Thread: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224:1119]

Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian

You've no clue. By your logic, it's an unconstitutional gun ban to restrict the public from buying 20MM helicopter-capable chain guns.

well if you had actually read about 400 posts of mine on the subject you would know that I think the issue involves individual arms and a 20MM chain gun is a crew served weapon. and btw there is actual constitutional support for arguing the federal government has no business restricting someone owning a chain gun as opposed to the silly comments that civilians ought to be limited to stuff of lesser grade than civilian police have

magazine limits

bans on select fire carbines

waiting periods

limits on how many guns you can buy in a month

are all blatant violations of the clear meaning of the 2A because the 2A is a limitation on what the government can do that does not change on what civilians can buy today, or tomorrow or next year or in a decade

Originally Posted by TurtleDude

well if you had actually read about 400 posts of mine on the subject you would know that I think the issue involves individual arms and a 20MM chain gun is a crew served weapon. and btw there is actual constitutional support for arguing the federal government has no business restricting someone owning a chain gun as opposed to the silly comments that civilians ought to be limited to stuff of lesser grade than civilian police have

magazine limits

bans on select fire carbines

waiting periods

limits on how many guns you can buy in a month

are all blatant violations of the clear meaning of the 2A because the 2A is a limitation on what the government can do that does not change on what civilians can buy today, or tomorrow or next year or in a decade

Your opinion is unsupported by the documentation of the period when the Bill of Rights was ratified, although I'm sure you will have some guys who say otherwise.

Originally Posted by Somerville

Your opinion is unsupported by the documentation of the period when the Bill of Rights was ratified, although I'm sure you will have some guys who say otherwise.

ever read Sanford Levinson's "THE EMBARRASSING SECOND AMENDMENT"

tell me what in the constitution actually was intended by the FOUNDERS to allow federal gun control powers.

Can you find a single shred of documentation that supports federal gun control powers from that era

don't bother looking it doesn't exist

Originally Posted by TurtleDude

ever read Sanford Levinson's "THE EMBARRASSING SECOND AMENDMENT"

tell me what in the constitution actually was intended by the FOUNDERS to allow federal gun control powers.

Can you find a single shred of documentation that supports federal gun control powers from that era

don't bother looking it doesn't exist

How can we compare the views of the Founding Fathers as neither Federalists or anti-Federalists believed the nation should support a "standing army" and inasmuch as the Founders lived in a very different world, it is difficult to state whether or not the Founders intended for Americans to have all the firearms they wish. We live in a very different world.

Are you in favour of eliminating the Army and the Air Force? The Navy and Marines were seen as essential defence elements in the 18th C. but not an army.

Originally Posted by Somerville

How can we compare the views of the Founding Fathers as neither Federalists or anti-Federalists believed the nation should support a "standing army" and inasmuch as the Founders lived in a very different world, it is difficult to state whether or not the Founders intended for Americans to have all the firearms they wish. We live in a very different world.

Are you in favour of eliminating the Army and the Air Force? The Navy and Marines were seen as essential defence elements in the 18th C. but not an army.

can you actually find a singe speech, letter, note or document from that time that even hints that the founders wanted the federal government to have a power over the private arms of private citizens and concurrent with the police powers of the "several states"? find me one. The last person I asked this to merely cited Article One Section 8 which was of course a complete failure

Originally Posted by TurtleDude

can you actually find a singe speech, letter, note or document from that time that even hints that the founders wanted the federal government to have a power over the private arms of private citizens and concurrent with the police powers of the "several states"? find me one. The last person I asked this to merely cited Article One Section 8 which was of course a complete failure

John Adams, DEFENCE OF THE CONSTITUTIONS OF THE UNITED STATES

To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws.

I'll ask again: Are you in favour of eliminating the Army and the Air Force? The Navy and Marines were seen as essential defence elements in the 18th C. but not an army. Standing armies were viewed as weapons used by governments/rulers to control their citizenry.

Originally Posted by Somerville

John Adams, DEFENCE OF THE CONSTITUTIONS OF THE UNITED STATES

uh that says nothing about the federal government having a power over what private citizens owning guns in their own private homes.

Originally Posted by Somerville

I'll ask again: Are you in favour of eliminating the Army and the Air Force? The Navy and Marines were seen as essential defence elements in the 18th C. but not an army. Standing armies were viewed as weapons used by governments/rulers to control their citizenry.

this is a thread about federal gun control being legitimate not other issues.