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 41 of 136 FirstFirst ... 3139404142435191 ... LastLast
Results 401 to 410 of 1352

Thread: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

  1. #401
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by countryboy View Post
    For one thing, I was posting while driving.

    Just because some dims support gun rights, doesn't mean they don't support other oppressive leftist policies. Beside, leftist 2A "advocates" generally have different ideas about the meaning of, "shall not be infringed".

    As far as Crispy cream being a republican, puh-leeze.

    We'll hafta agree to disagree for now bro. Gotta spend some time with the old lady before nite nite. Take er easy, and have a good night. No hard feelings on my end.
    Of course no hard feelings. Stop posting while driving, or somebody else will be kissing the misses good night!
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  2. #402
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,547

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    I'm defeating your argument that only the Democratic Party is about gun restrictions!
    I never said that, so stop tilting at straw men

    I said every federal gun restriction passed as a statute came from the Democraps



  3. #403
    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 Montecresto View Post
    Well, I just disagree with you. In my estimation, they both are strong arguments.
    Only one has support in the philosophical foundation and the historical and legal record of this nation. The other is of 20th century origin in the federal courts, derived from a perverse legal trick to keep Blacks disarmed in the South. It went like this, . . . Since Blacks were forbidden to serve in the militia, state constitution's right to arms provisions were interpreted by discriminatory state courts to only protect the arms of militia members -- thus laws disarming Blacks were constitutional regardless of Black's citizenship status.

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    The militia clause, lends itself nicely to the collective and the individual right fits nicely with the individual spirit of several of the other amendments.
    And that is a conclusion at odds with foundational constitutional principles (primarily conferred powers and retained rights) and longstanding Supreme Court opinion on the very nature of rights and specifically the right to arms and the 2nd Amendment (two separate, distinct things).

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Frankly, I fail to understand the need for either or.
    Well, the individual right model protects the rights of the citizen by rendering impotent the powers of government and the collective right model conjures powers into being that were never conferred to government for the singular purpose of violating / extinguishing the rights of the citizen.

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Defense, whether police, National Guard or Military is both rational and practical. And defense of ones self is also rational and practical, and, even natural. And nothing or no one should be able to deny that to
    The collective right model denies what you declare rational and practical and natural. The collective right model holds that no citizen has any right to possess and use any arms (even for self defense) outside of a government authorized and organized militia.

    The fundamental flaw the collective right theory is that the right to arms doesn't exist because of what the 2nd Amendment says, (or any particular interpretation of it), it exists because of what the body of the Constitution doesn't say . . .

    The Constitution is a charter of conferred powers and the Government of the United States can only exercise those delegated powers. Government's power and authority is defined and limited by the Constitution and all powers not granted to government by the Constitution are reserved to the States or the people.

    Rights, especially when enumerated like in our Bill of Rights, are "exceptions of powers never granted" which means that all the 2nd Amendment does is redundantly forbid the federal government to exercise powers it was never granted.
    I already have a license to own a gun; it's called a birth certificate.

  4. #404
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,157

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    On the other hand, does "shall not be infringed" mean you get to privately purchase nuclear warheads with no background check?


    Please, let's not be ridiculous. We've gone through this before.


    Under Strict Constitutional Scrutiny, it is easily argued that restricting nukes (and other WMD) is utterly necessary to maintaining the existence and functionality of society. Even if peaceably kept, WMD are inherently dangerous if improperly handled or stored, and incapable of anything but indiscriminate slaughter... therefore use in self-defense or other lawful purposes is all but impossible.

    It is hard enough to argue any legitimate purpose in a State owning WMD, let alone an individual. Let's keep the discussion somewhat within the realm of reason.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  5. #405
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Willie Orwontee View Post
    Only one has support in the philosophical foundation and the historical and legal record of this nation. The other is of 20th century origin in the federal courts, derived from a perverse legal trick to keep Blacks disarmed in the South. It went like this, . . . Since Blacks were forbidden to serve in the militia, state constitution's right to arms provisions were interpreted by discriminatory state courts to only protect the arms of militia members -- thus laws disarming Blacks were constitutional regardless of Black's citizenship status.



    And that is a conclusion at odds with foundational constitutional principles (primarily conferred powers and retained rights) and longstanding Supreme Court opinion on the very nature of rights and specifically the right to arms and the 2nd Amendment (two separate, distinct things).



    Well, the individual right model protects the rights of the citizen by rendering impotent the powers of government and the collective right model conjures powers into being that were never conferred to government for the singular purpose of violating / extinguishing the rights of the citizen.



    The collective right model denies what you declare rational and practical and natural. The collective right model holds that no citizen has any right to possess and use any arms (even for self defense) outside of a government authorized and organized militia.

    The fundamental flaw the collective right theory is that the right to arms doesn't exist because of what the 2nd Amendment says, (or any particular interpretation of it), it exists because of what the body of the Constitution doesn't say . . .

    The Constitution is a charter of conferred powers and the Government of the United States can only exercise those delegated powers. Government's power and authority is defined and limited by the Constitution and all powers not granted to government by the Constitution are reserved to the States or the people.

    Rights, especially when enumerated like in our Bill of Rights, are "exceptions of powers never granted" which means that all the 2nd Amendment does is redundantly forbid the federal government to exercise powers it was never granted.
    I don't understand why you're having difficulty with this. We have a natural individual right of self defense and we have a natural and practical right of collective defense. You and your gun may protect you from a middle of the night intruder, but collectively we need police and military practicing the collective right to bear arms for societal defense. This is really simple, and both positions are solid.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  6. #406
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 06:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,662

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Where did I say that it would? I asked Turtle Dude the question, he seems very knowledgeable on guns.
    OK, it was a presumption. Are you saying you knew it would not depressurize the cabin, since you commented on piercing the fuselage?
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  7. #407
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    OK, it was a presumption. Are you saying you knew it would not depressurize the cabin, since you commented on piercing the fuselage?
    No, I simply asked TD what would happen. He gave a link that said if it struck a window, it would depressurizes the plane in seconds.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  8. #408
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,547

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    No, I simply asked TD what would happen. He gave a link that said if it struck a window, it would depressurizes the plane in seconds.
    if the entire window were to evaporate



  9. #409
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 06:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,662

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by countryboy View Post
    Sorry, but the leftist agenda seeks to control every facet of our lives. The modern liberal / progressive cannot divorce themselves from those policies, which they support.

    I understand the point you are trying to make. I am generally not a fan of blanket statements either, but I do not see any liberals standing up for the cause of liberty and freedom these days. I can no longer give any of them the benefit of the doubt.

    Um...there's a few of us in this thread....backing the 2A unreservedly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  10. #410
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    if the entire window were to evaporate
    I don't know about "evaporate", but unless the Marshall is shooting a 22 caliber pistol, the window is likely to be gone, along with the cabins pressure.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

Page 41 of 136 FirstFirst ... 3139404142435191 ... 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
  •