What would you do with the second amendment?

[candycorn]

The only difference is the 2nd Amendment.

Which makes a dif how?

And the argumentative cul-de-sac the topic leads to shows up.

I'll keep it short and sweet; we have thousands of gun deaths; they have hundreds in Europe. Nearly everything else is equal in terms of culture. The difference is we have the 2nd Amendment and because of it you're able to purchase as many guns as your income allows and there is little if any means of determining if you're responsible enough to handle that much firepower. There is a reason we don't pass out M16s on the first day of boot camp.

Army Boot Camp Timeline At a Glance

Again, it's pointless to get into the debate. Have a nice night.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems.

The 2nd Amendment has magical powers to prevent security issues. Praise Odin.

why have a right to keep and bear Arms, right wingers.

Because the Constitution, the ultimate law of the land states, I have the right to. End of conversation

The express purpose for that right, is in the first clause.

No its the prefatory clause it's just an introduction, the operative clause is the functional part of the 2nd Amendment "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed",

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

The only difference is the 2nd Amendment.

Which makes a dif how?

And the argumentative cul-de-sac the topic leads to shows up.

I'll keep it short and sweet; we have thousands of gun deaths; they have hundreds in Europe. Nearly everything else is equal in terms of culture. The difference is we have the 2nd Amendment and because of it you're able to purchase as many guns as your income allows and there is little if any means of determining if you're responsible enough to handle that much firepower. There is a reason we don't pass out M16s on the first day of boot camp.

Army Boot Camp Timeline At a Glance

Again, it's pointless to get into the debate. Have a nice night.

As a civilian you can't go to your local gun store and buy an M16

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

Nothing (first choice). Second choice, let’s have an exercise between the first Army and gun owners. Hopefully the owners will see the silliness of the “we have to defend ourselves against the gubberment” when they are rolled up in about 10 mins; this rendering the 2nd Amendment null and void

I'm pretty sure the majority of the Military will refuse to follow an unlawful order to disarm US citizens exercising their constitutional right to bear arms. I know I would have when i served,

This is a lie.

No one is talking about ‘disarming’ anyone.

The point is this: the notion that private citizens armed only with semi-automatic weapons could ‘overthrow’ a government some have incorrectly and subjectively perceive to have become ‘tyrannical’ is idiocy, rendering the ‘argument’ that citizens have a right to possess firearms to ‘fight tyranny’ completely devoid of merit.

That’s why the Heller Court found that the Second Amendment enshrines an individual right, unconnected with militia service, acknowledging the fact that ‘the militia’ have become an anachronism

The ‘Red Dawn’ fantasy is as ridiculous as is wrong.

And the military would indeed follow the lawful order of putting down a lawless insurrection instigated by armed citizens who have incorrectly and subjectively perceived the government to have become ‘tyrannical,’ a government put into place reflecting the will of the majority of the people.

So you don't want to ban certain semi-automatic weapons ?

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

bump stocks aren't allowed at NRA shooting ranges cos they're too "dangerous". Hypocrisy!

Bump stocks are unreliable at best.

 

[candycorn]

The only difference is the 2nd Amendment.

Which makes a dif how?

And the argumentative cul-de-sac the topic leads to shows up.

I'll keep it short and sweet; we have thousands of gun deaths; they have hundreds in Europe. Nearly everything else is equal in terms of culture. The difference is we have the 2nd Amendment and because of it you're able to purchase as many guns as your income allows and there is little if any means of determining if you're responsible enough to handle that much firepower. There is a reason we don't pass out M16s on the first day of boot camp.

Army Boot Camp Timeline At a Glance

Again, it's pointless to get into the debate. Have a nice night.

As a civilian you can't go to your local gun store and buy an M16

Pfft...

The point was that they don't give rifles out to enlistees when their ability to handle the weaponry is still an unknown.

 

[Darkwind]

I'm pretty sure the majority of the Military will refuse to follow an unlawful order to disarm US citizens exercising their constitutional right to bear arms. I know I would have when i served,

This is a lie.

No one is talking about ‘disarming’ anyone.

The point is this: the notion that private citizens armed only with semi-automatic weapons could ‘overthrow’ a government some have incorrectly and subjectively perceive to have become ‘tyrannical’ is idiocy, rendering the ‘argument’ that citizens have a right to possess firearms to ‘fight tyranny’ completely devoid of merit.

That’s why the Heller Court found that the Second Amendment enshrines an individual right, unconnected with militia service, acknowledging the fact that ‘the militia’ have become an anachronism

The ‘Red Dawn’ fantasy is as ridiculous as is wrong.

And the military would indeed follow the lawful order of putting down a lawless insurrection instigated by armed citizens who have incorrectly and subjectively perceived the government to have become ‘tyrannical,’ a government put into place reflecting the will of the majority of the people.

Nothing in this reply is factual, correct, or even born of a tenacious grasp of reality.

Well, the key part of my response to the OP was "hopefully the owners will see the silliness of the "we have to defend ourselves against...." nonsense. Because I think a great many of them buy the NRA talking points and regurgitate them without giving their veracity a second thought.

You saw this after Sandyhook when they laughably blamed video games and movies for school shootings when the same games and movies are sold world wide. Thankfully and predictably, they've moved away from that hysteria and are now trying to blame over the counter drugs for massacres. In a few months, they will blame daylights savings time or the Hawaii volcanoes; anything except too many guns in the hands of too many persons who are not responsible gun owners.

It is laughable to blame guns at all.

The silliness of 'having to defend ourselves against"? What utter nonsense. Did you hear about the animal (no really, that is his gang nickname) who brutally stabbed a teenager to death and taunted him while doing it? It was part of this animal's initiation into MS-13.

I am curious as to the type of cowardice that remarks that "you can't take on our government with arms" as if defending your right to survive and live free of a tyrannical government hinged on being able to fortell winning that engagement.

When the Founding generation took on the most powerful nation on the planet to win their freedom from them, they didn't fight knowing they would win. They fought because they were right. They would have rightly called anyone who would not fight for fear of losing a 'Coward'.

The comment above that I made spoke to the falseness of the “rallying cry” that you have to defend yourself from the government.

As for the “blame”, I don’t really want to get into it because we all know where it will end but….deep breath….there are dozens of advanced nations that have a very minute fraction of our gun deaths and they enjoy as much freedom as we do. They have the same books, magazines, movies, video games, tabloids, etc and they have a much more militaristic recent past than we do; industrial scale violence is not a hypothetical to these people; their fathers and mothers experienced it on their homeland.

The only difference is the 2nd Amendment.

Nothing false about this rallying cry. History shows us that governments corrupt. The Second Amendment is not valid because a government WILL go tyrannical, it is valid because it MIGHT go corrupt. I could spend hours debating the nuance of that, but I think it would be a waste of time on My part.

No, that is NOT the only difference. Just like any country in any metric you wish to apply, each country is unique in its culture, beliefs, and values.

Other countries have had the desire for self-defense trained out of them. Americans have not. If you wish to live in a passive country, go for it.

Besides, the problem is nowhere near the big crisis you people make it out to be.

 

[candycorn]

This is a lie.

No one is talking about ‘disarming’ anyone.

The point is this: the notion that private citizens armed only with semi-automatic weapons could ‘overthrow’ a government some have incorrectly and subjectively perceive to have become ‘tyrannical’ is idiocy, rendering the ‘argument’ that citizens have a right to possess firearms to ‘fight tyranny’ completely devoid of merit.

That’s why the Heller Court found that the Second Amendment enshrines an individual right, unconnected with militia service, acknowledging the fact that ‘the militia’ have become an anachronism

The ‘Red Dawn’ fantasy is as ridiculous as is wrong.

And the military would indeed follow the lawful order of putting down a lawless insurrection instigated by armed citizens who have incorrectly and subjectively perceived the government to have become ‘tyrannical,’ a government put into place reflecting the will of the majority of the people.

Nothing in this reply is factual, correct, or even born of a tenacious grasp of reality.

Well, the key part of my response to the OP was "hopefully the owners will see the silliness of the "we have to defend ourselves against...." nonsense. Because I think a great many of them buy the NRA talking points and regurgitate them without giving their veracity a second thought.

You saw this after Sandyhook when they laughably blamed video games and movies for school shootings when the same games and movies are sold world wide. Thankfully and predictably, they've moved away from that hysteria and are now trying to blame over the counter drugs for massacres. In a few months, they will blame daylights savings time or the Hawaii volcanoes; anything except too many guns in the hands of too many persons who are not responsible gun owners.

It is laughable to blame guns at all.

The silliness of 'having to defend ourselves against"? What utter nonsense. Did you hear about the animal (no really, that is his gang nickname) who brutally stabbed a teenager to death and taunted him while doing it? It was part of this animal's initiation into MS-13.

I am curious as to the type of cowardice that remarks that "you can't take on our government with arms" as if defending your right to survive and live free of a tyrannical government hinged on being able to fortell winning that engagement.

When the Founding generation took on the most powerful nation on the planet to win their freedom from them, they didn't fight knowing they would win. They fought because they were right. They would have rightly called anyone who would not fight for fear of losing a 'Coward'.

The comment above that I made spoke to the falseness of the “rallying cry” that you have to defend yourself from the government.

As for the “blame”, I don’t really want to get into it because we all know where it will end but….deep breath….there are dozens of advanced nations that have a very minute fraction of our gun deaths and they enjoy as much freedom as we do. They have the same books, magazines, movies, video games, tabloids, etc and they have a much more militaristic recent past than we do; industrial scale violence is not a hypothetical to these people; their fathers and mothers experienced it on their homeland.

The only difference is the 2nd Amendment.

Nothing false about this rallying cry. History shows us that governments corrupt. The Second Amendment is not valid because a government WILL go tyrannical, it is valid because it MIGHT go corrupt. I could spend hours debating the nuance of that, but I think it would be a waste of time on My part.

No, that is NOT the only difference. Just like any country in any metric you wish to apply, each country is unique in its culture, beliefs, and values.

Other countries have had the desire for self-defense trained out of them. Americans have not. If you wish to live in a passive country, go for it.

Besides, the problem is nowhere near the big crisis you people make it out to be.

You've swallowed the gun lobby nonsense hook, line, and sinker.
Perhaps the reason that you don't have as many gun nuts in Europe is because you don't need armed intervention as much. Give it some thought if you wish...

Have a good weekend.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

No its the prefatory clause it's just an introduction, the operative clause is the functional part of the 2nd Amendment "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed",

Oh, no. You are, Causeless and, Clueless, about, the Necessaryness of the wellness of, Regulation. We have no security issues. We have a 2nd, Amendment, of the Whole people socialized, which cannot be infringed when serving in the standing army of the State.

Did I get that right and correctly fuck up the use of commas, danielpalos a/k/a Sanchito?

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

The only difference is the 2nd Amendment.

Which makes a dif how?

And the argumentative cul-de-sac the topic leads to shows up.

I'll keep it short and sweet; we have thousands of gun deaths; they have hundreds in Europe. Nearly everything else is equal in terms of culture. The difference is we have the 2nd Amendment and because of it you're able to purchase as many guns as your income allows and there is little if any means of determining if you're responsible enough to handle that much firepower. There is a reason we don't pass out M16s on the first day of boot camp.

Army Boot Camp Timeline At a Glance

Again, it's pointless to get into the debate. Have a nice night.

As a civilian you can't go to your local gun store and buy an M16

Pfft...

The point was that they don't give rifles out to enlistees when their ability to handle the weaponry is still an unknown.

Are you saying there should be some sort of test before you can own a firearm ?

 

[danielpalos]

We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems.

The 2nd Amendment has magical powers to prevent security issues. Praise Odin.

why have a right to keep and bear Arms, right wingers.

Because the Constitution, the ultimate law of the land states, I have the right to. End of conversation

The express purpose for that right, is in the first clause.

No its the prefatory clause it's just an introduction, the operative clause is the functional part of the 2nd Amendment "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed",

Only Congress may write words on formerly blank pieces of paper and them enacted as laws in our Republic.

Our Constitution is Express, not Implied; and clearly Expresses what is Necessary to the security of a free State. It is Not, implied.

 

[basquebromance]

if I die in a school shooting...

"I will never get my first kiss" - Cameron Kasky

"make sure no one else does" - Elio Ranaldo

"send my body to Paul Ryan with a price tag on it" - David Hogg

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

if I die in a school shooting...

...I contributed to the greater good by reducing the global population.

 

[kaz]

Actually they are crystal clear to people with higher literacy levels than you evidently possess

Is that the best you can do? Are you telling me that you are about to put an entire industry of Legal Scholars out of work? If only you could.

Yes, they are incompetent, leftist idiots. The 10th says that if the power is not ENUMERATED (a vocabulary word for you to look up) in the Constitution, than it is specifically a power denied the Federal government.

What about that is unclear to you?

And the 9th says that makes them no less of rights than powers specifically withheld from the Federal government in the Bill of Rights and other amendments.

What about that is unclear to you?

Most of what the Federal government does now is Unconstitutional

Then take it up in court. Or take it up in the States. If it's true you do have options. That is, if you are right.

Or you can just take up our time and bitch about it.

Oh stop whining. And yeah, go to the criminals and tell them to decide. Tell me about some times that worked for you

It's not me that's whining. I am stating fixes. You are just whining that nothing works but "More Guns". That has never been the answer. Even in combat, a well trained and disciplined unit will almost always defeat a larger less disciplined unit. The idea is to shoot the enemy not each other.

Gawd, more whining. Stop being such a girl, Shirley. And saying my argument is "more guns" is a lie. I never said that

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Only Congress may write words on formerly blank pieces of paper and them enacted as laws in our Republic.

And ONLY the United States Supreme Court can declare those laws unconstitutional. Quit "appealing to ignorance of" the Heller decision.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Our Constitution is Express, not Implied; and clearly Expresses what is Necessary to the security of a free State. It is Not, implied.

Our Supreme Court decisions are also EXPRESS, and I suggest you re-read Heller. I will try to get a Spanish version of the holding.

 

[kaz]

I'm pretty sure the majority of the Military will refuse to follow an unlawful order to disarm US citizens exercising their constitutional right to bear arms. I know I would have when i served,

I'm sure a week in the stockade and a bad conduct discharge would discourage that kind of shit.

Reminiscing again joe?

 

[danielpalos]

Only Congress may write words on formerly blank pieces of paper and them enacted as laws in our Republic.

And ONLY the United States Supreme Court can declare those laws unconstitutional. Quit "appealing to ignorance of" the Heller decision.

We have a Ninth Amendment. Our federal Constitution is one of Express powers. The first clause of our Second Amendment clearly expresses what is Necessary to the security of a free State.

 

[danielpalos]

Our Constitution is Express, not Implied; and clearly Expresses what is Necessary to the security of a free State. It is Not, implied.

Our Supreme Court decisions are also EXPRESS, and I suggest you re-read Heller. I will try to get a Spanish version of the holding.

Only Congress can do that; and they have Constitutional limits.

 

[Richard-H]

Congress should pass an amendment that does not reverse, but instead clarifies the 2nd amendment right to own guns.

It should allow the federal government, states and local governments to place limits on who can own guns and what types of guns can be owned.

It would pretty much just restate the current defacto status of gun laws and regulations - except that the federal government could create limitations that would apply nationally..