True Interpretation of the 2nd Amendment

Discussion in 'US Constitution' started by luosT_tcR, Jun 16, 2016.

  1. Soupnazi630
    Offline

    Soupnazi630 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2013
    Messages:
    2,956
    Thanks Received:
    362
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +1,506
    The second amendment is strictly about individual rights.

    Any argument to the contrary is an immediate failure.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. emilynghiem
    Offline

    emilynghiem Constitutionalist / Universalist Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    19,832
    Thanks Received:
    2,754
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    National Freedmen's Town District
    Ratings:
    +7,224
    Dear danielpalos
    One belief of the rightwing that I encourage all people of all views to take seriously
    is the concept of natural laws that govern us as human beings independent of
    these universal laws being written down and taught through church and state traditions.

    We all WANT free exercise of our beliefs, which is our free will and free choice
    to dissent or consent as we BELIEVE is right for us and/or for others.
    We all naturally defend this free will by our human nature.

    that is what the rightwing mean by naturally self-existent liberty
    (they call it given by God, but nontheists can call it given by Nature, where Nature is God).

    We all believe in DUE PROCESS before being deprived of our life liberty or property.
    Again this natural right and process is written into the Bill of Rights as necessary to
    defend from govt infringement, but this democratic process exists by the nature
    of us being people who live together in society and require some means of managing
    when we have conflicts and need to communicate to settle on AGREED TERMS.

    The main difference between left and right,
    while both believe people are the govt,
    the right pushes for people to be the authority and govt is supposed to reflect our consent.
    the left pushes for govt to be the central authority that establishes collective will
    for the people to follow.

    IN order to satisfy both sides, we need AGREEMENT between
    people and the govt laws, so neither is imposing on the other.
    And both are right: both the govt reflects the will of the people but not imposing it,
    and whatever we establish as the collective will of the people becomes law we agree on.
     
  3. Cecilie1200
    Offline

    Cecilie1200 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2008
    Messages:
    36,052
    Thanks Received:
    5,151
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +14,261
    I always love definitive assertions as to the intent of a law by people with the English comprehension skills of a fourth-grader. It's VERY meaningful to be told that an explanatory clause is somehow a directive.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  4. emilynghiem
    Offline

    emilynghiem Constitutionalist / Universalist Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    19,832
    Thanks Received:
    2,754
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    National Freedmen's Town District
    Ratings:
    +7,224
    Dear FireFly
    The 2nd Amendment does not give "crazies" any right to bear or abuse arms to defy or violate laws and rights of others. To do so would violate the REST of the Bill of Rights which include right of security in our persons houses and effects and not to be deprived of life liberty or property without due process of laws. Read the whole thing. The laws state clearly that no right shall be construed to disparage other rights or laws. So the whole thing checks itself and is clear that arms are to be used for defense, taken in full context and enforced consistently together!

    As for well regulated militia, if this meant that people could only bear arms under a govt regulated militia, do you think for ONE SECOND that Texas would ever agree to join the Union? We are talking about a state that used to be its own nation, and fought its own wars, yes including individuals armed with their own guns and fighting for themselves. If what you propose is the true meaning of the law, I don't see any Texans willing to join the union if that means giving up their guns to govt control through govt regulated militia. That makes no sense. Texas was already set up where people exercised their own right to bear arms and defend themselves. They wouldn't give that up. And change their whole culture.
    Are you kidding me?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. Cecilie1200
    Offline

    Cecilie1200 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2008
    Messages:
    36,052
    Thanks Received:
    5,151
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +14,261
    The Brady Campaign? Really? That REALLY was the only source of stats you could find, and yet for some reason, you expect us to take you seriously and debate with you like you're an actual, thinking person?

    Do you EVER come out of your tiny, leftist echo chamber?
     
  6. emilynghiem
    Offline

    emilynghiem Constitutionalist / Universalist Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    19,832
    Thanks Received:
    2,754
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    National Freedmen's Town District
    Ratings:
    +7,224
    Dear FireFly may I ask do you have the same compassion and concern
    for the millions of lives lost that could have been saved with spiritual healing
    for mental illness that costs NOTHING for this free therapy?

    Because of the freedom to choose, people cannot be forced to go through the one cure I've found that heals these ills, from mental illness including schizophrenia PTSD and suicidal or homocidal obsessions, to drug and other addictions/abuses.

    Not just these crimes you list, but other crimes and diseases that cost lives,
    all can be prevented by addressing the mental or criminal illness including drug addictions
    behind so many trafficking and gun crimes, through the spiritual healing methods and cures.

    So many lives could be saved if people CHOSE to get this free help!

    So the cost of FREEDOM means that many people die every day, every year
    from ills that have been cured for FREE.

    Do you think about that?
    Those losses are also due to having freedom in this country.

    My friend Olivia who has offered and provided FREE spiritual healing therapy to people who ask and agree, CRIES for the children and people she cannot get help to in time to save their lives. It's SAD that people don't know or they refuse help when it's FREE and it's saved people's lives and minds from mental, criminal even physical illness such as cancer and diabetes, and diseases with no medical cures.

    See www.christianhealingmin.org

    these solutions are FREE they have been medically researched
    yet the cost of human freedom means people have to choose this freely
    And those who don't know end up dying for lack of knowledge

    How many more people die from the combination of gun violence, other crimes and other diseases which could be prevented by curing the root causes?
     
  7. Cecilie1200
    Offline

    Cecilie1200 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2008
    Messages:
    36,052
    Thanks Received:
    5,151
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +14,261
    No, diss the messenger because they don't deal in facts, just propaganda. Learn the difference between "facts" and "what I REALLY want the facts to be".
     
  8. Cecilie1200
    Offline

    Cecilie1200 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2008
    Messages:
    36,052
    Thanks Received:
    5,151
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +14,261
    So you're saying that the Brady Campaign is vastly more informed about homicides than the FBI is? Are you really going to go with that position?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. Natural Citizen
    Offline

    Natural Citizen Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2016
    Messages:
    4,693
    Thanks Received:
    962
    Trophy Points:
    345
    Ratings:
    +3,916
    All might benefit by reading The Federalist numbers 28 by Hamilton and 46 by Madison for a clearer understanding of the States use of force against Federal usurpers.
     
  10. Penelope
    Offline

    Penelope Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2014
    Messages:
    32,998
    Thanks Received:
    2,941
    Trophy Points:
    1,145
    Ratings:
    +16,479
    Isn't it funny Bundy is a hero, and the kneelers are crap. First is a guy who thinks he is above the law and doesn't pay taxes, and the second is to draw attention to racial injustice by the police, the former is armed, the latter only kneels.
    The former is a patriot, those on their knees are not.
     

Share This Page