TheBlaze Books Give You More!

CommentsDisplaying Mindwerkz's 10 most recent comments.

• Poll Results: Blaze Readers On Guns And The Second Amendment

  January 14, 2013 at 1:26am

  In reply to Sensible_Centrist_Democrat.

  SCD

  You didnt answer my question. Of course you trust the government more then your neighbors, the question is why?

  The nuke issue is not beyond debate and perhaps I shouldn’t have used gov weapons as a limiting factor as it goes well beyond that. Infact my right to arms, which is not defined in any way, is stated as that which shall not be infringed. I get the gov weapons relation from subsequent definitions and arguments where it was defined by such as Madison and Jefferson. Madison, as the author of the bill of right, has a particular insight as to what it means and its intent. However as written there are zero limitations on the weapons I am guaranteed as a right. It is not that I will not see it, it that unlike you, I will not create it out of whole cloth based upon fear. The 2nd says I am allowed weapons and that that right cannot be infringed. The 9th says that if it isnt specifically delegated to the fed, it belongs to me. Thus as it is not specifically delegated, and rather expressly prohibited to infringe my arms, I have a right to everything and anything I can get my hands on. Now you dont want this to be true so you reject it. However your rejection of reality has no reflection on its exsistance. This works both ways, there is no legal right to tax my income, however my rejection of such a right does not stop them from arresting me if I dont pay. It is a strange world we live in.

• Poll Results: Blaze Readers On Guns And The Second Amendment

  January 14, 2013 at 1:10am

  Ispy

  Perhaps a little refresher, the wording is not “firearms” bur rather “arms.” Arms are defined as weapons and bear means to possess or present. Thus your right to possess weapons shall not be infringed. Tanks are weapons, RPG’s are weapons, bombs are weapons.

  This does raise the interesting question of nukes. If you dont want me owning nukes, why do you want our gov to do it? Now I see the practicality of having them as a peace keeping measure, but then couldn’t that same argument be made of a peaceful citizen? I admit to being very uncomfortable about there being nukes in my neighborhood and instinctively wanting them restricted. On the other hand, they are no more dangerous than any other weapon in the hands of a sane man. This is all theoretical really as no one is going to grant citizens nuke privileges but technically we do have a right to them. Sticky situation indeed…

• Poll Results: Blaze Readers On Guns And The Second Amendment

  January 14, 2013 at 12:59am

  In reply to Sensible_Centrist_Democrat.

  You skimmed right over the point. I am allowed to have anything the Gov does, so if you arnt ok with me having it, why are you ok with them having it?

  Logically you would want no one to have bombs right? Or do you trust a faceless bureaucrat more then your neighbor or yourself? Granted this is simply fear based thinking, but why do I scare you when a group that can hurt you a whole lot more than me dosent?

• Poll Results: Blaze Readers On Guns And The Second Amendment

  January 14, 2013 at 12:38am

  In reply to Sensible_Centrist_Democrat.

  SCD

  Hollow points are extremely common and typical hunting rounds. Banning them would be idiotic as you risk over penetration and leave you with significantly more dangerous rounds. Never heard those tossed in with “banning” comments before so you may want to tell your friends exactly what they are.

  As for tanks et al… If you understand the point of the 2nd, which is to defend against tyranny, and read the words of the drafters, where is there any question? Clearly I was intended to have “uninfringed” access to each and everything our military has. The real problem here is that we have a standing army at all. Re-funding it every few years is just a cheap way of short circuiting the constitution.

  The point is, yes, I legally have access to each and every thing the Gov has. Now the real question is if you dont want me to have it, why do you want them to have it? I dont hear any yells for disarming the Army.

• Flight Attendant Secrets Revealed: What Kind of Coffee You’re Actually Getting, Plus Why Some Flights Are Really Delayed

  January 7, 2013 at 10:01pm

  In reply to MrKnowItAll.

  Your son is lying to you. 30 vicodin would kill you in a matter of days. Granted you would be killed early the first day, it would just take a few days of excruciating pain as you die from sepsis after your liver and then kidneys failed.
  I realize this was likely an attempt at gross exaggeration to make a point that there are drug users in the sky. If not however, you are blatantly being lied to.

• Couple Catch Foul Ball & Fail to Give it to Heartbroken Child, TV Announcer NOT Pleased

  April 27, 2012 at 8:48pm

  In reply to APROUDVETERAN.

  Wow, Im really shocked at the hate for a toddler. I mean really, cries of socialism, calling him a spoiled brat, even people saying he needs to be beaten more. Honestly? The rangers didnt take anything from anyone else; they simply felt strongly that an injustice was performed by the adults not being charitable with a child. I for one agree with them.