"Repeal The Second Amendment!"

[Rustic]

The FFs didn't intend to protect self-propelled bullet, just musket balls and black powder. Go for it.

It Second Amendment doesn't indicate anything about bullet's, muskets or black powder.
Nothing you can suggest will make it identify something it doesn't.

If you don't like what it does, or doesn't state ... Then you are going to have to change it ...

.

Why change something that works so well? What's a few mass shootings at schools every now and then between gun lovers?

Gun free zones are at fault, they have a bunch of dead kids as proof

 

[martybegan]

Again, the other side can't be trusted to be reasonable, so anything more we give them will be exploited towards their overall goal of an unarmed populace.

again - then where do we go from here? sitting around saying WE DON'T TRUST YOU is only going to go so far.

A tangible example they won't take things too far.

Repeal NYC's sullivan law and let law abiding citizens get a revolver without going through hoops.

that's another issue that clogs this up - states can and will pass their own laws.

And those laws cannot be against the constitution. NYC's law is obviously infringement, but a case has never reached far enough up the courts to do anything about it.

then that would be up to someone in new york to push if it bugged them that much.

it's been tried over and over and it dies in lower courts.

 

[debbiedowner]

What "all or nothing"

All the compromise so far has been done on or forced on 2nd amendment people.

It will ultimately be decided at the ballot box.

The direction of public sentiment right now is pretty clear.
.

The 2nd amendment will live, it damn near takes an act of god to change. Some controls will be enacted relating to mental health issues and age, but most people deemed sane and old enough will always be able to purchase a gun.

I included age because there are now rumblings in Florida to raise the age for rifles, but I will go back to when I was 18 and argue if I am old enough to go to war I am old enough to drink alcohol. I know it's not the same but the theory is still there and if I was going to war at 18 I'd certainly want to be able to purchase a gun. Maybe we just give shrinks more patients and do a complete mental exam before you can purchase. No one knows the answer's but for the 2nd amendment it will remain unchanged.

the ultimate goal of the progressives is to get rid of the second and tenth amendment, They will not except anything less.

I don't think so I now many that have several guns and wants their right to purchase. I think you read too many right wing news propaganda. Yes, there is the fringe but if I had to bet my life I'd say the majority are on the 2nd amendments side.

There is no such thing as a progressive that is in favor of the second amendment and the 10th amendment for that matter.
They will not be satisfied until all freedom and individuality is put in an Orwellian state...

Live in your own little world up there in SD and think what you want and stay off Fox, Breitbart, infowars, gateway pundit, please expand your horizon's outside of your own little world.

 

[Taz]

The FFs didn't intend to protect self-propelled bullet, just musket balls and black powder. Go for it.

It Second Amendment doesn't indicate anything about bullet's, muskets or black powder.
Nothing you can suggest will make it identify something it doesn't.

If you don't like what it does, or doesn't state ... Then you are going to have to change it ...

.

Why change something that works so well? What's a few mass shootings at schools every now and then between gun lovers?

Gun free zones are at fault, they have a bunch of dead kids as proof

I agree, let's arm all the kids. Nobody would go anywhere near schools.

 

[BlackSand]

The framers stated in their own writings that they wanted the American citizens to have as much "fire power" as the state. They didn't trust government entities. They wanted this country to be ruled by the citizens. They did not want the government to have an upper hand over citizens when it comes to fire power. They were against a centralized military, the military was originally supposed to be comprised of just volunteer citizenry using their own weapons.

Thanks Chris ... Not only do I know what their intentions were ... There are a 100 different ways to defeat what the poster was implying.

The easiest course of action now is to stop arguing about what other people don't have the slightest clue about.
I mean face it ... They have no idea what they are talking about and you aren't going to change their minds.

I am just telling them what they are going to have to do to get what they want.
I won't mind watching the utter destruction of Progressives should they attempt to repeal the Second Amendment ...

And the Constitution gives them the ability to make that mistake ...

.

 

[Rustic]

It will ultimately be decided at the ballot box.

The direction of public sentiment right now is pretty clear.
.

The 2nd amendment will live, it damn near takes an act of god to change. Some controls will be enacted relating to mental health issues and age, but most people deemed sane and old enough will always be able to purchase a gun.

I included age because there are now rumblings in Florida to raise the age for rifles, but I will go back to when I was 18 and argue if I am old enough to go to war I am old enough to drink alcohol. I know it's not the same but the theory is still there and if I was going to war at 18 I'd certainly want to be able to purchase a gun. Maybe we just give shrinks more patients and do a complete mental exam before you can purchase. No one knows the answer's but for the 2nd amendment it will remain unchanged.

the ultimate goal of the progressives is to get rid of the second and tenth amendment, They will not except anything less.

I don't think so I now many that have several guns and wants their right to purchase. I think you read too many right wing news propaganda. Yes, there is the fringe but if I had to bet my life I'd say the majority are on the 2nd amendments side.

There is no such thing as a progressive that is in favor of the second amendment and the 10th amendment for that matter.
They will not be satisfied until all freedom and individuality is put in an Orwellian state...

Live in your own little world up there in SD and think what you want and stay off Fox, Breitbart, infowars, gateway pundit, please expand your horizon's outside of your own little world.

You just proved my point, I’m a libertarian I don’t trust any career politicians no matter what the side of the aisle they choose to be on.
I’m a one issue voter… And the fact remains we lost any sort of freedom and individuality in this country long ago. We need to arm this country better…

 

[pismoe]

The framers stated in their own writings that they wanted the American citizens to have as much "fire power" as the state. They didn't trust government entities. They wanted this country to be ruled by the citizens. They did not want the government to have an upper hand over citizens when it comes to fire power. They were against a centralized military, the military was originally supposed to be comprised of just volunteer citizenry using their own weapons.

Thanks Chris ... Not only do I know what their intentions were ... There are a 100 different ways to defeat what the poster was implying.

The easiest course of action now is to stop arguing about what other people don't have the slightest clue about.
I mean face it ... They have no idea what they are talking about and you aren't going to change their minds.

I am just telling them what they are going to have to do to get what they want.
I won't mind watching the utter destruction of Progressives should they attempt to repeal the Second Amendment ...

And the Constitution gives them the ability to make that mistake ...

.

-------------------------------------- thats kinda what i think , stand on you legal RIGHTS , fight legally , no working with lefties , no compromise and see what happens .

 

[pismoe]

and the arguing back and forth with emotionally driven know noting people gets pretty tiresome as they never learn no matter what they are shown from even recent 20th history .

 

[martybegan]

Again, the issue is that RKBA people have compromised over and over and the gun controllers keep pushing. When you can't get them to even admit NYC's laws are infringement, you know what they want for the rest of the country.

then we need to get a different group of people together to resolve this and tell those who can't be reasonable to bugger off.

first and foremost our gov needs a month long training series to educate people on guns, laws on the books, history, their use, hands on, and so forth. but this isn't to buy a guy, this is to be on the committee to fix our gun laws. there should in NO WAY be any politizing this. no colorado senators saying magazines will be thrown away after being used. if you are not gun and gun laws/history educated, you need to sit the **** down and shut up.

if you EVER tried to outlaw green tipped bullets as armor piercing, you need to sit the **** down and shut up cause you lie and can't be trusted in this.

we need educated people to review what we can do to address the situation. from what i can tell deeper background checks are needed, not more laws. i'm pretty sure every person who's shot up a school was breaking the law so more laws are not going to help.

gun crimes need harsher penalties including losing the right to buy guns. caught w/an illegal gun after this jail time. period. let the pot smokers out and send them to colorado or california to go be happy and out of the way and use these resources to crack down on guns laws.

but we need to address how we educate our kids to and what happened along the way to become so desensitized to the value of life? this isn't just a gun issue it's a society issue and we have to address the problems that make kids reach for guns in as much as make them harder to get.

Again, the other side can't be trusted to be reasonable, so anything more we give them will be exploited towards their overall goal of an unarmed populace.

again - then where do we go from here? sitting around saying WE DON'T TRUST YOU is only going to go so far.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- can't do much , GunOwners have RIGHTS . Stand on those Legal RIGHTS and don't give an inch , be ready and see what happens .

those rights are there because we agree to them and do in fact, defend them. but *we the people* can and do change our rights all the time. there is no god given right to anything, rights are what man has put up and chosen to defend. you can either work to resolve issues you're perceived to be a part of or you can stand that ground until they take that ground away.

The only way to change them is 2/3 of Congress (or conventions) and 3/4 of the States.

anything else is an end run.

And rights are inherent in man, regardless of the source, the only thing the constitution does is prevent government from interfering in them.

Without that, your other option is to fight.

 

[alang1216]

Repeal the Second Amendment, and replace it work something work-able for both sides of the Gun-Control argument.

The Constitution is a living, breathing document, so to speak.

When conditions change - when the needs of the Nation change - the Constitution changes.

Time for the Constitution to change, again.

I'd like to see it change from a right to a privilege, like driving a car. Anyone can drive if you meet the minimum requirements: knowledge of the rules and demonstration of the ability to use it safely. If you want to drive a truck there are even more restrictions since they are more dangerous. These criteria seem to work for cars, why not for guns?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Here's another one blabbering.

Michael Moore Calls for Repeal of 'Ancient & Outdated' 2nd Amendment

The 2nd Amendment isn't going anywhere. Quit fearmongering. You sound ridiculous.

It's going to stay in the constitution. However, it may become eroded by case law made by the courts. In other words, "banana" can mean "pineapple" if the supreme court decides to call it that way.

Only if the people permit it.

 

[BlackSand]

Why change something that works so well? What's a few mass shootings at schools every now and then between gun lovers?

You are going to have to change the Constitution in order to get what you want ...

I am telling you to knock yourself out trying to change the Constitution.
The Constitution gives you the ability to shoot yourself in the foot.

Your empty rhetoric means nothing ...
The fact you support the federal government is a result closely associated with the idea you embrace failure.

.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Repeal the Second Amendment, and replace it work something work-able for both sides of the Gun-Control argument.

The Constitution is a living, breathing document, so to speak.

When conditions change - when the needs of the Nation change - the Constitution changes.

Time for the Constitution to change, again.

I'd like to see it change from a right to a privilege, like driving a car. Anyone can drive if you meet the minimum requirements: knowledge of the rules and demonstration of the ability to use it safely. If you want to drive a truck there are even more restrictions since they are more dangerous. These criteria seem to work for cars, why not for guns?

Let's just change the entire Bill of Rights to the Bill of Privileges.

 

[pismoe]

GUNS are a RIGHT , driving a car on public roads is a privilege as you acknowledge Alang .

 

[CowboyTed]

The Constitution is a living, breathing document

That appears where in the Constitution?

Time for the Constitution to change, again.

You know the drill. Have at it.

It is well known that the founders expected the Constitution to be a living document to be changed as time moved on.

 

[hunarcy]

The second amendment is archaic and no longer applies to our society. As useless as the third amendment

We haven't relied on well regulated militias in150 years. We do not need armed civilians rushing to their local militia to defend us

Gun rights should be established at the state level with each state determining the gun protections they need

So, you'd be fine with NY banning guns while Georgia allows everyone to have a concealed carry license or an open carry license? What are you going to do when the guy from Georgia visits NYC? Will NY extend the Article 1 section 4 full faith and credit privilege to the Georgian license? Or, will NY unconstitutionally ignore the Georgian's privilege?

 

[alang1216]

GUNS are a RIGHT , driving a car on public roads is a privilege as you acknowledge Alang .

True enough but that is how it is not how it has to be. Do you have see any need to make driving a right?

 

[alang1216]

Let's just change the entire Bill of Rights to the Bill of Privileges.

Or admit we don't live in the 18th century.

 

[pismoe]

GUNS are a RIGHT , driving a car on public roads is a privilege as you acknowledge Alang .

True enough but that is how it is not how it has to be. Do you have see any need to make driving a right?

--------------------------------------------- disagree as i am not for changing things because of a current problem . Guns are an American RIGHT and thats where i stand Alang .

 

[ChrisL]

Let's just change the entire Bill of Rights to the Bill of Privileges.

Or admit we don't live in the 18th century.

I know. The world is even MORE dangerous now. Even more reason to be armed and ready to defend yourself and your family from a lunatic. "Gun control" measures have not worked and will not work. Guess why?