The wording of the 2nd amendment states the people's rights to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. If the 14th amendment precludes the States from "make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States." If that is the case, how can a State "infringe" on my right to carry a firearm. I'm not talking about making me get a CCW permit as infringing, NYC states I have to have a reason THEY approve of.
Easy. The 2nd amendment is a restriction on the federal government stating that the federal government can't infringe, not a right granted by the federal government that can't be infringed. As much as I dislike it, the states, cities and such have always infringed on this right.
The document says nothing about restrictions by just the feds, it says the rights of the people cannot be infringed.
Its amazing you are arguing in favor of government power.
And btw, if this is all a snark attempt by a libertarian trying to be all smart, go **** yourself. We have enough fake assholes on this site.
No sir. First off that's not even close to what I said.
Second, these ten amendments include declaratory clauses and restrictive clauses.
THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.
You should read the entire transcript for the bill of rights amendments, not just the amendments. The restrictive clauses in the bill of rights apply restrictions to the federal government not to the states, except and unless it states that the restriction applies to the states. More particularly the 10th stated that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." IOW if they 2nd amendment were to be applied to the feds and the states as you so imagine, then the 2nd would have had to say "shall not be infringed by congress or the states." But clearly it does not and clearly the states have been restricting our right to keep and bear arms before, during, and after the bill of rights were signed into law.
I'm not being a fake asshole, I'm a gun proponent that's telling you a fact about the 2nd amendment that not to many understand.
If it isn't in the document, what bearing does it have besides a view into intent, which is debatable.
And if you are not a fake, then you are not a libertarian by any stretch of the imagination. You are a statist. Not as bad as Farkey over there, but in the same ballpark.
Uhmm, listen nimrod, can I call you nimrod? Not only is it in the document, I quoted the document. Not only does the portion I cited have bearing, it is also well understood that the bill of rights are not really a listing of rights but rather a listing of restrictive clauses that apply to the federal government to restrict the power of the federal government.
I know it's hard to believe that you don't know everything about such an important document, but there it is nonetheless.
I'm not a statist. Not by any measure.
Do you have a right to keep and bear arms? Yes. That is a natural right. That natural right can't be taken from you by the federal government, per the 2nd amendment. However, each individual state, and cities, and private owners can restrict this right within their jurisdiction.
Do I like that states can do this? No. But that's why we have a republic. Do I like that individual can restrict it within their property? Yes within reason.
