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 37 of 136 FirstFirst ... 2735363738394787 ... LastLast
Results 361 to 370 of 1352

Thread: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

  1. #361
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    the government creating an environment where the right could not be exercised. If that happens - then the right has been INFRINGED.
    The Gun Free School Zone Act. The school property is an environment where I cannot exercise my right. Therefore, according you, the Gun Free School Zone Act is an infringement, and I agree.

  2. #362
    Educator
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Last Seen
    10-23-14 @ 02:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    945

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    It is simple reality. Nothing more and nothing less. When modernists use the term INFRINGEMENTS they mean any incremental step in regulation or control. That is NOT what the word INFRINGED means.
    According to Merriam-Webster:

    Full Definition of INFRINGE
    transitive verb
    1: to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another

    Pretty sure that's exactly what they meant.

    I suspect you are confusing the word with 'impinged'.
    We're born alone, we live alone, we die alone. Only through our love and friendship can we create the illusion for the moment that we're not alone.
    - Orson Welles

  3. #363
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:58 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,819

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by countryboy View Post
    Which has already happened many times.

    The amendment says nothing about "creating an environment". Why would you define it that way?
    can you tell me when this happened?
    __________________________________________________ _
    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. #364
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:58 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,819

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by GBFAN View Post
    According to Merriam-Webster:

    Full Definition of INFRINGE
    transitive verb
    1: to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another

    Pretty sure that's exactly what they meant.

    I suspect you are confusing the word with 'impinged'.
    Do you have a link for that definition?
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  5. #365
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:58 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,819

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    The Gun Free School Zone Act. The school property is an environment where I cannot exercise my right. Therefore, according you, the Gun Free School Zone Act is an infringement, and I agree.
    Why do you assume you have a right to take a firearm anywhere you want to even on the property of others?
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  6. #366
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:58 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,819

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    The truly decent people agree.

    Disagreeing is a sign of a...less than decent person.
    That is smugly dishonest. It also is evidence of the very problem I spoke about.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  7. #367
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:58 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,819

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by countryboy View Post
    Again, what is your point?
    To shine the spotlight of TRUTH upon intellectual fraud and dishonesty.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  8. #368
    Sage
    countryboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    17,705

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    To shine the spotlight of TRUTH upon intellectual fraud and dishonesty.
    Such as?

  9. #369
    Educator
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Last Seen
    10-23-14 @ 02:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    945

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Do you have a link for that definition?
    Are you f$$King serious? You can't look it up yourself? Give me a break ...

    It's really easy ... go to Google .. type Merriam-Webster ... go to the first link ... type in the word i-n-f-r-i-n-g-e-d .... read it for yourself.
    We're born alone, we live alone, we die alone. Only through our love and friendship can we create the illusion for the moment that we're not alone.
    - Orson Welles

  10. #370
    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 Unrepresented View Post
    I'm not claiming to be a scholar of court history, but the ACLU usually does fairly well at interpreting them, based on their legal record.
    Well, except for those instances when the ACLU is duplicitously misrepresenting the Court to further a leftist political agenda.

    Either the ACLU is correct or they are lying . . . Either Heller was the first time that the Court said the 2nd Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms without regard to one's state militia attachment, or I'm correct, that the Court recognized the right to bear arms being possessed by two ex-slaves, who were disarmed, kidnapped and lynched by the KKK in 1873 Louisiana, a state that had no state militia.

    There's no interpretation to be done there; the facts be the facts. In referencing the indictment of the KKK members, the Court said:

    "The right there specified is that of "bearing arms for a lawful purpose." This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed, but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress. This is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government, leaving the people to look for their protection against any violation by their fellow citizens of the rights it recognizes, to [the local police]."

    The Court rejected federal court jurisdiction because the KKK members who violated the two Black citizens' right to arms (among many others) were private citizens, not state government agents . . . so the 14th Amendment (and thus the 2nd) didn't apply.

    The Court affirms the principle that the 2nd Amendment is not the source of the right to arms thus the right is not in any manner dependent on the Constitution to exist. That principle, all by itself negates and extinguishes any notion that the right is conditioned, qualified or contingent upon a citizen being a member of the militia.

    That principle was further explained and re-re-re-affirmed by the Heller Court 132 years later:

    "[I]t has always been widely understood that the Second Amendment , like the First and Fourth Amendments, codified a pre-existing right. The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it “shall not be infringed.” As we said in United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 553 (1876) , “[t]his is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed … .”"

    Please don't swallow the ACLU's lie.
    I already have a license to own a gun; it's called a birth certificate.

Page 37 of 136 FirstFirst ... 2735363738394787 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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