Maryland Patriot
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 9,966
- 1,394
- 290
no, the 2nd has always meant we could own guns, only recently has it been been disputed by the socialists. and if you take the 2nd for all it was meant for when written, it was to keep the citizens as well armed as the government to insure the government did not become tyrannical (as it now is) so yes, as written with its full intent, the citizens should be equally armed in order to protect against whatever the government has to use.Japan and Europe don't have the right to own and carry in their constitutions.
neither does the United States. The Second Amendment is about Militias. But even if it were the case, it doesn't make it a good idea.
Funny how the left can look at exact wording in the second, and find ways to make it not say what it says, then they can look at the wording that says if you are born here you are a citizen and try to make it look as if that right extends to the mother and father of the one born here.
The left sure are some strange people when it comes to logic.
Guy, the notion that the 2nd Amendment garuntees gun ownership is a fairly recent one, not held through most of our history. Even Heller wasn't absolute. Otherwise, there's be a right of a private citizen to own a howitzer and weaponized anthrax shells.
The fourteenth Amendment, however, has always been held to mean if you were born here, you were a citizen. And it was needed to say that to abolish slavery and give citizenship to the former slaves.
as far as the 14th, please show me where it specifically says that if you have a baby here you are automatically a citizen.