View Poll Results: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

Voters
75. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    15 20.00%
  • No

    59 78.67%
  • Not sure

    1 1.33%
Page 116 of 136 FirstFirst ... 1666106114115116117118126 ... LastLast
Results 1,151 to 1,160 of 1352

Thread: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

  1. #1151
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:22 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,910

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    I'm not skipping over anything, I'm looking for what applies.

    Obviously the first two words do not apply (unless you're exaggerating things for political reasons) to gun restrictions such as requiring licenses, mag size limits, etc..
    And why is that?


    None of that actually means the right to keep and bear is broken or violated (although perhaps the last MIGHT apply if you stretched things a bit).
    The first two are the most common usage. They apply perfectly and you have given us no reason not connected to political ideology or belief or simply outright denial why they do not apply.



    However, we then reach the 3rd meaning listed, "transgressed", and that word quite definitely applies to the situation.
    Only if one insists on removing the first two first more common usage definitions, ignoring them for political reasons and focusing only on the third to produce a result that runs contrary to the common usage of the day.

    Depending on how you view things, of course, you might say that anything less than absolutely unfettered access to any and all "arms" counts as "infringed".
    That is an ideological and political position not based on the definition provided giving the most common usage of the day.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  2. #1152
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Down in the holler
    Last Seen
    03-17-15 @ 08:44 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,212

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    People would not be allowed to have firearms.
    Hm, so the only possible way congress could violate the second amendment would be to create an environment in which having firearms is not allowed (i.e. a total ban on firearms)? Am I understanding you correctly?

  3. #1153
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:22 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,910

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Green Man View Post
    Hm, so the only possible way congress could violate the second amendment would be to create an environment in which having firearms is not allowed (i.e. a total ban on firearms)? Am I understanding you correctly?
    The extent to which the Court would declare the right would be INFRINGED would have to be made by the Courts after accepting legal challenges. The DC case was one such example. Effectively, the DC law prohibited the practical use of the most popular firearm in normal use by citizens all over the nation - the handgun. That went too far and caused the right to be infringed since it created an environment where large numbers of normal Americans in DC could not use the most common weapon which would normally be available to them.

    My personal opinion is that there is some middle ground between NO GOVERNMENT REGULATION and COMPLETE BAN OF ALL FIREARMS. Obviously a complete ban on all firearms would cause the right to be INFRINGED. But something short of that like in the DC handgun law also had that same effect.
    Last edited by haymarket; 10-21-14 at 09:35 AM.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  4. #1154
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,701

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Green Man View Post
    Hm, so the only possible way congress could violate the second amendment would be to create an environment in which having firearms is not allowed (i.e. a total ban on firearms)? Am I understanding you correctly?
    That is what he has said in the past. He also has said that if you own one firearm and thus can enjoy your rights under the 2A it is hard to conceive of the government doing anything that would infringe that right. SO the answer to your question is YES



  5. #1155
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,701

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    The extent to which the Court would declare the right would be INFRINGED would have to be made by the Courts after accepting legal challenges. The DC case was one such example. Effectively, the DC law prohibited the practical use of the most popular firearm in normal use by citizens all over the nation - the handgun. That went too far and caused the right to be infringed since it created an environment where large numbers of normal Americans in DC could not use the most common weapon which would normally be available to them.

    My personal opinion is that there is some middle ground between NO GOVERNMENT REGULATION and COMPLETE BAN OF ALL FIREARMS. Obviously a complete ban on all firearms would cause the right to be INFRINGED. But something short of that like in the DC handgun law also had that same effect.
    but this claim contradicts your position that there is no individual right and that the 2A only involves those in the militia.



  6. #1156
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,701

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    There really is no intellectually sound middle position. EITHER THE 2A prohibits federal action or it does not. And more importantly, either the federal government was granted a specific and clear power or it was not. The obvious answer to the latter is NO and the fact that FDR and his toads violated the Tenth Amendment and mutated the commerce clause is why we have all these silly and dishonest attempts to limit the restrictions recognized by the 2A. If the FDR schmucks had not have grabbed improper power for the Federal government, there would be no reason for the gun haters to be engaging in such silly parsing the 2A's language



  7. #1157
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles area
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 01:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,868

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    but this claim contradicts your position that there is no individual right and that the 2A only involves those in the militia.
    Exactly. One minute, as here, he's the soul of moderation, recognizing that individual Americans have the right to keep and bear arms, and protesting that he only wants reasonable restrictions on that right. But the next minute, he is railing that Scalia willfully misinterpreted the Second Amendment, that it obviously meant the right to pertain only to militias, and that nothing ever gave individuals any right to keep and bear arms.

    Of course I would never call that kind of stratagem intellectual dishonesty. But I think some people might.

  8. #1158
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,701

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Exactly. One minute, as here, he's the soul of moderation, recognizing that individual Americans have the right to keep and bear arms, and protesting that he only wants reasonable restrictions on that right. But the next minute, he is railing that Scalia willfully misinterpreted the Second Amendment, that it obviously meant the right to pertain only to militias, and that nothing ever gave individuals any right to keep and bear arms.

    Of course I would never call that kind of stratagem intellectual dishonesty. But I think some people might.
    Oh I think you're right



  9. #1159
    Advisor Willie Orwontee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cradle of Liberty (obs.)
    Last Seen
    10-07-17 @ 01:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    381

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    No. It is you who have made those claims based on what you call these fundamental principles and wrongly include a belief which cannot be proven as one of them.

    The problem is your own creation and I will not be placed into that ill fighting straight jacket.

    I believe in the American system and the Constitution out of simple and basic pragmatics - it is simply the best system which has the people as the center of power and government and I think that works out best for the nation and its people. I do not have to believe in gods in the sky dispensing rights like so much Halloween candy to costumed toddlers to support America, its people and our form of government.

    Just to come at your position from a different angle, I would like for you to tell us your sentiments on the authenticity / enforceability of many state constitutions.

    You dismiss the thought that the concept of inherent, pre-existing rights can be constitutionally recognized and enforced but plainly by their construction, state constitutions demand this concept to be recognized and enforced.

    Like many others, my state, Pennsylvania, calls out the rights that the people possess in Article I, and declares them inviolate before a single power is conferred and before any branch of the government is created or established and before any governmental acts and duties are authorized, structured and assigned.

    Are these state constitutions invalid because they are based on the concepts of inherent, pre-existing, retained rights that are excepted out of all subsequent grants of power?

    Just in case you want to see what I'm talking about -- PA State Constitution -- Art. I, 21 is how the right to arms is expressed and secured . . .
    I already have a license to own a gun; it's called a birth certificate.

  10. #1160
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:22 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,910

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    but this claim contradicts your position that there is no individual right and that the 2A only involves those in the militia.
    lets review what you have been taught .... what did I say about the Second Amendment and it evolving into an individual right in our discussion on Heller?
    Last edited by haymarket; 10-21-14 at 06:17 PM.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •