OT - 11/13/2015 Paris

[elocomotive]

Sure. But I'm going to guess that Thomas Jefferson was OK with the Constitutional amendment process the way that it was written. So I'd say that statement actually shows him to be on "my side" here as much as the opposite.

As I said before, there is a clear process for amending the Constitution. And it's not OK to simply try to ignore it or "get around" it every time you don't think you can get the results that you want by using it.

In all seriousness though, Dragon, I don't really know what you mean. The Constitution provides a framework for rights, but laws and regulations are developed in connection with that framework in basically every area imaginable. I don't really know specifically what you are referring to though.

 

[Comeds]

People love Reagan but they are selective about what they like about him. Remember when Reagan was vocal they we should allow the Newcomer refugees to settle.

I know it’s a hell of a challenge, but ask yourselves if not us, who, if not now, when?

No one brings that up in regards to the Syrian refugees.

 

[dash]

Sure. But I'm going to guess that Thomas Jefferson was OK with the Constitutional amendment process the way that it was written. So I'd say that statement actually shows him to be on "my side" here as much as the opposite.

As I said before, there is a clear process for amending the Constitution. And it's not OK to simply try to ignore it or "get around" it every time you don't think you can get the results that you want by using it.

I just saw a snippet of Jeffries' routine and I don't believe he advocates ignoring or trying to "get around" the process in place for amending the Constitution. His point (if I'm understanding it correctly) is that certain Americans are under the belief that it's not possible to amend the constitution. Obviously, that is not the case.

 

[elocomotive]

I'm pretty sure that amendments can be passed by a proposal from Congress that must be ratified by 2/3 of the states. But I'm waffling on whether it is 2/3 or 3/5. I think it's two thirds though. Don't quote me on any of this though, Jim. I'm a lawyer, not a... oh shit.

Been a long time since I studied that though - probably high school. I'm probably wrong, haha.

 

[elocomotive]

Gaahhhh... looked it up.

It's passed by a two-third majority in Congress and then a 3/4 majority of the state legislature.

 

[DragonfromTO]

"It's okay to go around the Constitutional amendment process if you think it's right" -Thomas Jefferson

"Everything written on the Internet is true." -Abraham Lincoln

I'm not attributing that position to Jefferson at all though. I am attributing it to those who seek to pass laws that would violate the 2nd Amendment without actually doing anything about the 2nd amendment itself. If you want to say that you don't know anyone like that and/or you've never heard an argument like that I guess I'll take your word for it, but it seemed rather unlikely to me when I made the point.

 

[dare2be]

As long as the words "well-regulated militia" are still in the 2nd amendment, no laws being considered would violate the amendment. The amendment is long overdue for an overhaul.

 

[DragonfromTO]

In all seriousness though, Dragon, I don't really know what you mean. The Constitution provides a framework for rights, but laws and regulations are developed in connection with that framework in basically every area imaginable. I don't really know specifically what you are referring to though.

Sure, but (theoretically at least though) those laws and regulations can't actually violate those rights. That is what I am talking about. So you don't get to pass a law that violates one of those rights without going through the process of amending that right first.

 

[DragonfromTO]

I just saw a snippet of Jeffries' routine and I don't believe he advocates ignoring or trying to "get around" the process in place for amending the Constitution. His point (if I'm understanding it correctly) is that certain Americans are under the belief that it's not possible to amend the constitution. Obviously, that is not the case.

I find it awfully hard to believe that there is a significant group of people who care enough about the issue to specifically address it with him after his routine while not even knowing the basic details. It sounds like a handful of insignificant idiots to me, not something that's representative of some larger contingent of the US population.

 

[DragonfromTO]

I'm pretty sure that amendments can be passed by a proposal from Congress that must be ratified by 2/3 of the states. But I'm waffling on whether it is 2/3 or 3/5. I think it's two thirds though. Don't quote me on any of this though, Jim. I'm a lawyer, not a... oh shit.

Been a long time since I studied that though - probably high school. I'm probably wrong, haha.

Now now, be careful with that 3/5ths shit. Check your white privilege bro

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

I don't think that's really true though. NOBODY is pro-criminal regardless of race. What I see is people getting upset about media attention. I remember after Trayvon a bunch of news stories on the politics board that people posted about saying "how come this guy isn't getting attention?!?" And it was like... 'well, because that guy is going to fucking jail.'

Well, in a lot of major cities with majority or major black populations crime rates are much higher than in similar-sized cities with smaller black populations. I don't know how you can't look at that as a major problem. A majority of the population doesn't have to be "pro-crime" in order to look itself in the mirror and say "hey, we have a serious fucking crime problem and there seems to be one group in particular that seems more prone to it than others".

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

People love Reagan but they are selective about what they like about him. Remember when Reagan was vocal they we should allow the Newcomer refugees to settle.

I know it’s a hell of a challenge, but ask yourselves if not us, who, if not now, when?

No one brings that up in regards to the Syrian refugees.

Or that he raised the fuck out of taxes.

 

[dash]

I find it awfully hard to believe that there is a significant group of people who care enough about the issue to specifically address it with him after his routine while not even knowing the basic details. It sounds like a handful of insignificant idiots to me, not something that's representative of some larger contingent of the US population.

Oh, I agree and as we know, it's usually a small group with the loudest voices that get the most notoriety. However, I can't help but refer to this paraphrasing of a quote from H.L. Mencken...

No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public

 

[Comeds]

Or that he raised the fuck out of taxes.

Yeah, he wasn't exactly small government was he.

 

[dash]

Donald Trump says he would ‘absolutely’ create mandatory Muslim database if elected president

 

[dare2be]

Donald Trump says he would ‘absolutely’ create mandatory Muslim database if elected president

Told ya there would be plenty of new fodder.

 

[Comeds]

What a nation of cowards we are.

 

[dash]

What a nation of cowards we are.

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety

- Benjamin Franklin

 

[elocomotive]

Well, in a lot of major cities with majority or major black populations crime rates are much higher than in similar-sized cities with smaller black populations. I don't know how you can't look at that as a major problem. A majority of the population doesn't have to be "pro-crime" in order to look itself in the mirror and say "hey, we have a serious fucking crime problem and there seems to be one group in particular that seems more prone to it than others".

Because it's usually a spurious correlation - the question is what are the income levels and education levels in those cities, because that is often CAUSATIONAL to crime. Additionally, studies have shown that drug use rates are roughly equal by race, and yet African Americans are arrested and convicted at higher rates than other races, so that could skew the crime statistics as well. I just don't believe nor have I read in any studies that race is a CAUSE of crime. I believe it's the underlying characteristics that relate to race that are causal factors in crime.

 

[forty_three]

Donald Trump says he would ‘absolutely’ create mandatory Muslim database if elected president

Sweet, can we do the same thing with guns?