived by [the law] of keeping arms for his own defence? What law forbids the veriest pauper, if he can raise a sum sufficient for the purchase of it,
from mounting his Gun on his Chimney Piece . . . ?"); 3 B. Wilson, The Works of the Honourable James Wilson 84 (1804) (with reference to state constitutional right: "This is one of our many renewals of the Saxon regulations. 'They were bound,' says Mr. Selden, 'to keep arms for the preservation of the kingdom, and of their own person'"); W. Duer, Outlines of the Constitutional Jurisprudence of the United States 31-32 (1833) (with reference to colonists' English rights: "The right of every individual to keep arms for his defence, suitable to his condition and degree; which was the public allowance, under due restrictions of the natural right of resistance and self-preservation"); 3 R. Burn, Justice of the Peace and the Parish Officer 88 (1815) ("It is, however, laid down by Serjeant Hawkins, . . . that if a lessee, after the end of the term, keep arms in his house to oppose the entry of the lessor, . . ."); State v. Dempsey, 31 N. C. 384, 385 (1849) (citing 1840 state law making it a misdemeanor for a member of certain racial groups "to carry about his person or keep in his house any shot gun or other arms").

So yes the right to bear arms was originally a right of personal self-defense first and a defense against tyranny second.
And this really is my last comment on this issue in this thread. If you want to keep yapping about Aryasar you can post in the Gun Control thread.

Famm · Dec 14, 2012

Oh boo the fuck hoo. Literal babies die every day from malnutrition and dehydration. The human race is cruel and opportunistic. In general we enjoy a safety and security in this nation that is unheard of. Go dig irrigation ditches in Africa if you want to get misty eyed about the poor fucking children. Life is still cheap in general.

Murders and Shootings

Elisha Dushku

Vyemm Raider

Mr. Poopybutthole

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Correspondent / Stock Pals CEO

Molten Core Raider

Elisha Dushku

shitlord

Elisha Dushku

Lord Nagafen Raider

I got Tuco'd!

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Correspondent / Stock Pals CEO

shitlord

Shit Lord Supreme

Golden Squire

shitlord

Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun.

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Correspondent / Stock Pals CEO

Elisha Dushku

Ahn'Qiraj Raider