2nd Amendment Discussion

danielpalos

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
55,688
Reaction score
1,169
Points
1,855
Location
Alta California, federalist.
The Progressive really need to get control of ALL firearms and not because of the Nut Jobs running around on the street. They fear that Normal Citizens will start to defend their "Rights" and the Progressive can not stand for that to happen. they want a unarmed Citizen who can only riot and break stuff in a Rage. Look at Hong Cong that is all they can do is throw stuff at the Police. This is what they want. When the Police and Army and Criminals are the only ones with firearms you are the victims. This is just wrong and not what the Constitution is all about. We are going to have to get the Menially ill off the streets, and the borders under control. As for me I will die, and the younger folk will have to pick up and defend this Nation it is ashamed that we have such people who want control and to bring us down to nothing but slaves, they are working at it every time a Street Nut does a killing run at the people. You want to loose your right just give up the Keys to your life. Be like China....
Here is the legal concept under discussion:

We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems in our free States.

This is the common law for the common defense:

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

YAWN
Thanks for ceding the point and the argument, like usual.
Seeing your drivel does not mean I agree to it.
thanks for ceding the point and the argument by having nothing but the inferiority of fallacy for an argument.
 

Taz

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
18,417
Reaction score
597
Points
190
We shouldn’t allow brown people to have guns.
 

Porter Rockwell

Silver Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2018
Messages
5,628
Reaction score
477
Points
95
We shouldn’t allow brown people to have guns.
California won't allow dishonest danielpalos to own a gun. He's a fruitcake by their standards - and I'm not so sure he ain't a bit tan.
 

emilynghiem

Constitutionalist / Universalist
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
22,035
Reaction score
3,127
Points
290
Location
National Freedmen's Town District
Second Amendment. The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "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."

So...in my opinion (your own mileages may vary), I'm pretty darn sure our founding fathers did NOT have in mind that we should ALL be allowed to have siege towers, catapults, tanks, canons, etc in our back yards aimed at our neighbors or nearby cities/towns.

So my question is.....why are NON MILITARY NON POLICE people allowed to own machine guns in any form? What is the purpose? To hunt? Maybe for sport since using one will shred what they claim they plan to eat for ....cough...survival. So why? NOBODY should own or have a permit to carry or own an AK whatever or anything similar to it. The ONLY purpose of these weapons are for mass extermination...in a quick manner. To take out as many as possible, usually humans.

I am all for the second amendment, but that means to protect ourselves against harm..which means a hand gun or two, a rifle, a hunting weapon, etc. This does NOT mean we can drag our catapults with us wherever we go. The only purpose for a catapult is the same reason AKs exist. Mass death. And as I stated....I don't think the writers of the constitution had what is happening now, in mind when they wrote it.

The only ones that SHOULD have access to such weapons are the military and police/sheriff/etc (Law Enforcement).

Your thoughts?
Citizens are not required to ‘justify’ the exercising of a fundamental right as a ‘prerequisite’ to indeed do so – such as the Second Amendment right.

Consequently, citizens are not required to justify seeking to own an AR or AK platform rifle or carbine – or any other semi-automatic version of a military/battle rifle or carbine.

Current Second Amendment case law places weapons in one of two categories: those considered dangerous and unusual (sawed off shotguns, fully automatic rifles and carbines) whose possession is not entitled to Constitutional protections, and weapons considered to be in common use (all handguns, most long guns) whose possession are entitled to Constitutional protections.

Current Second Amendment case law also holds that AR and AK platform rifles and carbines may be considered dangerous and unusual, allowing states and local jurisdictions to aggressively regulate such weapons, where that regulation does not place an undue burden on the Second Amendment right.
Dear C_Clayton_Jones
Well stated clarification.
It reminds me of how some people see the need for the state to regulate abortion, while others don't want ANY level, stage or form of abortion restricted by the GOVT.

If you know people who REFUSE to consent to Govt intervening in regulating late-term or partial-birth abortions (out of concern that letting Govt controls in, would open the door to regulating ALL OTHER cases and conditions), this is very similar to absolutists with Second Amendment gun rights who don't want Govt messing with it at ALL for much the same reasons.
 

MikeK

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2010
Messages
15,924
Reaction score
2,471
Points
290
Location
Brick, New Jersey
Our rights are indeed inalienable, but they are not ‘absolute,’ including the Second Amendment right. It is not a right to keep and carry any gun whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.
It remains an absolute right until any exceptions to its purview are plainly stipulated -- and no such stipulations are found anywhere in the Second Amendment. Governments have thus far managed to impose limits on our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms only because of the People's altruistic tolerance of said limits -- but no such limits are even vaguely suggested anywhere in the Amendment. With few exceptions, gun laws are examples of skillful lawyers' ability to weave webs of confusingly melodic jargon.
 

MikeK

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2010
Messages
15,924
Reaction score
2,471
Points
290
Location
Brick, New Jersey
So my question is.....why are NON MILITARY NON POLICE people allowed to own machine guns in any form?
Gracie, while it is true that non-military, non-police persons can own machine guns in any form the category of persons who are so entitled is so negligible it is hardly worth mentioning. In order to lawfully own a machine gun one must pass through such an incredibly thorough maze of investigative red tape and personal scrutiny that very few licenses have ever been issued.
 

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
54,077
Reaction score
11,743
Points
2,030
Location
In a Republic, actually
Our rights are indeed inalienable, but they are not ‘absolute,’ including the Second Amendment right. It is not a right to keep and carry any gun whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.
It remains an absolute right until any exceptions to its purview are plainly stipulated -- and no such stipulations are found anywhere in the Second Amendment. Governments have thus far managed to impose limits on our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms only because of the People's altruistic tolerance of said limits -- but no such limits are even vaguely suggested anywhere in the Amendment. With few exceptions, gun laws are examples of skillful lawyers' ability to weave webs of confusingly melodic jargon.
No right is ‘absolute,’ no right as ever been perceived to be ‘absolute’ – including the Second Amendment.

The Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law, as determined by the Supreme Court – including the Second Amendment.

“But that’s not in the Constitution” is a failed and ignorant ‘argument’ – devoid of fact and merit; government and the people are one in the same, the people and their government have always had the authority to place limits and restrictions on our rights and protected liberties consistent with Constitutional case law – including the Second Amendment.
 

MikeK

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2010
Messages
15,924
Reaction score
2,471
Points
290
Location
Brick, New Jersey
NOBODY should own or have a permit to carry or own an AK whatever or anything similar to it. The ONLY purpose of these weapons are for mass extermination...in a quick manner. To take out as many as possible, usually humans.
Gracie, there are two types of 'AK.' The (original) military version, which is capable of fully automatic (machine-gun) function, and the civilian version, which is not. Both are visually identical.
 
OP
Gracie

Gracie

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
60,448
Reaction score
17,299
Points
2,220
Location
Wandering Nomad
This has been and still is an interesting discussion. I thank everyone for their opinions on what the 2nd amendment really means according to the mindset of the founding fathers.
With that said..I still believe having guns that are mainly for military/police use as a personal weapon is overkill. Literally and figuratively. I can protect myself quite well with my two revolvers. Actually..I want to sell the 357 (a sheriff back home said if I ever wanted to sell...call him)...and buy one with a clip. For me and MrGracie..that is enough. The 38 revolver...and whatever weapon he chooses with a clip.

So I guess it is up to each individual to decide what will make them feel safe and as protection, right?
 

Hossfly

ZIONUT
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
41,772
Reaction score
12,232
Points
2,220
Location
Ft Worth,TX
I thought this thread would be a good place to post this notice. I'm anxious to see what happens during this period at Wally World. This notice is on all the social media.


upload_2019-9-10_19-58-25.png
 

Hossfly

ZIONUT
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
41,772
Reaction score
12,232
Points
2,220
Location
Ft Worth,TX
I thought this thread would be a good place to post this notice. I'm anxious to see what happens during this period at Wally World. This notice is on all the social media.


View attachment 278565
If you will leave a link, I will send it with every outgoing e mail I send between now and the 16th
There wasn't a link as far as I know. One of my Facebook friends sent me a message with the picture. I copied the picture and posted it here. I will try to find a link though.
 

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
54,077
Reaction score
11,743
Points
2,030
Location
In a Republic, actually
This has been and still is an interesting discussion. I thank everyone for their opinions on what the 2nd amendment really means according to the mindset of the founding fathers.
With that said..I still believe having guns that are mainly for military/police use as a personal weapon is overkill. Literally and figuratively. I can protect myself quite well with my two revolvers. Actually..I want to sell the 357 (a sheriff back home said if I ever wanted to sell...call him)...and buy one with a clip. For me and MrGracie..that is enough. The 38 revolver...and whatever weapon he chooses with a clip.

So I guess it is up to each individual to decide what will make them feel safe and as protection, right?
In accordance with Federal, state, and local laws – yes.

Of course, not every type of firearm is going to be available to every citizen in every jurisdiction.

In some states, for example, residents won’t be able to purchase an AR or AK platform rifle or carbine with a 30-round detachable magazine.

And such restrictions, of course, are perfectly Constitutional, in no manner in violation of the Second Amendment – an Amendment which is neither unlimited nor absolute, where government has the authority to place limits and restrictions on the possession of firearms consistent with Second Amendment case law.
 

Porter Rockwell

Silver Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2018
Messages
5,628
Reaction score
477
Points
95
I thought this thread would be a good place to post this notice. I'm anxious to see what happens during this period at Wally World. This notice is on all the social media.


View attachment 278565
If you will leave a link, I will send it with every outgoing e mail I send between now and the 16th
There wasn't a link as far as I know. One of my Facebook friends sent me a message with the picture. I copied the picture and posted it here. I will try to find a link though.
I tried to copy and paste it onto Facebook. Couldn't make it work.
 

danielpalos

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
55,688
Reaction score
1,169
Points
1,855
Location
Alta California, federalist.
This has been and still is an interesting discussion. I thank everyone for their opinions on what the 2nd amendment really means according to the mindset of the founding fathers.
With that said..I still believe having guns that are mainly for military/police use as a personal weapon is overkill. Literally and figuratively. I can protect myself quite well with my two revolvers. Actually..I want to sell the 357 (a sheriff back home said if I ever wanted to sell...call him)...and buy one with a clip. For me and MrGracie..that is enough. The 38 revolver...and whatever weapon he chooses with a clip.

So I guess it is up to each individual to decide what will make them feel safe and as protection, right?
In accordance with Federal, state, and local laws – yes.

Of course, not every type of firearm is going to be available to every citizen in every jurisdiction.

In some states, for example, residents won’t be able to purchase an AR or AK platform rifle or carbine with a 30-round detachable magazine.

And such restrictions, of course, are perfectly Constitutional, in no manner in violation of the Second Amendment – an Amendment which is neither unlimited nor absolute, where government has the authority to place limits and restrictions on the possession of firearms consistent with Second Amendment case law.
Only well regulated militia of the United States have literal recourse to our Second Amendment, when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.
 

Hossfly

ZIONUT
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
41,772
Reaction score
12,232
Points
2,220
Location
Ft Worth,TX
I thought this thread would be a good place to post this notice. I'm anxious to see what happens during this period at Wally World. This notice is on all the social media.


View attachment 278565
If you will leave a link, I will send it with every outgoing e mail I send between now and the 16th
There wasn't a link as far as I know. One of my Facebook friends sent me a message with the picture. I copied the picture and posted it here. I will try to find a link though.
I tried to copy and paste it onto Facebook. Couldn't make it work.
It's being shared on FB.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Top