Why doesn't the DOJ Civil Rights Division defend the 2nd?

[M14 Shooter]

When it was written in 1791, women, black people and catholics weren't allowed to own guns.

You avoided my question:

Who holds the right which falls under the protection of the 2nd?

Well?

 

[M14 Shooter]

The people IN the militia.

It does not matter how many times yo repeat this lie, it remains a lie.

 

[otto105]

According to the US Department of Justice website "The Civil Rights Division protects the civil and constitutional rights of all people in this country, enforcing the Constitution and federal laws of the United States in pursuit of our founding ideals – fundamental fairness, equal justice, and equal opportunity for all.".

So why doesn't the division litigate against states and other units of government in the defense of the 2nd amendment?

Civil Rights Division

www.justice.gov

Prosecute violations of criminal statutes that prohibit specified acts of interference with federally protected rights and activities

I know:

"the treatment of the Second Amendment as a disfavored right" - Justice Thomas

Maria Buntins does that from Russia.

 

[otto105]

You avoided my question:

Who holds the right which falls under the protection of the 2nd?

Well?

A well regulated militia under the supervision of the government.

 

[M14 Shooter]

A well regulated militia under the supervision of the government.

The text of the 2nd Amendment proves you wrong.
Try again:
Who holds the right which falls under the protection of the 2nd?

 

[otto105]

The text of the 2nd Amendment proves you wrong.
Try again:
Who holds the right which falls under the protection of the 2nd?

A well regulated militia…

 

[Auld Phart]

A well regulated militia…

ever consider reading the entire amendment?

 

[otto105]

ever consider reading the entire amendment?

Hilarious

 

[Auld Phart]

Hilarious

so is your take on the amendment.

learn to read, it doesn't end at the word 'militia'.

 

[otto105]

so is your take on the amendment.

learn to read, it doesn't end at the word 'militia'.

Yes, it’s the part you fuckers miss.

 

[Auld Phart]

Yes, it’s the part you fuckers miss.

we don't miss it. unlike you, we don't have ADD.

NOTHING in the amendment states you are required to belong to a militia to own a firearm.

but, because you stop reading at 'militia', you think it does.

 

[otto105]

we don't miss it. unlike you, we don't have ADD.

NOTHING in the amendment states you are required to belong to a militia to own a firearm.

but, because you stop reading at 'militia', you think it does.

Didn’t post that you add anything fuckup.

You gun/penis wussies omit things.

 

[meaner gene]

we don't miss it. unlike you, we don't have ADD.

NOTHING in the amendment states you are required to belong to a militia to own a firearm.

but, because you stop reading at 'militia', you think it does.

This is where amendments can modify the original sections of the constitution.
Take Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

This means that congress could by law, withdraw their permission for states to have a militia. As congress must give permission for states to "keep troops" in times of peace. Yet give the states permission to engage in war (which requires troops) when they're invaded or in imminent danger.

This means without congresses approval, states couldn't draft or train troops, ahead of an invasion by hostile forces. They would be at the sole mercy of the federal government, and "common defense", for their territorial integrity.

Protecting their own state would be a right you would think the states should have, but could be taken away under the original constitution. But for -- the 2nd amendment, saying a free state needed it's own militia.

 

[Auld Phart]

Didn’t post that you add anything fuckup.

You gun/penis wussies omit things.

You gun/penis wussies omit things.

Look whos' talking!!

you omit the second half of the amendment.

 

[Auld Phart]

This is where amendments can modify the original sections of the constitution.
Take Article 1, Section 10, Clause 3

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

This means that congress could by law, withdraw their permission for states to have a militia. As congress must give permission for states to "keep troops" in times of peace. Yet give the states permission to engage in war (which requires troops) when they're invaded or in imminent danger.

This means without congresses approval, states couldn't draft or train troops, ahead of an invasion by hostile forces. They would be at the sole mercy of the federal government, and "common defense", for their territorial integrity.

Protecting their own state would be a right you would think the states should have, but could be taken away under the original constitution. But for -- the 2nd amendment, saying a free state needed it's own militia.

what does that have to do with the Second giving the right to keep and bear arms to the People?

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

/—-/ How stupid. But we’re used to your posts.

Awwww, as usual...........Can't answer the question.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

You avoided my question:

Who holds the right which falls under the protection of the 2nd?

Well?

The government, dumbass.
They hold all people's rights.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Awwww, as usual...........Can't answer the question.

/—-/ GEEEZE, gun grabber. You’re trying to make the point that the 2nd A only applies to state militias.
In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court affirmed for the first time that the right belongs to individuals, for self-defense in the home,[4]

 

[M14 Shooter]

A well regulated militia…

The text of the 2nd Amendment proves you wrong.
Try again:
Who holds the right which falls under the protection of the 2nd?

 

[M14 Shooter]

The government, dumbass.
They hold all people's rights.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Now I remember why you're on ignore.