With gun violence down, is America arming against an imagined threat?

[Mom]

So now that several people have pointed out the errors of your thesis you are ready to admit you are wrong?

If you want to hunt and need a gun, fine. But to say that you need it in case you get attacked by the US army, then you're *******

The 2A is not about hunting.

I know, making you all because you think you need a pea shooter to defend yourself against the US army who are going to attack you, not maybe attack you, actually attack you. Any dumber than that and you'd vote for Mitt Romney and his magic underwear.

 

[The Rabbi]

If you want to hunt and need a gun, fine. But to say that you need it in case you get attacked by the US army, then you're *******

The 2A is not about hunting.

I know, making you all because you think you need a pea shooter to defend yourself against the US army who are going to attack you, not maybe attack you, actually attack you. Any dumber than that and you'd vote for Mitt Romney and his magic underwear.

How is that even a response to what I wrote.
Do you think the 2A only protects guns for hunting?

 

[Uncensored2008]

I know, making you all because you think you need a pea shooter to defend yourself against the US army who are going to attack you, not maybe attack you, actually attack you. Any dumber than that and you'd vote for Mitt Romney and his magic underwear.

You're not just dumb, you're del dumb......

 

[Spoonman]

So to you losers, the 2nd amendment is to protect you in case you get attacked by the US army?

****, are you stupid.

Madison... the guy who introduced the 2nd Amend to the 1st Congress on June 8, 1789 thought so, just read Federalist #46. In fact, he postulated that the federal army would not stand a chance. I tend to agree with Madison.

I can see where the 2nd was needed BACK IN 1776! But seriously, today it's not needed for that reason. Stop living in the past. You can take your powdered wig off now.

i can see where we need it more today. back in 1776, legislators worked for the people. today they work for themselves and spoecial interests.

 

[Spoonman]

I can see where the 2nd was needed BACK IN 1776! But seriously, today it's not needed for that reason. Stop living in the past. You can take your powdered wig off now.

You forget that the constitution is a religious and divine document written by gods. It is perfect and divine and was dreamt up by angels who knew that the military-style submachine gun would one day be invented.

It is not like the bible, some parts of which are obviously outdated and need to be re-interpreted to meet 21st century thinking.

you forget that it is our divine document, not yours. you worry about what finland does and stop trying to change our world.

 

[Mom]

Madison... the guy who introduced the 2nd Amend to the 1st Congress on June 8, 1789 thought so, just read Federalist #46. In fact, he postulated that the federal army would not stand a chance. I tend to agree with Madison.

I can see where the 2nd was needed BACK IN 1776! But seriously, today it's not needed for that reason. Stop living in the past. You can take your powdered wig off now.

i can see where we need it more today. back in 1776, legislators worked for the people. today they work for themselves and spoecial interests.

So you're seriously saying that you need guns in case you need to fight the US army? **** man, stupidity like that is mind-boggling!

 

[Spoonman]

I can see where the 2nd was needed BACK IN 1776! But seriously, today it's not needed for that reason. Stop living in the past. You can take your powdered wig off now.

i can see where we need it more today. back in 1776, legislators worked for the people. today they work for themselves and spoecial interests.

So you're seriously saying that you need guns in case you need to fight the US army? **** man, stupidity like that is mind-boggling!

that is the intent of the 2nd amendment. that the public be as strong as the central government. if that were the case we wouldn't be in the mess we are in today. Madison knew what he was talking about.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I can see where the 2nd was needed BACK IN 1776! But seriously, today it's not needed for that reason. Stop living in the past. You can take your powdered wig off now.

You forget that the constitution is a religious and divine document written by gods. It is perfect and divine and was dreamt up by angels who knew that the military-style submachine gun would one day be invented.

It is not like the bible, some parts of which are obviously outdated and need to be re-interpreted to meet 21st century thinking.

you forget that it is our divine document, not yours. you worry about what finland does and stop trying to change our world.

Never mind that, with regard to the 2nd, the 21s century saw the two most signficant interpretations of the constitution.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So you're seriously saying that you need guns in case you need to fight the US army? **** man, stupidity like that is mind-boggling!

If it comes to fighting, the Army ain't going to be on your side, stupid.

Why the **** would the Army, sworn to uphold the Constitution, side with you in your war to end the Constitution?

Look, you're not stupid because you're a leftist - you're a leftist because you're stupid.....

 

[Mom]

So you're seriously saying that you need guns in case you need to fight the US army? **** man, stupidity like that is mind-boggling!

If it comes to fighting, the Army ain't going to be on your side, stupid.

Why the **** would the Army, sworn to uphold the Constitution, side with you in your war to end the Constitution?

Look, you're not stupid because you're a leftist - you're a leftist because you're stupid.....

Where did I say that I'm trying to end the constitution? And why would the US army fight Americans? You probably shouldn't hit the still so early in the day.

 

[Spoonman]

So you're seriously saying that you need guns in case you need to fight the US army? **** man, stupidity like that is mind-boggling!

If it comes to fighting, the Army ain't going to be on your side, stupid.

Why the **** would the Army, sworn to uphold the Constitution, side with you in your war to end the Constitution?

Look, you're not stupid because you're a leftist - you're a leftist because you're stupid.....

Where did I say that I'm trying to end the constitution? And why would the US army fight Americans? You probably shouldn't hit the still so early in the day.

they have in the past. what is to stop them now?

 

[Mom]

If it comes to fighting, the Army ain't going to be on your side, stupid.

Why the **** would the Army, sworn to uphold the Constitution, side with you in your war to end the Constitution?

Look, you're not stupid because you're a leftist - you're a leftist because you're stupid.....

Where did I say that I'm trying to end the constitution? And why would the US army fight Americans? You probably shouldn't hit the still so early in the day.

they have in the past. what is to stop them now?

Seriously, put the 'shine down. You going to fight the army to get your slaves back?

 

[The Rabbi]

I can see where the 2nd was needed BACK IN 1776! But seriously, today it's not needed for that reason. Stop living in the past. You can take your powdered wig off now.

i can see where we need it more today. back in 1776, legislators worked for the people. today they work for themselves and spoecial interests.

So you're seriously saying that you need guns in case you need to fight the US army? **** man, stupidity like that is mind-boggling!

So do you think the 2A only protects hunting?

 

[Spoonman]

Where did I say that I'm trying to end the constitution? And why would the US army fight Americans? You probably shouldn't hit the still so early in the day.

they have in the past. what is to stop them now?

Seriously, put the 'shine down. You going to fight the army to get your slaves back?

you don't know history very well do you? tell me, which statement do you believe is true today

We control the government

The government controls us

 

[Uncensored2008]

Where did I say that I'm trying to end the constitution?

So, you didn't even know that the second amendment is in the Constitution?

You've never even seen a copy of the Constitution, have you? I mean, it's obvious you've never read it, but you've not even glanced at it, have you?

And why would the US army fight Americans? You probably shouldn't hit the still so early in the day.

You're abysmally stupid. Again, the army has zero incentive to back the Obamunists in your bid to end civil rights and the Constitutional Republic. At this point, Obama is too crippled to even spawn the civil war that you lust for.

Look, you're not stupid because you're a leftist - you're a leftist because you're stupid.....

 

[Spoonman]

Where did I say that I'm trying to end the constitution?

So, you didn't even know that the second amendment is in the Constitution?

You've never even seen a copy of the Constitution, have you? I mean, it's obvious you've never read it, but you've not even glanced at it, have you?

And why would the US army fight Americans? You probably shouldn't hit the still so early in the day.

You're abysmally stupid. Again, the army has zero incentive to back the Obamunists in your bid to end civil rights and the Constitutional Republic. At this point, Obama is too crippled to even spawn the civil war that you lust for.

Look, you're not stupid because you're a leftist - you're a leftist because you're stupid.....

i think mom has been running for the shelter of her mothers little helper far too often

 

[FA_Q2]

I can see where the 2nd was needed BACK IN 1776! But seriously, today it's not needed for that reason. Stop living in the past. You can take your powdered wig off now.

i can see where we need it more today. back in 1776, legislators worked for the people. today they work for themselves and spoecial interests.

So you're seriously saying that you need guns in case you need to fight the US army? **** man, stupidity like that is mind-boggling!

Whether or not it is stupid is irrelevant. Whether or not they are crazy is irrelevant. What is relevant is what the second amendment states. It confers the right to own and bear arms. Period. That you want such changed is also irrelevant unless you are attempting to pass another amendment. All this talk about passing more laws in order to do an end run around the constitution is pathetic. The reasons for wanting to bear arms does not matter. The only thing that matters is that the right is there and it must be upheld until such time that another amendment changes the second.

 

[legaleagle_45]

I can see where the 2nd was needed BACK IN 1776! But seriously, today it's not needed for that reason. Stop living in the past. You can take your powdered wig off now.

Which is a great reason to seek to repeal the 2nd Amend, it is not a valid reason to ignore the 2nd Amend.

Here is what you need to do.

1.) Convince 2/3rds of the US Senate to pass a proposed amendment repealing the 2nd Amend; and,

2.) Convince 2/3rds of the US House to pass a proposed amendment repealing the 2nd Amend; and,

3.) After completing steps 1 and 2 in the same Congress, have 38 states agree to ratify the proposed amendment and you are done...

Quite simple really and laid out clearly in Article V of the Constitution. You might call Harry Reid as now that the Senate has rejected all major gun control legislation for this year, they should have time on their hands to consider your proposal.

I am certain that Harry will be thriilled with your proposal and will insist that it be the centerpeice of the Democrats mid term election strategy... I can see the slogan now:

ELECT A DEM AND REPEAL PART OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS... HOPE AND CHANGE WE CAN BE SCARED OF!!!

 

[Mom]

i can see where we need it more today. back in 1776, legislators worked for the people. today they work for themselves and spoecial interests.

So you're seriously saying that you need guns in case you need to fight the US army? **** man, stupidity like that is mind-boggling!

Whether or not it is stupid is irrelevant. Whether or not they are crazy is irrelevant. What is relevant is what the second amendment states. It confers the right to own and bear arms. Period. That you want such changed is also irrelevant unless you are attempting to pass another amendment. All this talk about passing more laws in order to do an end run around the constitution is pathetic. The reasons for wanting to bear arms does not matter. The only thing that matters is that the right is there and it must be upheld until such time that another amendment changes the second.

I'm not for outlawing guns completely, that would make no sense and would never happen. But in my view, the 2nd amendment doesn't say you can own any guns, however many you want...
Plus, repealing the 2nd amendment doesn't necessarily outlaw guns, the constitution would just be silent on guns, like it is on cars, or boats, or Bic pens.

 

[legaleagle_45]

But in my view, the 2nd amendment doesn't say you can own any guns, however many you want...

What it says is this:

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.

Plus, repealing the 2nd amendment doesn't necessarily outlaw guns, the constitution would just be silent on guns, like it is on cars, or boats, or Bic pens.

It would be a necessary first step if you wished to pass laws outlawing guns.