Where is it written that 2nd Amend is to keep Govt. in Check?

[Truthmatters]

So show me in the Constitution where you have the right to take my guns or keep me from buying a gun.

Don't have to. All we have to do is pass a law and enforce it. Then it's up to YOU to prove your Constitutional rights have been violated.

THAT'S the way it works.

Um, no. That is not how it works. If laws are unconstitutional, they are not laws, thus nothing about them is enforceable.

According to your idea of how our government works, Congress could pass a law that says everyone in Fairfax County, VA must be executed by the end of next week. So, all these persons in FFX County would have to prove they shouldn't be executed by the end of next week.

That's absurd.

The scotus already determined gun laws oare perfectly constitutional

 

[buckeye45_73]

your right to own a specific gun isn't constitutionally protected

Actually it is. Exactly what part of "shall not be infringed" don't you get?

when will you FACE that the scotus already decided this?


Your own right wing guys said they are perfectly constitutional

What is constitutional? please elaborate....and give us a link and not just your hotair

 

[Truthmatters]

Wrong...The laws get passed under the constrains of the Constitution, not as a way to circumvent and rewrite it.

your right to own a specific gun isn't constitutionally protected

same as one has the right to an attorney, but not the attorney of one's choice

Uh Jilian you cant be that stupid...you just like taking away Constitutional rights that you dont like.....again dont be a retard

The scotus ALREADY said gun laws are perfectly constitutional.

why do you people act like complete idiots in the face of facts?

 

[nodoginnafight]

So show me in the Constitution where you have the right to take my guns or keep me from buying a gun.

Don't have to. All we have to do is pass a law and enforce it. Then it's up to YOU to prove your Constitutional rights have been violated.

THAT'S the way it works.

Um, no. That is not how it works. If laws are unconstitutional, they are not laws, thus nothing about them is enforceable.

According to your idea of how our government works, Congress could pass a law that says everyone in Fairfax County, VA must be executed by the end of next week. So, all these persons in FFX County would have to prove they shouldn't be executed by the end of next week.

That's absurd.

It's the way it works.
How do you think the Constitutionality of a law is determined?
By some idiot CLAIMING what is and what is not Constitutional?
By consulting the Turner Diaries?
Nope.
It is determined by SCOTUS rulings and SCOTUS has to have a case to rule on.

 

[g5000]

So show me in the Constitution where you have the right to take my guns or keep me from buying a gun.

Don't have to. All we have to do is pass a law and enforce it. Then it's up to YOU to prove your Constitutional rights have been violated.

THAT'S the way it works.

And many have tried to write laws limiting our rights and have failed.

Most recently, DC vs. Heller.

But go ahead and keep trying! Liberals getting their asses handed to them on gun rights in court over and over again hasn't stopped them so far.

 

[martybegan]

Don't have to. All we have to do is pass a law and enforce it. Then it's up to YOU to prove your Constitutional rights have been violated.

THAT'S the way it works.

Wrong...The laws get passed under the constrains of the Constitution, not as a way to circumvent and rewrite it.

your right to own a specific gun isn't constitutionally protected

same as one has the right to an attorney, but not the attorney of one's choice

You have a right to a competently trained attorney, who is able to perfom his task in the court you are brought in front of. They grab some schlub off the street and say "here is your attorney, we met the requirements of the consitution"

With the 2nd amendment you have the right to a firearm that meets the requirements of your ability to defend yourself, be it in self defense or when called to form the milita. With the term "not be infringed" the government has to make a compelling hard reason why a person cannot be armed with an "arm" as set in the contituiton, and defined by the common used weapons of the time period.

So you just can't let people have a 2 shot .22 derringer and say, "here's your arm, we have met the requirements of the constitution"

 

[Truthmatters]

your right to own a specific gun isn't constitutionally protected

same as one has the right to an attorney, but not the attorney of one's choice

Uh Jilian you cant be that stupid...you just like taking away Constitutional rights that you dont like.....again dont be a retard

The scotus ALREADY said gun laws are perfectly constitutional.

why do you people act like complete idiots in the face of facts?

Supreme Court Shoots Down D.C. Gun Ban - ABC News



Writing for the 5-4 majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that the Constitution protects an individual's right to keep and carry a gun. The decision will affect gun control laws across the country.

"We hold that the District's ban on handgun possession in the home violated the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense."

He addressed the "problem of handgun violence" by saying there are a "variety of tools" such as "measures regulating handguns" available

 

[martybegan]

your right to own a specific gun isn't constitutionally protected

same as one has the right to an attorney, but not the attorney of one's choice

Uh Jilian you cant be that stupid...you just like taking away Constitutional rights that you dont like.....again dont be a retard

The scotus ALREADY said gun laws are perfectly constitutional.

why do you people act like complete idiots in the face of facts?

The SCOTUS also said that seperate but equal when it came to government actions and public areas was just fine... 100 years ago. They ruled against the civil war amendments due to thier political beliefs.

Whats to stop the judges from doing the same now?

 

[nodoginnafight]

IF ....
You have a constitutional right to wage war on equal footing with the United States government then you would have the right to own surface to air missiles, nuclear submarines, etc ....

Do you think you have that right?

nuff said.

You do NOT have the right to maintain weaponry in order to wage war on the U.S. government. The notion is beyond absurd. I can't believe people capable of upright walking would even try to argue the point.

 

[Truthmatters]

that means scalia put into this decision a clear statement that gun laws are legal.


Sorry guys but its already decided

 

[jillian]

Wrong...The laws get passed under the constrains of the Constitution, not as a way to circumvent and rewrite it.

your right to own a specific gun isn't constitutionally protected

same as one has the right to an attorney, but not the attorney of one's choice

Uh Jilian you cant be that stupid...you just like taking away Constitutional rights that you dont like.....again dont be a retard

you don't know what you're talking about.

but it's always amusing when subliterates who are uneducated twits call me stupid.

 

[Si modo]

Don't have to. All we have to do is pass a law and enforce it. Then it's up to YOU to prove your Constitutional rights have been violated.

THAT'S the way it works.

Um, no. That is not how it works. If laws are unconstitutional, they are not laws, thus nothing about them is enforceable.

According to your idea of how our government works, Congress could pass a law that says everyone in Fairfax County, VA must be executed by the end of next week. So, all these persons in FFX County would have to prove they shouldn't be executed by the end of next week.

That's absurd.

It's the way it works.
How do you think the Constitutionality of a law is determined?
By some idiot CLAIMING what is and what is not Constitutional?
By consulting the Turner Diaries?
Nope.
It is determined by SCOTUS rulings and SCOTUS has to have a case to rule on.

Now you're catching on.

And, the SCOTUS has ruled in DC v Heller that the Constitution says just what it says: an individual has a right to have arms.

 

[Spoonman]

Wingnuts keep saying the Second Amendment is to keep the government in check.

Where is this written in the Constitution?

what ever the reason, the fact remains it iw written in the constitution that there is a right to bear arms and this right shall not be infringed upon. It also puts no limitations on the types of arms to be owned. Had they felt it should be limited, i'm sure they would have included it.

 

[Truthmatters]

Pretending any gun law is unconstitutional is insane.



Its westboro level crazy to claim that with the facts that exsist today

 

[thanatos144]

Wingnuts keep saying the Second Amendment is to keep the government in check.

Where is this written in the Constitution?

Wayne Lapierre wrote it in his book.

And Timothy McVeigh used to hand out pamphlets promoting that notion.

Hitler passed out pamphlets for socialism.

 

[nodoginnafight]

So show me in the Constitution where you have the right to take my guns or keep me from buying a gun.

Don't have to. All we have to do is pass a law and enforce it. Then it's up to YOU to prove your Constitutional rights have been violated.

THAT'S the way it works.

And many have tried to write laws limiting our rights and have failed.

Most recently, DC vs. Heller.

But go ahead and keep trying! Liberals getting their asses handed to them on gun rights in court over and over again hasn't stopped them so far.

you citation PROVES my point. The case WAS NOT U.S. Constitution v D.C. it was D.C. v Heller Heller HAD to file suit in order to get the Constitutionality ruled on.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Um, no. That is not how it works. If laws are unconstitutional, they are not laws, thus nothing about them is enforceable.

According to your idea of how our government works, Congress could pass a law that says everyone in Fairfax County, VA must be executed by the end of next week. So, all these persons in FFX County would have to prove they shouldn't be executed by the end of next week.

That's absurd.

It's the way it works.
How do you think the Constitutionality of a law is determined?
By some idiot CLAIMING what is and what is not Constitutional?
By consulting the Turner Diaries?
Nope.
It is determined by SCOTUS rulings and SCOTUS has to have a case to rule on.

Now you're catching on.

And, the SCOTUS has ruled in DC v Heller that the Constitution says just what it says: an individual has a right to have arms.

NOw? It's what I was arguing from the very beginning. Catch up please.

 

[jillian]

Uh Jilian you cant be that stupid...you just like taking away Constitutional rights that you dont like.....again dont be a retard

The scotus ALREADY said gun laws are perfectly constitutional.

why do you people act like complete idiots in the face of facts?

The SCOTUS also said that seperate but equal when it came to government actions and public areas was just fine... 100 years ago. They ruled against the civil war amendments due to thier political beliefs.

Whats to stop the judges from doing the same now?

you're misstating the law.

and analogizing taking certain weapons or clips out of the hands of individuals is NOT abridging your right to own a gun.

i'd suggest you go look at the helelr decision again.

and then go look at the right to counsel cases.

 

[Truthmatters]

Uh Jilian you cant be that stupid...you just like taking away Constitutional rights that you dont like.....again dont be a retard

The scotus ALREADY said gun laws are perfectly constitutional.

why do you people act like complete idiots in the face of facts?

Supreme Court Shoots Down D.C. Gun Ban - ABC News



Writing for the 5-4 majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that the Constitution protects an individual's right to keep and carry a gun. The decision will affect gun control laws across the country.

"We hold that the District's ban on handgun possession in the home violated the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense."

He addressed the "problem of handgun violence" by saying there are a "variety of tools" such as "measures regulating handguns" available

witness they wont even addmit the cold hard facts

 

[thanatos144]

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed

What the hell did you think this meant?