Quote:
Originally posted by cool_chick
Oh give me a f#cking break. Any opposing viewpoint of yours will not be mete with the merits of the argument, but with some stupid bull***** like "leftwing" or "socialist" or some lameass friggin invalid excuse to the merits of the argument. Try addressing the merits of the argument for a change instead of pathetic lameass invalid excuses to disregard the argument.
Just admit it, no source will be "acceptable" to you unless it's on a gun supporting site.
It's called a biased view on your part...and your biased viewpoint doesn't make the clause clear.
|
I've posted references in depth that appeared in scholarly journals, mostly law journals. These references of course, support the only viable position re: the Second Amendment, the position I hold. Those favoring the "Collective rights" position, the one wherein you must be a militia member to have a gun and can only use it in that regard, have virtually no supporting documentation, and what little is available, again, is authored by anti-self defense lobbyists. Still, you've an opportunity to prove me wrong.
If you'll just do the research of the opposing view, and post it here, we can get that in depth "opposing view" literature you've mentioned several times.