The second amendment

[Mr. P]

Overall I guess this is the best forum to place this.

........

Ok, I am in this rather heated discussion on the subject of “The right to own and carry” a gun on another board. I am sure they think I am a Lib.

I am frustrated, some folks are hell bent on “the second amendment says so, that’s all there is to it! I should be able to own and carry whatever I want, whenever I want, wherever I want!” .

I'm pro gun, so this reaction bugs me.
My position is, the second amendment is debated as to its intent, i.e. you can own a gun, but not a nuke, or a stinger missile and you can't just take it anywhere anytime, blah, blah... That pisses em off!
I am not saying there is No right to own or carry…I am saying it’s a complex issue as to interpretation of the second, and laws of the State.

Thoughts?

*Got another after this one. USC Title 18*

 

[dilloduck]

Overall I guess this is the best forum to place this.

........

Ok, I am in this rather heated discussion on the subject of “The right to own and carry” a gun on another board. I am sure they think I am a Lib.

I am frustrated, some folks are hell bent on “the second amendment says so, that’s all there is to it! I should be able to own and carry whatever I want, whenever I want, wherever I want!” .

I'm pro gun, so this reaction bugs me.
My position is, the second amendment is debated as to its intent, i.e. you can own a gun, but not a nuke, or a stinger missile and you can't just take it anywhere anytime, blah, blah... That pisses em off!
I am not saying there is No right to own or carry…I am saying it’s a complex issue as to interpretation of the second, and laws of the State.

Thoughts?

*Got another after this one. USC Title 18*

I'm thinking it all comes back to the "nobody can tell me what to do" fantasy that people like to claim they have. They basically propose anarchy when in reality if true anarchy were to ever come about, they would be the first to whine, be enslaved and die.

 

[Gunny]

Overall I guess this is the best forum to place this.

........

Ok, I am in this rather heated discussion on the subject of “The right to own and carry” a gun on another board. I am sure they think I am a Lib.

I am frustrated, some folks are hell bent on “the second amendment says so, that’s all there is to it! I should be able to own and carry whatever I want, whenever I want, wherever I want!” .

I'm pro gun, so this reaction bugs me.
My position is, the second amendment is debated as to its intent, i.e. you can own a gun, but not a nuke, or a stinger missile and you can't just take it anywhere anytime, blah, blah... That pisses em off!
I am not saying there is No right to own or carry…I am saying it’s a complex issue as to interpretation of the second, and laws of the State.

Thoughts?

*Got another after this one. USC Title 18*

I'm 110% pro responsible gun ownership. That of course, in my mind means Billy Bob the redneck who gets in a fight every Sat nite should NOT be allowed to take a gun to the bar.

Meaning: I don't think the right to own and bear arms extends to being able to do with and go whereever you want with them.

 

[MtnBiker]

Amendment II

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.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html#amendmentii

I believe in gun ownership and the right to carry a gun. I do believe walking around with a AK47 is ridicules, yet a person should be able to own one.

 

[Gunny]

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html#amendmentii

I believe in gun ownership and the right to carry a gun. I do believe walking around with a AK47 is ridicules, yet a person should be able to own one.

ITA. I wouldn't want one myself, but as long as someone behaves responsibly with it, I see no reason why they should be allowed to have one.

I'm basically a target shooter. I have long-range rifles and handguns. Might not be anyone else's thing but I would hope they would extend the same privilege and courtesy toward my likes as I am theirs.

 

[Mr. P]

ITA. I wouldn't want one myself, but as long as someone behaves responsibly with it, I see no reason why they should be allowed to have one.

I'm basically a target shooter. I have long-range rifles and handguns. Might not be anyone else's thing but I would hope they would extend the same privilege and courtesy toward my likes as I am theirs.

Got something for ya Gunny....hold on a min...

 

[Mr. P]

Score the second down left side...

<img src="http://image.usmessageboard.com/imagehostingsite//is.php?i=3659&img=Picture_202a.JP.jpg" border="0">

 

[Mr. P]

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html#amendmentii

I believe in gun ownership and the right to carry a gun. I do believe walking around with a AK47 is ridicules, yet a person should be able to own one.

The infringed part seems to raise hairs...I posted this when someone posted "what part of infringed don't you understand?".

In the context of the Constitution, phrases like "shall not be infringed," "shall make no law," and "shall not be violated" sound pretty unbendable, but the Supreme Court has ruled that some laws can, in fact, encroach on these phrases. For example, though there is freedom of speech, you cannot slander someone; though you can own a pistol, you cannot own a nuclear weapon.

They really got pissed about that.

 

[Gunny]

Score the second down left side...

<img src="http://image.usmessageboard.com/imagehostingsite//is.php?i=3659&img=Picture_202a.JP.jpg" border="0">

I wouldn't complain about taking that home ....good shooting.

 

[Mr. P]

I wouldn't complain about taking that home ....good shooting.

I didn't complain. As you can tell it's an old target. Even though I only placed 6th in the State with it, I was and am proud of it. If that second on the left would have been scored 0 instead of -1 I'd have moved up to second place, I think it was. No matter, I was happy at 6th.

Edit: Thanks!

 

[Hobbit]

I think most weapon ownership laws are unconstitutional, though I have no problem restricting when they're carried. The second ammendment was meant to arm the citizens against the government, so I don't think they should outlaw 'military' grade weapons. However, there's no reason to carry them around loaded unless you're in the middle of a war zone, in which case no gun control laws really matter anymore, do they?

As far as certain weapons are concerned, like nukes, the government can and should control their ownership without violating the second ammendment. The government has outlawed possession of nuclear material, as it is dangerous. They have also expressly forbidden the manufacture of nuclear warheads. They're the only ones who make them, and they're not selling, so you can't own one.