It's pretty obvious that these people have no idea what they are talking about especially when these people are too fucking stupid to understand what they are commenting on.
That's where the Dred Scott post originated. One of these bozos thought they could persuade me that the Second Amendment was an individual right (whatever that means) by pulling one of most disreputable Supreme Court Cases. Dred Scott is considered to be the product of an overly ideological and reactionary judge relying on poor scholarship and weak legal reasoning in an effort to shape public policy.
To be quite honest if you have to rely on dicta from a case which is cited as an example of poor scholarship and weak legal reasoning, you are only showing yourself out to be a complete and total fuckwit.
That's not very persuasive of anything other than you are a complete and total fuckwit!
Anyway, more proof of a lack of understanding and comprehension comes from this "person":
Weer'd Beard said...
This was my favorite!
"Such as the person who worked at the Capitol brought a gun to work and was caught when the cop questioned him about his concealed carry badge."
Not sure what this jerkoff is on about. Maybe Weer'd Beard doesn't read too much gun enthusiast literature or he might have seen one of these for sale. He missed that I was recounting a war story from my days at USAO-DC. I guess the acronym went over his tiny head.
Which means I don't think this fuckwit quite understood what I said, which was:
Laci the Chinese Crested said...
Sevesteen, I have to disagree. My experience is that most law abiding gun owners follow the rules. Yes, there were a few cases from my days at USAO-DC.
Such as the person who worked at the Capitol brought a gun to work and was caught when the cop questioned him about his concealed carry badge. A tourist who asks police at the Capitol where they can park their car since they have guns in the trunk.
My fav was the guy who went to Georgetown dressed as Hitler on Halloween with a real gun in a holster. Just imagine the time he had in the DC jail waiting to be bailed out!
But for the most part, gun owners try to abide by the law.
October 14, 2009 2:08 PM
"My experience is that most law abiding gun owners follow the rules."
"But for the most part, gun owners try to abide by the law.
Gee, that doesn't sound very bigoted against gun owners to me:
See, one problem I have with the gun cretin crowd is they like to use the word bigot which is defined as "a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance." Then the fuckwits don't even try to understand what you are saying. Instead, they keep trying to foist something on you that you have shown conclusively does not support their point.
Isn't that a bigoted attitude?
Well, I am not obstinately or intolerantly devoted to my views. I am open to anyone who can provide me with cogent and considered reasoning. As I said, I have yet to receive a good argument from these morons. And trust me, I've been open minded. I do listen, but rarely do I hear anything of value.
On the other hand, these people are so obstinately or intolerantly devoted to their world view that they are not open to logic and other opinion. Not to mention they don't even try to understand what others are saying, as the Weer'd Beard bit points out. They attack you for something you say or did (e.g, "he's anti-gun that must make him wrong") rather than try to see your point of view.
And they are more than willing to show their ignorance: e.g., stubbornly insisting that Dred Scott proves their position. Worse saying they understand the decision as they trot out the "Parade of Horribles" to make their point.
Not to mention they will call you all sorts of names if you disagree with them and come around and harass you until you give up or accept their point of view.
Again, doesn't that make these assholes bigots?
Again Weer'd Beard made a comment about me going to Law School in ridicule. As I said in a prior post, I think he is too much of a fuckwit to realise that was a compliment. Additionally, he was showing his ignorance by refusing to accept my expertise and using it to ridicule me.
If anything they want to force their opinions on others no matter how incorrect they are. They want to come here and post comments. The Dred Scott thing is a good case in point, these assholes want to prove that Dred Scott proves an individual right when it doesn't show dick. And they keep insisting it supports their point of view!
Once again with feeling, if you have to rely on dicta from a case which is cited as an example of poor scholarship and weak legal reasoning, the only thing you are showing is that you are a complete and total fuckwit.
But they don't get that point.
Additionally, they aren't going to get respect if they act like a bunch of fuckwits. If anything, they are going to alienate anyone who supports them.
I can say that there is one good lesson from Dred Scott which is that constitutional controversies are resolved only when one side persuades or eliminates the other.
But it seems that we are seeing gun assholes everywhere: toting AR-15s near the president, wearing a pistol and carrying a sign saying "It Is Time To Water The Tree Of Liberty", and death threats against the president are up.
They have their own little circle jerks all over the net, which is one of the reasons I don't want to share my space with their idiotic comments.
That shit is scary!
If you can't persuade 'em, you hope they shoot themselves.
Gun assholes--a dying breed.
