What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

When 2nd Amendment Saves Lives

OP
S

Stryder50

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2021
Messages
1,593
Reaction score
942
Points
918
Location
Lynden, WA, USA
This thread is about the 2ndammendment dumb ass. Quit whining about the vaccine. Grow up and get the shot, you big baby.
I've already got the covid and got over it you ninny.
Reread you post #82 above where you claim our guv'mint doesn't steal power and try to gain reading comprehension that I just gave an example of where they have.
Thanks for your input fascist nazi.
 

westwall

LET'S GO BRANDON!
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
75,566
Reaction score
31,553
Points
2,290
Location
Nevada
As I've always said, background checks currently have no registration component. No reason why they should.



They all do. There you go lying again.
 

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
92,758
Reaction score
32,151
Points
2,250
That's the problem. Lots of morons read it, but are too stupid to know what it says.

You were looking in the mirror when you posted that….
 

Batcat

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2020
Messages
2,790
Reaction score
2,660
Points
1,938
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.






Well I am just referring to how some likes to quote the 2nd amendment. Yes, the supreme court has taken up the issue but it is the government that regulates who can have a gun and who cannot have a gun. It is the government that set the rules.

It is not the 2nd amendment.

The government allows individual owners to have guns. It set rules for who can legally own a gun. It also set rules for who cannot legally own a gun. I do not have a problem with that as it is the law.

I am just tired of the 2nd amendment argument being used to justify gun ownership.

It really is a LIBERAL interpretation of the 2nd amendment and when the argument can be made that it is legal to own a gun based on the laws that are on the book which specifically clarifies it.
Well we have another gun rights case coming before the Supreme Court. The ruling will be interesting to say the least.

 

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
64,041
Reaction score
21,861
Points
2,250
Location
In a Republic, actually
the government has stolen that power,,

the 2nd doesnt need interpreted since its written in simple english even a moron can read,,
The only thing moronic is the wrongheaded notion that the Second Amendment isn’t subject to interpretation by the Supreme Court.
 

progressive hunter

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
34,964
Reaction score
18,648
Points
1,915
The only thing moronic is the wrongheaded notion that the Second Amendment isn’t subject to interpretation by the Supreme Court.
nothing to interpret,, its clear as to the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE and since the 9-10th A are clear as to the people,,
well its pretty clear its the peoples right and authority,,

now I have pointed to 3 things in the constitution that make it clear its the people can you show me anything that says different??

otherwise your premise is a lie
 

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
64,041
Reaction score
21,861
Points
2,250
Location
In a Republic, actually
It is the government that set the rules.

It is not the 2nd amendment.
Not exactly.

Government is at liberty to regulate firearms pursuant to Second Amendment jurisprudence; government may not regulate firearms in violation of that case law.
 

frigidweirdo

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
35,599
Reaction score
4,534
Points
1,130

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
64,041
Reaction score
21,861
Points
2,250
Location
In a Republic, actually
Got it. You don't think the supreme court interprets our laws.
Which is why it’s pointless to discuss the Second Amendment with conservatives – another example of the right’s contempt for the rule of law.
 

progressive hunter

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
34,964
Reaction score
18,648
Points
1,915
Not exactly.

Government is at liberty to regulate firearms pursuant to Second Amendment jurisprudence; government may not regulate firearms in violation of that case law.
case law doesnt apply to the constitution as stated in the constitution, only an amendment can change it,,

so once again your premise is a lie,,
 

frigidweirdo

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
35,599
Reaction score
4,534
Points
1,130
Well we have another gun rights case coming before the Supreme Court. The ruling will be interesting to say the least.



The case is about whether guns are protected outside of homes.

The reality is, they're not really.

The 2nd Amendment protects the right to own a weapons. (Keep arms). This doesn't regulate what you can do with the gun beyond being able to obtain then (buy and sell).

It also protects the right to be in the militia (bear arms). Beyond this it has no scope.
 

Batcat

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2020
Messages
2,790
Reaction score
2,660
Points
1,938
Go buy a bullet proof vest then.....
Why? I live in Florida. Over 2,000,000 residents have concealed weapons permits and it is legal to have a loaded firearm in your car if it is securely encased (e.g. in a glove box).

Almost everybody I know is armed and has a firearm with them either legally concealed legally or in their car when they leave their house.
 

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
64,041
Reaction score
21,861
Points
2,250
Location
In a Republic, actually
rights are not laws dumbass,,,

why are you ignoring my proof??

the 2nd A is specific as to the RIGHT OF PEOPLE and as you can read in the 9-10th A's the government state or fed has no say and the PEOPLE have the authority,,
Nonsense.

Measures are enacted by government in accordance with Constitutional case law; that case law instructs government as to what measures are valid and what measures are not, what limits and restrictions on our rights are lawful and what limits and restrictions are not.

With regard to the Second Amendment, government may enact laws requiring a background check, consistent with the Second Amendment.

Government may not enact laws prohibiting the possession of a handgun, in violation of the Second Amendment.

That these simple, fundamental facts of governance must be explained at all on a political discussion forum is ridiculous.
 

progressive hunter

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
34,964
Reaction score
18,648
Points
1,915

The case is about whether guns are protected outside of homes.

The reality is, they're not really.

The 2nd Amendment protects the right to own a weapons. (Keep arms). This doesn't regulate what you can do with the gun beyond being able to obtain then (buy and sell).

It also protects the right to be in the militia (bear arms). Beyond this it has no scope.
WTF???
keep and bear have nothing to do with the militia or it would say that,,

you mother fuckers amaze me with the shit you come up with,,,
 

progressive hunter

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
34,964
Reaction score
18,648
Points
1,915
Nonsense.

Measures are enacted by government in accordance with Constitutional case law; that case law instructs government as to what measures are valid and what measures are not, what limits and restrictions on our rights are lawful and what limits and restrictions are not.

With regard to the Second Amendment, government may enact laws requiring a background check, consistent with the Second Amendment.

Government may not enact laws prohibiting the possession of a handgun, in violation of the Second Amendment.

That these simple, fundamental facts of governance must be explained at all on a political discussion forum is ridiculous.
I noticed you skipped over providing any proof like I did,,,
it can only mean your premise is a lie,,
 

frigidweirdo

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
35,599
Reaction score
4,534
Points
1,130
rights are not laws dumbass,,,

why are you ignoring my proof??

the 2nd A is specific as to the RIGHT OF PEOPLE and as you can read in the 9-10th A's the government state or fed has no say and the PEOPLE have the authority,,

Oh, this is precious. This is one of those posts you want to put up on the wall to show people when you want to make them laugh.

Rights came from the Magna Carta when King John was messing things up. The rights weren't for all people, but for those with power. It was a way of taking power away from the monarch and giving it to the lords of the country.

Rights have changed, but they're still laws. They just happen to be higher laws than other laws. They need much more consensus to be changed, and they can be changed.

The 2A is the "right of the people".... yes, but who enforces this right? Who enforces any law? The courts, the police, the armed forces, the people (if they can be bothered). They're the same, except that to change a Constitutional Right you need a huge majority of states, and the federal government, rather than a simple majority of Congress.
 

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
64,041
Reaction score
21,861
Points
2,250
Location
In a Republic, actually
regulation is not infringement.
Correct.

As long as government acts in accordance with applicable case law, no rights are ‘infringed.’
 

progressive hunter

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
34,964
Reaction score
18,648
Points
1,915
Oh, this is precious. This is one of those posts you want to put up on the wall to show people when you want to make them laugh.

Rights came from the Magna Carta when King John was messing things up. The rights weren't for all people, but for those with power. It was a way of taking power away from the monarch and giving it to the lords of the country.

Rights have changed, but they're still laws. They just happen to be higher laws than other laws. They need much more consensus to be changed, and they can be changed.

The 2A is the "right of the people".... yes, but who enforces this right? Who enforces any law? The courts, the police, the armed forces, the people (if they can be bothered). They're the same, except that to change a Constitutional Right you need a huge majority of states, and the federal government, rather than a simple majority of Congress.
rights dont need enforced they can only be violated,,,

you mother fuckers are amazing,, I dont know how youre still alive,,
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$295.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top