Biden says “No Amendment to the Constitution is absolute”

[bigrebnc1775]

Most state government have a similar 2nd amendment set up, thus they are still restricted too.

That is why our Second Amendment expressly declares what is Necessary not Optional to the security of a free State.

Otherwise, this is a sovereign right of every free State of our Union:

Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Illinois State Constitution)

the U.S Constitution is the supreme law of the land it supersedes a state Constitution
Once again you have shown you have no clue of the meaning for what you post.
How can you have a free state when only the police have guns?

 

[danielpalos]

Most state government have a similar 2nd amendment set up, thus they are still restricted too.

That is why our Second Amendment expressly declares what is Necessary not Optional to the security of a free State.

Otherwise, this is a sovereign right of every free State of our Union:

Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Illinois State Constitution)

the U.S Constitution is the supreme law of the land it supersedes a state Constitution
Once again you have shown you have no clue of the meaning for what you post.
How can you have a free state when only the police have guns?

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No right is absolute because all rights are a balance between individual freedom and any conflict you might cause in the rights of others.

But that is irrelevant when it comes to the Bill of Rights.
The Bill of Rights is a bad name for it because it contains no rights at all.
It instead only contains restrictions on the federal government.
And restrictions on the federal government most certainly can be absolute.
When the second amendment says there can be no federal infringement on the right to bear arms, then that can and is absolute.
Meaning that only state and local laws can restrict weapons, not any federal legislation.

Most state government have a similar 2nd amendment set up, thus they are still restricted too.

The founders debated over this before they voted to place a right to firearms in the U.S. Constitution.
Some argued there was no need to have a protected right to firearms in the U.S. Constitution since all states already had a bill of rights that protected the firearm rights of a citizen. but in the end they wanted to make sure that right was protected by the federal government.

 

[berg80]

Even Scalia, who refused to acknowledge the anachronistic nature of some parts of the Constitution, admitted the 2nd Amendment does not give absolute rights to gun owners beyond the control of government.

My Turn: Gun rights are not absolute - Concord Monitor

I am writing to correct the assertion by Rep. Al Baldasaro (Monitor front page, Jan. 25) regarding restrictions on guns in schools when he says, “I do not lose my rights because I walk into a school.” The truth is that you definitely can lose your...

www.concordmonitor.com

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Most state government have a similar 2nd amendment set up, thus they are still restricted too.

That is why our Second Amendment expressly declares what is Necessary not Optional to the security of a free State.

Otherwise, this is a sovereign right of every free State of our Union:

Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Illinois State Constitution)

the U.S Constitution is the supreme law of the land it supersedes a state Constitution
Once again you have shown you have no clue of the meaning for what you post.
How can you have a free state when only the police have guns?

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

You contridict yourself all the time
You just wrote this shit
"Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Illinois State Constitution)"

But then turn around and write this
"The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States."
Most citizens are not subject to the police powers to get a firearms

North Carolina
Sec. 30. Militia and the right to bear arms.

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; and, as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they shall not be maintained, and the military shall be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power. Nothing herein shall justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons, or prevent the General Assembly from enacting penal statutes against that practice.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Even Scalia, who refused to acknowledge the anachronistic nature of some parts of the Constitution, admitted the 2nd Amendment does not give absolute rights to gun owners beyond the control of government.

My Turn: Gun rights are not absolute - Concord Monitor

I am writing to correct the assertion by Rep. Al Baldasaro (Monitor front page, Jan. 25) regarding restrictions on guns in schools when he says, “I do not lose my rights because I walk into a school.” The truth is that you definitely can lose your...

www.concordmonitor.com

that is incorrect

 

[danielpalos]

Most state government have a similar 2nd amendment set up, thus they are still restricted too.

That is why our Second Amendment expressly declares what is Necessary not Optional to the security of a free State.

Otherwise, this is a sovereign right of every free State of our Union:

Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Illinois State Constitution)

the U.S Constitution is the supreme law of the land it supersedes a state Constitution
Once again you have shown you have no clue of the meaning for what you post.
How can you have a free state when only the police have guns?

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

You contridict yourself all the time
You just wrote this shit
"Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Illinois State Constitution)"

But then turn around and write this
"The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States."
Most citizens are not subject to the police powers to get a firearms

North Carolina
Sec. 30. Militia and the right to bear arms.

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; and, as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they shall not be maintained, and the military shall be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power. Nothing herein shall justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons, or prevent the General Assembly from enacting penal statutes against that practice.

Yet, even North Carolina doesn't believe in the right wing gossip and hearsay regarding the Second Amendment barring State gun control laws.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Most state government have a similar 2nd amendment set up, thus they are still restricted too.

That is why our Second Amendment expressly declares what is Necessary not Optional to the security of a free State.

Otherwise, this is a sovereign right of every free State of our Union:

Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Illinois State Constitution)

the U.S Constitution is the supreme law of the land it supersedes a state Constitution
Once again you have shown you have no clue of the meaning for what you post.
How can you have a free state when only the police have guns?

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

You contridict yourself all the time
You just wrote this shit
"Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Illinois State Constitution)"

But then turn around and write this
"The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States."
Most citizens are not subject to the police powers to get a firearms

North Carolina
Sec. 30. Militia and the right to bear arms.

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; and, as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they shall not be maintained, and the military shall be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power. Nothing herein shall justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons, or prevent the General Assembly from enacting penal statutes against that practice.

Yet, even North Carolina doesn't believe in the right wing gossip and hearsay regarding the Second Amendment barring State gun control laws.

and yet you're an ignorant ***** that doesn't understand what he's talking about

 

[danielpalos]

Most state government have a similar 2nd amendment set up, thus they are still restricted too.

That is why our Second Amendment expressly declares what is Necessary not Optional to the security of a free State.

Otherwise, this is a sovereign right of every free State of our Union:

Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Illinois State Constitution)

the U.S Constitution is the supreme law of the land it supersedes a state Constitution
Once again you have shown you have no clue of the meaning for what you post.
How can you have a free state when only the police have guns?

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

You contridict yourself all the time
You just wrote this shit
"Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Illinois State Constitution)"

But then turn around and write this
"The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States."
Most citizens are not subject to the police powers to get a firearms

North Carolina
Sec. 30. Militia and the right to bear arms.

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; and, as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they shall not be maintained, and the military shall be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power. Nothing herein shall justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons, or prevent the General Assembly from enacting penal statutes against that practice.

Yet, even North Carolina doesn't believe in the right wing gossip and hearsay regarding the Second Amendment barring State gun control laws.

and yet you're an ignorant ***** that doesn't understand what he's talking about

Says an immoral false witness bearing right-winger. How typical.

 

[Rigby5]

Most state government have a similar 2nd amendment set up, thus they are still restricted too.

That is why our Second Amendment expressly declares what is Necessary not Optional to the security of a free State.

Otherwise, this is a sovereign right of every free State of our Union:

Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Illinois State Constitution)

the U.S Constitution is the supreme law of the land it supersedes a state Constitution
Once again you have shown you have no clue of the meaning for what you post.
How can you have a free state when only the police have guns?

This is a common belief, that federal law supersedes state law, but that is not correct.
There are 2 ways to tell.
One is that you have to have a state government first, before you can then create a federal government or any federal legislation, so then federal has to be inferior to state, since the states can't create something greater than themselves.
Another is that the main function of the federal constitution is to divide jurisdiction between the federal government and the states.
In areas where states are explicitly given jurisdiction and federal jurisdiction banned, then state law is supreme.

But I do not understand who is agreeing or disagreeing over firearm rights?
The federal 2nd amendment bans federal jurisdiction over firearms.
If the state constitution also bans state jurisdiction over firearms, then there should be no firearms restrictions at all.
I supposed that still depends on what "infringed" means?
Does registration infringe? Maybe not?

 

[Rigby5]

Here are Scalia's views on firearms:

{...

Gun rights can be restricted for felons & sensitive places​

The Supreme Court's 2006 decision in DC v. Heller provides good policy guidance on gun ownership rights and public safety. Justice Scalia wrote this opinion with great care. First, the Court affirmed the right of individuals to possess firearms for traditional lawful purposes such as self-defense within the home and for hunting.
Second, the opinion also held that Second Amendment rights are not unlimited. Justice Scalia went out of his way to declare longstanding laws that prohibit possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill; that forbid guns in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings; that impose conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms; and that restrict the right to carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose, are still valid and enforceable.

Source: Patrick Wiesner's (D-KS) 2016 Senate campaign website , Aug 8, 2016

Felons may possess guns unless state explicitly prohibits it​

The only limitation that Massachusetts law imposed on petitioner’s possession of firearms was that he could not carry handguns outside his home or business. In my view, state law did not “expressly provide that petitioner may not possess firearms,” and thus petitioner cannot be sentenced as an armed career criminal.
Petitioner’s prior convictions qualify as violent felonies only if the “restoration of his civil rights” by operation of Massachusetts law “expressly provided that petitioner may not possess firearms.“ In 1994, [that was not so]. To the contrary: Petitioner was permitted to possess shotguns, rifles, and handguns. Indeed, Massachusetts provided petitioner with a firearm identification card that enabled him to possess such firearms.

The Court rejects this on the basis of ”a likely, and rational, congressional policy“ of prohibiting firearms possession by all ex-felons whose ability to possess certain firearms is in any way restricted by state law. I respectfully dissent.

Source: 1998 SCOTUS case Caron v. US, 97-6270, dissenting opinion , Jun 22, 1998

Right to gun ownership is individual, not collective.​

Justice Scalia wrote the Court's decision on District of Columbia v. Heller on Jun 26, 2008:
Overturning DC's handgun ban, the court ruled that the Second Amendment protects the individual right to own a gun for private use--not only in connection with service in a militia. The 5-to-4 decision, District of Columbia v. Heller, left unanswered questions, but also much room for continued gun regulation, short of an absolute ban.
...}

Antonin Scalia on Gun Control

www.ontheissues.org

 

[danielpalos]

Criminals of the People get Infringed all the time. Right-wingers are just plain silly.

 

[justinacolmena]

Most state government have a similar 2nd amendment set up, thus they are still restricted too.

The damn government going to have stop ******* shit up for people like this, or the cities will continue to burn, and the protests will get worse and worse. America is ripe for the pillage and plunder without gun rights, and headed for collapse as the ancient Roman Empire, at the time of the Emperor Constantine, with too many holidays, and too many laws on the books, Catholicism became religio licita under state control, citizens were shorn of their gun rights and demoted to slaves.

 

[danielpalos]

This is a State's sovereign right secured by our Second Amendment:

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.

 

[justinacolmena]

Criminals of the People get Infringed all the time. Right-wingers are just plain silly.

Do you really need to be forced against your will at gunpoint to get off the weed, sober up, stop doing heroin and paying off crooked cops to revoke gun rights of honest citizens? Because it's coming down to that.

 

[justinacolmena]

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state

All persons within the state.

Permitted to possess and carry Firearms and other weapons without exception.

Because nothing short of perfection is acceptable before God.

 

[danielpalos]

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state

All persons within the state.

Permitted to possess and carry Firearms and other weapons without exception.

Because nothing short of perfection is acceptable before God.

Well regulated militia of the whole and entire People have literal recourse to our Second Amendment.

 

[justinacolmena]

to possess firearms for traditional lawful purposes such as self-defense within the home and for hunting.

Even felons have that right.

 

[danielpalos]

Criminals of the People get Infringed all the time. Right-wingers are just plain silly.

Do you really need to be forced against your will at gunpoint to get off the weed, sober up, stop doing heroin and paying off crooked cops to revoke gun rights of honest citizens? Because it's coming down to that.

Only rebels without a Cause say that.

I have heard one left winger proclaim that if he gets drafted into the organized militia due to right-wing rebels without a Cause, he is going to volunteer for the heavy weapons section of that unit.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Most state government have a similar 2nd amendment set up, thus they are still restricted too.

That is why our Second Amendment expressly declares what is Necessary not Optional to the security of a free State.

Otherwise, this is a sovereign right of every free State of our Union:

Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Illinois State Constitution)

the U.S Constitution is the supreme law of the land it supersedes a state Constitution
Once again you have shown you have no clue of the meaning for what you post.
How can you have a free state when only the police have guns?

This is a common belief, that federal law supersedes state law, but that is not correct.
There are 2 ways to tell.
One is that you have to have a state government first, before you can then create a federal government or any federal legislation, so then federal has to be inferior to state, since the states can't create something greater than themselves.
Another is that the main function of the federal constitution is to divide jurisdiction between the federal government and the states.
In areas where states are explicitly given jurisdiction and federal jurisdiction banned, then state law is supreme.

But I do not understand who is agreeing or disagreeing over firearm rights?
The federal 2nd amendment bans federal jurisdiction over firearms.
If the state constitution also bans state jurisdiction over firearms, then there should be no firearms restrictions at all.
I supposed that still depends on what "infringed" means?
Does registration infringe? Maybe not?

Who has jurisdiction over the U.S. Constitution?
The only authority the federal government has is ensuring rights are protected, and that includes states with restrictive gun laws that infringe on the rights of U.S. Citizens
14th amendment remember?