Do we need a constitutional convention to remove the second Amendment?

[ScienceRocks]

Do we need a constitutional convention to remove the second Amendment? This seems to be something you leftist are gunning for this morning.

 

[uscitizen]

Not remove but modify.

 

[regent]

Bring it up to date. I blame the us, the American people not just the Republican party for allowing that Amendment to remain an archaic part of the constitution, and all for votes and money. We will never stop violence nor the nuts in America but that does not mean we should stop trying. And for America to make it so easy for the nuts to get the means to kill children wholesale is unbelievable.
The Court is not the answer they are just robed politicians with a great job. If one reads the second amendment it sounds like something from the dark ages. That period has long passed. Our militias are now part of the nut groups.

 

[bucs90]

No. We cant ban guns. Its impractical. There are too many, too easy to hide. The cops wouldnt follow that order, neither would the military.

Now...I do wonder what the Founders would have written if they had an epedimic of colonial schoolhouses being massacred with muskets and bayonets by fellow citizens. But they didn't, their society didnt do that, except through warfare when the Brits did it.

Mental health is an answer to start with.

Second, not a gun ban, but measures for gun security. This kid should never have been near guns. They werent his. He wasn't 21, so he couldnt leagally own a pistol anyway. And that rifle should've been in a safe, somewhere he couldnt get it.

 

[bayoubill]

Bring it up to date. I blame the us, the American people not just the Republican party for allowing that Amendment to remain an archaic part of the constitution, and all for votes and money. We will never stop violence nor the nuts in America but that does not mean we should stop trying. And for America to make it so easy for the nuts to get the means to kill children wholesale is unbelievable.
The Court is not the answer they are just robed politicians with a great job. If one reads the second amendment it sounds like something from the dark ages. That period has long passed. Our militias are now part of the nut groups.

hold on... lemme go back and find a prior-written response to this that fits...


eta: found it...

jes' curious... does having your head up your ass leave a permanent brown stain from the neck up...? or does it wash off when you take a bath...?

 

[daveman]

When faced with a problem, the left automatically chooses the solution that leads to less freedom.

Ironic, considering they call themselves "liberals".

 

[Pheonixops]

I'm pro Second Amendment and anti "assault weapons" ban. I'm a LIBERAL.................

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Lets get rid of the 1st and 2nd amendments.

 

[uscitizen]

When faced with a problem, the left automatically chooses the solution that leads to less freedom.

Ironic, considering they call themselves "liberals".

compare the percentages of libs vs cons in congress that were against the origional Patriot act.

 

[daveman]

When faced with a problem, the left automatically chooses the solution that leads to less freedom.

Ironic, considering they call themselves "liberals".

compare the percentages of libs vs cons in congress that were against the origional Patriot act.

And then let's count the Dems who voted to extend and expand it.

Still want to pretend that liberals support individual liberty?

 

[RandallFlagg]

Not remove but modify.

Well, if after we do that, how about modifications to disallow free speech? How how about we REALLY tick off the liberals and modify it to prohibit a woman's "right to choose"? Boy!!! That'll show 'em, won't it!?! The lefts' heads would explode!!

How about, while we're at it, we take away the right to vote for "dumb black guys" like me? Or better yet, stop allowing those ignorant "single white women" from voting?

No thank you. I"ll take your "Archaic" version over your "new, improved" version any day of the week and three times on Sunday.

Lord, what's next? Folks erecting statues to that murderer Che Gueverra!?!

 

[Sallow]

Not remove but modify.

Personally..I have no problem with people owning guns to protect their homes or businesses.

No citizen should be allowed to carry guns in the streets.

 

[Sallow]

Not remove but modify.

Well, if after we do that, how about modifications to disallow free speech? How how about we REALLY tick off the liberals and modify it to prohibit a woman's "right to choose"? Boy!!! That'll show 'em, won't it!?! The lefts' heads would explode!!

How about, while we're at it, we take away the right to vote for "dumb black guys" like me? Or better yet, stop allowing those ignorant "single white women" from voting?

No thank you. I"ll take your "Archaic" version over your "new, improved" version any day of the week and three times on Sunday.

Lord, what's next? Folks erecting statues to that murderer Che Gueverra!?!

There are plenty of laws that disallow free speech.

Try yelling fire in a movie theater or bomb on a plane in the airport.

See where that gets ya.

 

[daveman]

Not remove but modify.

Personally..I have no problem with people owning guns to protect their homes or businesses.

No citizen should be allowed to carry guns in the streets.

Again -- how are you going to get criminals to obey that law?

 

[007]

Not remove but modify.

Personally..I have no problem with people owning guns to protect their homes or businesses.

No citizen should be allowed to carry guns in the streets.

All law abiding citizens that legally own their firearms should be allowed to carry them where ever the hell they want.

No "modifications" to the 2nd amendment needed.

 

[Sallow]

Not remove but modify.

Personally..I have no problem with people owning guns to protect their homes or businesses.

No citizen should be allowed to carry guns in the streets.

Again -- how are you going to get criminals to obey that law?

No.

Hence the "criminal" thing.

 

[007]

Personally..I have no problem with people owning guns to protect their homes or businesses.

No citizen should be allowed to carry guns in the streets.

Again -- how are you going to get criminals to obey that law?

No.

Hence the "criminal" thing.

Then why would you support giving criminals an advantage?

 

[Sallow]

Not remove but modify.

Personally..I have no problem with people owning guns to protect their homes or businesses.

No citizen should be allowed to carry guns in the streets.

All law abiding citizens that legally own their firearms should be allowed to carry them where ever the hell they want.

No "modifications" to the 2nd amendment needed.

The second amendment has nothing to do with private gun ownership.

And it never has.

We've corrupted the original intent.

 

[Sallow]

Again -- how are you going to get criminals to obey that law?

No.

Hence the "criminal" thing.

Then why would you support giving criminals an advantage?

They don't.

 

[Truthmatters]

we dont need to remove it.

the founders worded in such a way we can police guns in any way we need to