True Interpretation of the 2nd Amendment

[whutTHEYsay]

Cecilie1200, post: 19598342

They're not especially rapid-fire OR high velocity compared to any number of other guns.

I see you are not addressing a specific firearms comparison.

Do you believe a Revolutionary War era musket has the same rapid fire capability and bullet velocity as an AR15?


Do you think a bolt action three cartridge XPR HUNTER is no different than an AR15? Can you fire dozens of rounds at the same pace in both rifles?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

A musket from the 18th century, when the Second Amendment was written, and an assault rifle of today.CreditTop, MPI, via Getty Images, bottom, Joe Raedle/Getty Images .

What's your point?

the First gives freedom of the press.

Priniting press when the Constitution was written

Revolutionary newspaper.

Current newspaper

things change.

LIve with it

Do you seriously think you are capable of using logic and reason?

Let me know when a printing press is used to commit mass murder.

 

[WinterBorn]

A musket from the 18th century, when the Second Amendment was written, and an assault rifle of today.CreditTop, MPI, via Getty Images, bottom, Joe Raedle/Getty Images .

This comparison is laughable.

Yes, the rifle on the top was what was held by civilians when the 2nd amendment was written. It was also the standard rifle of the best equipped army in the world. And it could be fired as fast as the best militaries of the time.

The lower rifle may look like the one carried by the best equipped army, but it is significantly slower to fire.

 

[WinterBorn]

A musket from the 18th century, when the Second Amendment was written, and an assault rifle of today.CreditTop, MPI, via Getty Images, bottom, Joe Raedle/Getty Images .

What's your point?

the First gives freedom of the press.

Priniting press when the Constitution was written

Revolutionary newspaper.

Current newspaper

things change.

LIve with it

Do you seriously think you are capable of using logic and reason?

Let me know when a printing press is used to commit mass murder.

Do you not think millions have been killed by propaganda created in a printing press?

 

[Auld Phart]

A musket from the 18th century, when the Second Amendment was written, and an assault rifle of today.CreditTop, MPI, via Getty Images, bottom, Joe Raedle/Getty Images .

What's your point?

the First gives freedom of the press.

Priniting press when the Constitution was written

Revolutionary newspaper.

Current newspaper

things change.

LIve with it

Do you seriously think you are capable of using logic and reason?

Let me know when a printing press is used to commit mass murder.

logic and reason?

your kind?

hopefully, I will NEVER use your style 'logic and reason'.

that 'the second only authorized muskets' bullshit is as lame as 3 legged horse.


2nd doesn't say anything about muskets, it says 'arms'.

in your feeble logic, firearms would only consist of single shot rifles and handguns.

you want to take firearms back 300 years, but keep all the other advancements that suit you.

you should join the nearest Flat Earth Society.

 

[Auld Phart]

Cecilie1200, post: 19598342

They're not especially rapid-fire OR high velocity compared to any number of other guns.

I see you are not addressing a specific firearms comparison.

Do you believe a Revolutionary War era musket has the same rapid fire capability and bullet velocity as an AR15?

Does that matter?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Cecilie1200, post: 19598342

They're not especially rapid-fire OR high velocity compared to any number of other guns.

I see you are not addressing a specific firearms comparison.

Do you believe a Revolutionary War era musket has the same rapid fire capability and bullet velocity as an AR15?

A better question is, "Do I care?" Or how about, "What the hell does that have to do with anything?"

 

[Cecilie1200]

A musket from the 18th century, when the Second Amendment was written, and an assault rifle of today.CreditTop, MPI, via Getty Images, bottom, Joe Raedle/Getty Images .

What's your point?

the First gives freedom of the press.

Priniting press when the Constitution was written

Revolutionary newspaper.

Current newspaper

things change.

LIve with it

Do you seriously think you are capable of using logic and reason?

Let me know when a printing press is used to commit mass murder.

Do you not think millions have been killed by propaganda created in a printing press?

Excellent point. Information - and disinformation - are far more dangerous than any weapon. "The pen is mightier than the sword", and all that.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

A better question is, "Do I care?" Or how about, "What the hell does that have to do with anything?

Now you don't care after telling me assault rifles are not especially rapid-fire or high velocity compared to any number of other guns.

You must realize what a stupid statement that was.


Can you fire a bolt action XPR HUNTER at the same rapid fire pace as an AR15?

Popular handguns don't match the bullet velocity of the AR15. Why did you insist they were about the same?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

WinterBorn, post: 19598622

Do you not think millions have been killed by propaganda created in a printing press?

Can you name a mass murder where the free press as an institution has been held responsible? I didn't don't know CNN has its own military and police force.

Think people.

Propaganda cannot kill a single soul.

A propagandist with superiority in followers and firearms can kill many. Just like a late middle aged man with a fascination in killing humans with assault weapons can rent a room in Vegas and try all his fascinating toys out in real life and death.

 

[Auld Phart]

A better question is, "Do I care?" Or how about, "What the hell does that have to do with anything?

Now you don't care after telling me assault rifles are not especially rapid-fire or high velocity compared to any number of other guns.

You must realize what a stupid statement that was.


Can you fire a bolt action XPR HUNTER at the same rapid fire pace as an AR15?

Popular handguns don't match the bullet velocity of the AR15. Why did you insist they were about the same?

Can you fire a bolt action XPR HUNTER at the same rapid fire pace as an AR15?

Can a Volkswagen match the speed of a Corvette?

you're comparing apples and oranges

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Excellent point. Information - and disinformation - are far more dangerous than any weapon. "The pen is mightier than the sword", and all that.

Then why don't you assault rifle nuts trade your AR15s in for Parkers ball points and take penmanship classes.

 

[WinterBorn]

WinterBorn, post: 19598622

Do you not think millions have been killed by propaganda created in a printing press?

Can you name a mass murder where the free press as an institution has been held responsible? I didn't don't know CNN has its own military and police force.

Think people.

Propaganda cannot kill a single soul.

A propagandist with superiority in followers and firearms can kill many. Just like a late middle aged man with a fascination in killing humans with assault weapons can rent a room in Vegas and try all his fascinating toys out in real life and death.

I like the way you addressed my point with the caveat "free press as an institution". Look at what Himmler was able to do with his propaganda. Germans didn't bat an eye when the Jews were forced into cattlecars.

 

[Cecilie1200]

A better question is, "Do I care?" Or how about, "What the hell does that have to do with anything?

Now you don't care after telling me assault rifles are not especially rapid-fire or high velocity compared to any number of other guns.

You must realize what a stupid statement that was.


Can you fire a bolt action XPR HUNTER at the same rapid fire pace as an AR15?

Popular handguns don't match the bullet velocity of the AR15. Why did you insist they were about the same?

No, I'm sorry, pointing out your ignorance about the AR15 has nothing whatsoever to do with my not caring about Revolutionary muskets, OR their utter irrelevance to the topic.

If you want to fixate on centuries-old antiques, that's your little red wagon. I'm not obligated to join you.

If you're going to drag me through a comparison of the AR15 and every single possible other gun type, why don't we just cut to the chase, and you tell me where the cut-off is. EXACTLY what rate of fire constitutes "rapid-fire"? How did you arrive at that particular benchmark? And why should law-abiding citizens consider it somehow "morally superior" to have less effective weapons than those against whom they're defending themselves?

 

[WinterBorn]

Excellent point. Information - and disinformation - are far more dangerous than any weapon. "The pen is mightier than the sword", and all that.

Then why don't you assault rifle nuts trade your AR15s in for Parkers ball points and take penmanship classes.

I don't own an AR (had one but sold it years ago). I think I will keep my firearms and keep writing via a keyboard.

Why don't you try and get a constitutional amendment to remove the right to keep and bear arms. You only need the legislatures of 38 states.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

WillHaftawaite, post: 19598925

Can a Volkswagen match the speed of a Corvette?

Why ask me? Ask Cecile?

 

[Auld Phart]

WillHaftawaite, post: 19598925

Can a Volkswagen match the speed of a Corvette?

Why ask me? Ask Cecile?

Because you're the one making comparisons between firearms.

 

[Dan Stubbs]

If anything, instead of abolishing the 2nd amendment
it should be EXPANDED to protect equal right to defense in ALL forms

You are talking some silly Nonsense.

You just don't get it do you, GUNS are BAD, they prevent the wealthy from taking control of the American Sheeple Live Stock, and all live stock at some point needs to be Culled, you can Cull animals if they can fight back, in other words, the American Sheeple have TEETH, the TEETH are the GUNS in America, so before we can begin the Culling, we must first pull the teeth.

Why do we have to wait for conflicts to escalate to the point of threatening to use guns for defense?
Is that the only choice of equalizer?

Currently only the big corporations and interests that can afford to lobby and/or have leverage to sue and WIN in federal courts can get their way.
It's not just guns alone that defend rights, but the fact that the NRA can AFFORD LAWYERS TO SUE -- IN FEDERAL COURT -- IF LINES GET CROSSED.

The only thing that stopped Obamacare were lawsuits that WON in federal court.
Who can afford that?

So we don't have equal defense in this country.
The feds can get into our pocketbooks and harass using the IRS.

Taking up guns is not enough to stop the onslaught and oppression of rights.
Look to the lawyers and lobbies that can afford legal defense.

The day that the average person can go to a group and get the same defense for a complaint,
maybe we'll have equality! Thank you luosT_tcR Keep posting and keep your mind well loaded!

Much that you wrote has happened, it was lead to abuse of power and large companys have tied lawsuits up in the courts for years and 20 years just to fend off the justice of law. They hope you die before it ever comes to court or it become a moot subject. Swift justice just does not happen.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The Second says you're full of it

The Supreme Court says not all firearms are protected by the Second Anendnent.

AR15s are not protected.

They can be and should be banned as similar to weapons of war.

Except that they're no more similar to "weapons of war" than any other gun is. And where, exactly, do you find that AR-15s are not protected under the 2nd Amendment?

Maryland banned the AR15

"The 4th Circuit held that Maryland’s ban on military-style assault rifles is constitutional regardless of the standard of scrutiny because the Second Amendment does not give civilians a right to own such weapons."

Second Amendment does not apply to assault weapons: en banc 4th...


"The majority focused instead on Justice Scalia’s concession that governments may prohibit “weapons that are most useful in military service—M–16 rifles and the like.” The semi-automatic weapons banned under Maryland’s law were adapted from M-16s and other automatic rifles developed for military use, according to the 4th Circuit. That fact, the court said, put them within the category of weapons the Heller opinion excepted from Second Amendment protection."

AR 15s actually aren’t ‘banned’ in Maryland – they’re legal provided they conform to state laws and provisions, such as a magazine limited to 10 rounds.

For some an AR isn’t an AR absent a 30-round magazine.

As for the 4th Circuit’s ruling on Maryland’s FSA, the Heller Court provided the lower courts no guidance as to level of judicial review, which it was compelled to do given the issues concerning the District’s handgun regulation.

And as long as appellate courts continue to uphold measures such as the FSA, the Supreme Court is unlikely to agree to review their constitutionality.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

WinterBorn, post: 19598954

I like the way you addressed my point with the caveat "free press as an institution". Look at what Himmler was able to do with his propaganda. Germans didn't bat an eye when the Jews were forced into cattlecars.

So you think 'Himmler. was the free press? Ok. Duly noted.