Originally Posted by
TSORon
PT brought the questions about the validity of his legalistic claims upon himself. He was asked to be “very specific”, and failed.
On the contrary, I was very specific. You, however, either couldn't understand the responses, or simply believe that you know more about constitutional law than I do.
Believe me. You don't.
He used a shotgun to swat a fly, and missed the swarm at his back. To bad for him. His choice, not mine.
If you think the Constitution is a "shotgun," so be it. I'm not interested in writing, "A Child's Golden Wonder Book of Constitutional Law," though one clearly appears to be needed by TSA. Constitutional jurisprudence is arcane, which is why it takes a post-graduate degree and a licensing exam to practice it. You seem to expect it to be articulable in Romper Room, "Do bee/don't bee," fashion and, when it's explained to you and you don't understand the explanation, resort to insult. It's rather amusing to hear someone whose comprehension of these topics barely achieves a high school level criticize the education of others.
And…. As for the other various vapid concerns, I give them the weight they deserve.
As I said, when you don't understand something you resort to insults. It's a transparent tactic and a primary reason you are not given the respect to which you think you are entitled. Note that you are one of a number of TSOs and STSOs who post here. Though, of course, disagreement with them is frequent, no one reacts to them as they react to you. You might want to think about that.