XPost: can.talk.guns, alt.guns, alt.rec.guns   
   XPost: talk.politics.guns   
   From: Nope@noway.net   
      
   Scout wrote:   
   > "Magus"  wrote in message   
   > news:aNYJi.64448$Y7.13857@bignews3.bellsouth.net...   
   >> Scout wrote:   
   >>> "Magus"  wrote in message   
   >>> news:y0YJi.64425$Y7.64012@bignews3.bellsouth.net...   
   >>>> Scout wrote:   
   >>>>> "Leif"  wrote in message   
   >>    
   >>>>>> Leif speaking:  Then we agree that the militia consisted of those who   
   >>>>>> were obliged to militia service by law, rather that being taken from   
   >>>>>> persons from the general public who happened to have a gun?   
   >>>>> So once again Leif is back to claiming the militia is defined under   
   >>>>> federal/state law.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> You really do need to make up your mind there Leif, exactly who defines   
   >>>>> the militia. Is it the Founding Fathers, the law, or SCOTUS?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Oh, and no matter how the militia is defined.....the right is still   
   >>>>> that of the people. You do know who the people are, right?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>> No he doesn't. According to him it's those obliged to serve in the   
   >>>> militia.   
   >>> Well, he says that then turns around and ignores both federal and state   
   >>> law and claims that SCOTUS says the militia is only the National Guard.   
   >>>   
   >>> He really does need some consistency in his argument because his   
   >>> assertion of who the militia is changes from message to message. One   
   >>> might even get the impression he doesn't know, other than he wants it to   
   >>> sound like he does and he doesn't want it to mean anyone not under the   
   >>> thumb of the federal government.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >> His inconsistency comes from reading into things what he wants to see   
   >> there. He starts with "this is how things are" and looks for cites that   
   >> vaguely support his opinion--rather than reading the material to determine   
   >> the truth.   
   >   
   > Sounds about right. Certainly does explain the fact that he can't hold a   
   > consistent arguement from one source or cite to another.   
   >   
   >   
   >>>> According to Weasel it's the federal government.   
   >>> Citing Weasel is sort of like quoting a chipmunk. A lot of chatter, but   
   >>> no content.   
   >>>   
   >> Was I citing the Weasel or using him as another absurdity?   
   >   
   > I wouldn't put Leif and Weasel on the same level. Leif seems at least able   
   > to engage in some sort of cognitive mental process even if it is orientated   
   > to trying to prove what he knows must be true (ie the FF couldn't possibly   
   > mean for the ordinary average person to be able to have guns and other   
   > arms). Weasel's thought process such as it is, seems to derive more as an   
   > expression of mental static than any sort of cognitive functioning. One of   
   > the reasons why one is in my killfile and the other is not, at least yet.   
   >   
   >   
   >   
      
   Agreed, Leif seems to honestly believe his position and tries to support   
   it--Lee is just a lying sack of shit.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)