Forgive those that trespass? Not in AZ

[zakubandit]

12th Amendment-- The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

So if the government wants to go ahead and say that all that doesn't matter, then it can go ahead and change the Constitution then? Right? Isn't that what you are saying?

[zakubandit]

Imran, ever told an armed to the teeth soldier he's retarded before? If you've done that and he was alone, imagine a squad or platoon of his buddies. We can be a pretty loyal bunch. I've taken my punches for my friends, and they've taken theirs.

[KrazyHorse]

Are you even making any sense in your own head any more?

[KrazyHorse]

I think I might have broken him.

[zakubandit]

So what don't you understand this time KH? The quote from the Constitution? Or the part where talking **** to a vet on the internet means you've got internet balls?

[Arrian]

The same thing is said over and over again, that I don't know what I am talking about. That what I am saying is wrong.

There are two possibilities, I suppose:

1. That everyone other than you and Slowwhand who has posted in this thread is just out to get you.

2. You are, in fact, wrong.

KH (smart physics type), Imran (lawyer), Darius (I forget what he does, but he's a reasonable and fairly well-informed poster) and Kuci (smart young mathy type) all agree here.

These people are quoting the Constitution and its amendments. You, on the other hand, are making emotional arguments not grounded in the laws of the land. You're just making **** up. [edit: I see a quote in one of your recent posts, made as I typed this. I'm pretty sure there is an easy response to it, though]

All you had to do, when you were shown that AZ's actions are unconsitutional, was say "oh, damn" and then go on about how the Feds should be enforcing the immigration laws on the books. But no... you had to argue that water isn't wet instead.

-Arrian

[Imran Siddiqui]

12th Amendment-- The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

So if the government wants to go ahead and say that all that doesn't matter, then it can go ahead and change the Constitution then? Right? Isn't that what you are saying?

Two things:

1) 12th Amendment deals with the election of President and Vice-President (making it a ticket instead of 2nd place finisher being VP). You are attempting to quote the 10th Amendment.

2) Later Amendments, by the very definition of the term "Amendment", change the Constitution!! You ****!

[KrazyHorse]

There are two possibilities, I suppose:
Darius (I forget what he does, but he's a reasonable and fairly well-informed poster)

Darius is a law student, IIRC.

[zakubandit]

I didn't argue any fact wrong did I. The liberals and the conservatives have different ways of how like to interpret the Constitution. Anyone gonna argue different? What I did say was wrong was them trying to dictate my beliefs to me. And I did provide facts, not all of them liberal enough sorry.

And so a physics type, a lawyer, a whatever informed poster, and a mathy type know more about what it means to maintain freedom and protection than a vet? And yet they are well within they maintained rights to slam the oath that this veteran took, because I took the oath. Then you got KH who wants to slam me on my service, and then basically called my PTSD a cop out. Raise you hand if you've been shot at? Raise your hand if you have been blown up? And again, raise your hand if you've fought in a war? OK. Hands down. Call PTSD a cop out after you've gone through what I have.

[KrazyHorse]

So what don't you understand this time KH? The quote from the Constitution? Or the part where talking **** to a vet on the internet means you've got internet balls?

I'll talk **** to you in person, if you want. Next time you're in Baltimore or I'm in Guangdong.



Not to mention the fact that I have no idea what you think your quote from the Constitution (which is, as Imran said, from the 10th, not the 12th Amendment) proves. Quoting an amendment to demonstrate that amendments are disallowed?

[Imran Siddiqui]

The liberals and the conservatives have different ways of how like to interpret the Constitution.

Thinking Liberals and Conservatives both agree that Amendments can change the Constitution... in fact, that's the point of them and the point of Article V!

[KrazyHorse]

I really like how his alleged service in the military renders him the ultimate arbiter of what exactly the Constitution says.

Jesus, why does the supreme court exist? We can just ask some Chinese guy in Guangdong who's pretending to be a US army vet.

[Arrian]

And so a physics type, a lawyer, a whatever informed poster, and a mathy type know more about what it means to maintain freedom and protection than a vet?

How exactly does being a vet better equip you to read a legal document than being a lawyer? This is really silly, man.

Then you got KH who wants to slam me on my service

No. He slammed: a) your argument; and b) your attempt to claim that your service somehow makes your argument fly. [edit: he also doesn't believe your claims re: service, which is another matter. This is the internet. People make **** up all the time]

How is your PTSD relevant to this discussion, by the way?

-Arrian

[Arrian]

This one takes the cake, though:

I didn't argue any fact wrong did I.

Sure you did. Repeatedly, in fact. It's all there in this thread.

This isn't a conservative/liberal interpretation thing. We're not debating what the authors of the 2nd amendment meant by "arms" here.

-Arrian

[KrazyHorse]

FWIW I actually do believe him, but the opportunity to keep needling him was too good to pass up.