Gun Control & RKBA

ffr

(23,208 posts)

23. Well yes, there is a straw man there.

Sat Mar 17, 2018, 08:19 PM

Mar 2018

You said It still doesnt change the fact that the second militia act puts a very major kink into that argument.

I've made no such claim about anything to do with second militia act, so why are you bring that up in reply to what I said earlier. To say that I have and to say that therefore you've presented a major kink to that argument is clearly a straw man, but of an order of magnitude I have never seen. You seem to be having a conversation with someone else.

Please, stick to what I have said. One more strike and I will simply block you as a D.U. member. I prefer insightful discussion that enlightens. This bores me.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

71 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What America's gun fanatics won't tell you [View all] ffr Mar 2018 OP

So, "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged" AzureCrest Mar 2018 #1

Is that your only conclusion to the OP-ED after reading Alexander Hamilton's Federalist Paper 29? ffr Mar 2018 #2

Trying to figure out your logic, here. AzureCrest Mar 2018 #3

I'm sorry, but you just made a straw man fallacy. I have offered no proposition at this point ffr Mar 2018 #4

"The Second Amendment doesnt give you the right to own a gun " AzureCrest Mar 2018 #10

Just sayin' what? Who are you talking to? ffr Mar 2018 #24

it isn't a strawman, gejohnston Mar 2018 #22

It quite clearly is a straw man fallacy. I have made no proposition. ffr Mar 2018 #26

here is the logic, gejohnston Mar 2018 #28

Who are you talking to? This isn't a reply. ffr Mar 2018 #31

Yes you did. krispos42 Mar 2018 #61

I get it... Puha Ekapi_2 Mar 2018 #63

For 200 years the said safeinOhio Mar 2018 #5

no it didn't gejohnston Mar 2018 #20

False equivalency, in my opinion. pangaia Mar 2018 #29

Thats not all the laguage of the second. HopeAgain Mar 2018 #34

Thats a very good point Eko Mar 2018 #6

You had me interested there in what you had to say all the way up to the point ffr Mar 2018 #7

I thought these were your words. Eko Mar 2018 #8

Nope. Who are you talking to? n/t ffr Mar 2018 #12

You. Eko Mar 2018 #16

Ah, I see Eko Mar 2018 #9

You got it! ffr Mar 2018 #13

It still doesnt change the fact Eko Mar 2018 #11

The third straw man fallacy already in this brief discussion. ffr Mar 2018 #15

that argument Eko Mar 2018 #18

Well yes, there is a straw man there. ffr Mar 2018 #23

Wow, so no one can comment Eko Mar 2018 #25

You are welcome to comment on the article, but you will get my rebuttal ffr Mar 2018 #27

Ive been here since 2011. Eko Mar 2018 #33

No, Eko, it does not reply to me directly. It replies to me INdirectly. ffr Mar 2018 #38

The article is responding back to me and not you? Eko Mar 2018 #40

Can you re-write that? I'm not sure what to make of it. n/t ffr Mar 2018 #42

"When you reply to a sourced article posted on D.U., you are replying to that sourced article." Eko Mar 2018 #46

In other words Eko Mar 2018 #47

Sorry, but I don't have time for this. ffr Mar 2018 #48

All you have to do Eko Mar 2018 #49

There is no Eko Mar 2018 #50

See how this is done? Eko Mar 2018 #39

What is your point? ffr Mar 2018 #41

My original post to "the article" Eko Mar 2018 #43

Why are you telling me this? ffr Mar 2018 #45

Where is the rule that says that? Eko Mar 2018 #51

Huh? There's no rule. Why do you bring that up? I've explained this already. ffr Mar 2018 #54

And I replied to you. Eko Mar 2018 #56

I wasnt the only person to make that mistake. Eko Mar 2018 #14

No, it's quite clear. The excerpt in light blue references the article clearly. ffr Mar 2018 #17

Yeah, Eko Mar 2018 #19

That's a given. Articles are referenced sometimes at the top for LBN, but usually at the bottom. ffr Mar 2018 #55

Yup Im familiar with those. Eko Mar 2018 #57

Sorry, Marketwatch is gejohnston Mar 2018 #21

Not a very historically sound point of view. SomethingNew Mar 2018 #30

Here's the fourth straw man fallacy. How many minutes has it been? ffr Mar 2018 #35

Post removed Post removed Mar 2018 #37

Even Scalia agrees that there is no right sharedvalues Mar 2018 #32

Heller did not affirm an individual right? Marengo Mar 2018 #66

Another ref agreeing with post: 2nd militia amend allows regulation sharedvalues Mar 2018 #36

Thats a very good point Eko Mar 2018 #44

You don't really think those assholes CARE what the constitution says, do you? Ferrets are Cool Mar 2018 #52

Finally, my interpretation! leanforward Mar 2018 #53

Correct. Straw Man Mar 2018 #59

Title 10, United States Code, Section 311 krispos42 Mar 2018 #58

women suffered with no suffrage jimmy the one Mar 2018 #68

I'll say this discntnt_irny_srcsm Mar 2018 #60

Federalist 29 isn't about the 2nd Amendment. MarvinGardens Mar 2018 #62

Well, the first quoted paragraph was good. ManiacJoe Mar 2018 #64

President Obama disagrees with you... AncientGeezer Mar 2018 #65

ffr thread is spot on jimmy the one Mar 2018 #67

You forget that the findings in Miller were rendered moot by Heller. The same standard applies... friendly_iconoclast Mar 2018 #69

Icon claims 1939 Miller decision was overturned. jimmy the one Apr 2018 #70

Glad I am not a fanatic - love quoting Fed#29 to point out what was meant by "well regulated". jmg257 Jul 2018 #71