The Right To Bear Arms

[Ernie S.]

Stupid ass threads and posters like this thread is the reason I don't frequent this site as often.

Second amendment obsolete?

Your fucking common sense is obsolete.

Please explain to us how the 2nd Amendment is legally relevant in current America. Are you in a militia?

Is it still a part of the Constitution? Then it's not obsolete, is it?
If you want it to go the way of Prohibition, suggest repealing it, but duck.

 

[Ernie S.]

I am also a gun lover, but the 2nd Amendment will be changed. It's just a matter of time...

sure you are.....your posts sure back that up.....a gun lover calling for guns to be banned....

He claims to be a gun lover, but proves he's a liar and a coward.

 

[Ernie S.]

I am also a gun lover, but the 2nd Amendment will be changed. It's just a matter of time...

sure you are.....your posts sure back that up.....a gun lover calling for guns to be banned....

I'm just trying to help prevent you radical NaziCon gun nuts from ruining it for the rest of us who support reasonable gun control legislation and strict enforcement.

Legal Conservative gun owners aren't the ones ruining it. Liberal criminals who already are prohibited from owning guns are. No matter how much you want to win, it's an empty battle. You are fighting the wrong enemy.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Dream on...

say that when you prove me wrong.....until then.....

 

[jillian]

Stupid ass threads and posters like this thread is the reason I don't frequent this site as often.

Second amendment obsolete?

Your fucking common sense is obsolete.

Please explain to us how the 2nd Amendment is legally relevant in current America. Are you in a militia?

Is it still a part of the Constitution? Then it's not obsolete, is it?
If you want it to go the way of Prohibition, suggest repealing it, but duck.

things are generally part of the constitution after they're obsolete or they wouldn't be changed. but the reality is, the constitution, except for prohibition, has never been amended to limit rights... it's only ever been amended to expand them.

and it's unlikely that the 2nd amendment would be amended any time soon.

 

[YoungRepublican]

There really is no argument here. there is no legislation that you need to alert the Govt that you are forming a militia, so theres no way for anyone to tell you you arent in a militia. hence, you can can be your own personal militia and own a gun legally. This is first week stuff in Constitution 101 guys and gals

Wow, that was brilliant...and hilarious...

Are you being facetious? I dont know whether to thank you or defend my point lol
On another note. Fonts need a sarcastic style

 

[Ernie S.]

tinydenser is hilariously stupid.

Why don't you turn your rep back on so you can neg her?

 

[Lakhota]

tinydenser is hilariously stupid.

Why don't you turn your rep back on so you can neg her?

Negging is for children, Pee-wee...

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Artifice]

There really is no argument here. there is no legislation that you need to alert the Govt that you are forming a militia, so theres no way for anyone to tell you you arent in a militia. hence, you can can be your own personal militia and own a gun legally. This is first week stuff in Constitution 101 guys and gals

Wow, that was brilliant...and hilarious...

Are you being facetious? I dont know whether to thank you or defend my point lol
On another note. Fonts need a sarcastic style

I support this "sarcastic font" idea. Sometimes it gets a little tedious trying to decipher the madness.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I am also a gun lover, but the 2nd Amendment will be changed. It's just a matter of time...

And all it takes is to propose and pass through Congress a new Amendment. The problem is the gun grabbers know they can not pass such an amendment. New laws must conform to already existing law. That the second is a personal right and that the weapons protected are of a military style in common use.

 

[Lakhota]

The truth behind America's 'civilian militias' - Telegraph

The Militia Movement -- Extremism in America

The Government and the Militia Movement

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Terrorist-Next-Door-Militia-Movement/dp/0312320418]The Terrorist Next Door: The Militia Movement and the Radical Right[/ame]

 

[Lakhota]

I am also a gun lover, but the 2nd Amendment will be changed. It's just a matter of time...

And all it takes is to propose and pass through Congress a new Amendment. The problem is the gun grabbers know they can not pass such an amendment. New laws must conform to already existing law. That the second is a personal right and that the weapons protected are of a military style in common use.

The 2nd Amendment is simply whatever SCOTUS says it is. SCOTUS has redefined it before and will redefine it again.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There are two problems with the Second Amendment. First, under any circumstance, it is confusing; something that an English teacher would mark up in red ink and tell the author to redo and clarify. Secondly, there are actually two versions of the Amendment; The first passed by two-thirds of the members of each house of Congress (the first step for ratifying a constitutional amendment). A different version passed by three-fourths of the states (the second step for ratifying a constitution amendment). The primary difference between the two versions are a capitalization and a simple comma.

DETAILS: Confusion -- the wording of the Second Amendment | Occasional Planet

Interesting diversion into idiocy. The only reason to delve into the issue of capitalization in the 2nd Amendment is if you are completely ignorant of the fat that spelling and capitalization rules were non existent at the time the Constitution was written. It wasn't until the invention of the printing press made it possible to actually develop rules about those things that anyone actually started paying attention to the whole proper noun verses regular noun thing. Given that

Strangely enough, the same lack of rules applied to the use of commas, which is even more proof that the author of the idiotic diversion is completely unqualified to comment on the alleged confusion in a clearly written sentence.

Thanks for the laugh though.

 

[YoungRepublican]

Please explain to us how the 2nd Amendment is legally relevant in current America. Are you in a militia?

Is it still a part of the Constitution? Then it's not obsolete, is it?
If you want it to go the way of Prohibition, suggest repealing it, but duck.

things are generally part of the constitution after they're obsolete or they wouldn't be changed. but the reality is, the constitution, except for prohibition, has never been amended to limit rights... it's only ever been amended to expand them.

and it's unlikely that the 2nd amendment would be amended any time soon.

And the limiting of terms lenth

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Please explain to us how the 2nd Amendment is legally relevant in current America. Are you in a militia?

Is it still a part of the
Constitution? Then it's not obsolete, is it?
If you want it to go the way of Prohibition, suggest repealing it, but duck.

things are generally part of the constitution after they're obsolete or they wouldn't be changed. but the reality is, the constitution, except for prohibition, has never been amended to limit rights... it's only ever been amended to expand them.

and it's unlikely that the 2nd amendment would be amended any time soon.

Quite true, the government prefers to limit rights through court decisions.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

tinydenser is hilariously stupid.

Why don't you turn your rep back on so you can neg her?

Negging is for children, Pee-wee...

C'mon, you don't have rep so no one can see how many splotches you have,

 

[CrazedScotsman]

By Peter Weber

That's the opinion of Rupert Murdoch's conservative New York Post. And it's not as far-fetched as it may seem.

Well, let's read the text of the Second Amendment, says Jeffrey Sachs at The Huffington Post:

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.​

It's astonishingly clear that "the Second Amendment is a relic of the founding era more than two centuries ago," and "its purpose is long past."

As Justice John Paul Stevens argues persuasively, the amendment should not block the ability of society to keep itself safe through gun control legislation. That was never its intent. This amendment was about militias in the 1790s, and the fear of the anti-federalists of a federal army. Since that issue is long moot, we need not be governed in our national life by doctrines on now-extinct militias from the 18th century.​

"Fair-minded readers have to acknowledge that the text is ambiguous," says Cass Sunstein at Bloomberg View. Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote the majority opinion in Heller, was laying out his interpretation of a "genuinely difficult" legal question, and "I am not saying that the court was wrong." More to the point: Right or wrong, obsolete or relevant, the Second Amendment essentially means what five justices on the Supreme Court say it means. So "we should respect the fact that the individual right to have guns has been established," but even the pro-gun interpretation laid out by Scalia explicitly allows for banning the kinds of weapons the shooter used to murder 20 first-graders. The real problem is in the political arena, where "opponents of gun control, armed with both organization and money, have been invoking the Second Amendment far more recklessly," using "wild and unsupportable claims about the meaning of the Constitution" to shut down debate on what sort of regulations might save lives.

More: Is the Second Amendment obsolete? - The Week

The Second Amendment is only obsolete to the person who trusts the government from now into the very distant future, and I know no one who trusts our government from now into the very distant future.

 

[Zander]

 

[Zoom]

It's definitely not the most important amendment, like most conservatives argue, but it's not obsolete. We're the United Freakin States. We were founded on a revolutionary crazy notion that people are allowed to be as free as they want.

If you take away that crazy, then we're closer to being like the French. And no one wants that.

People were not free as they wanted back then. Only certain ones. In other words, white males.