What weapons does the 2nd protect? - Page 4

Goobieman · 06-27-08, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iriemon

I addressed the question asked. The 2A logically read provides the right to bear anything that are "arms", everything on the list, and more.

So you agree that, as per the arguments laid down in this decision, the 2nd protects all firearms, from hanguns and shoguns, thru assault rifles to machineguns such as the the M60 and M2HB.

Good to hear!

DeeJayH · 06-27-08, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iriemon

Trying to devine what the original founders had in mind is to some extent an exercise in futility. They passed the second amendment in an environment where most folks were part of the organized militia (which the founders deemed so crucial that they noted in the Amendment itself that a well regulated militia was necessary to the security of a free state) and in which arms consisted of single shot muskets that had to be manually reloaded after every shot. It is doubtful they could have conceived of an environment where no organized militia existed and "arms" can include things like machine guns and missles.

If you interpret the amendments based on its words, the right provided is the right to "bear arms". Logically, anything you can be armed with falls within the paramaters of the right. That would include any kind of projectile weapon, grenades, satchel charges, RPGs, AA missles, etc.

aren't you the one that mocked me for saying 'we need to take into account the mindset and the times in which the Founding Fathers lived.'
to which you retorted, 'you will keep that in mind next time we debated the constitution?'

innnnnnteresting

Iriemon · 06-27-08, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goobieman

So you agree that, as per the arguments laid down in this decision, the 2nd protects all firearms, from hanguns and shoguns, thru assault rifles to machineguns such as the the M60 and M2HB.

Good to hear!

I'm hard pressed to find a good argument that those are not "arms". Whether you can read the amendment without consideration of its original intent in applying it today is another matter. But looking at the language itself, those weapons, and hand gernades, shoulder fired missiles and RPGs and things like that are all things someone can be armed with and are arms.

Goobieman · 06-27-08, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iriemon

But looking at the language itself, those weapons, and hand gernades, shoulder fired missiles and RPGs and things like that are all things someone can be armed with and are arms.

How do these weapons not fall under the catrgory of "dangerous and unusual weapons" that the court considers outside the protection of the 2nd?

Iriemon · 06-27-08, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeeJayH

aren't you the one that mocked me for saying 'we need to take into account the mindset and the times in which the Founding Fathers lived.'
to which you retorted, 'you will keep that in mind next time we debated the constitution?'

innnnnnteresting

How was that mocking you, and how does that apply to the present discussion?

Iriemon · 06-27-08, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goobieman

How do these weapons not fall under the catrgory of "dangerous and unusual weapons" that the court considers outside the protection of the 2nd?

Are we talking about what the 2dA says or what we think the Court says it says? The 2A says the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. It says nothing that you can infringe the right to bear arms for dangerous and unusual arms.

If we use that as a basis upon which the 2dA shall be infringed, why is a maching gun not dangerous, and why is a hand grenade unusual?

Goobieman · 06-27-08, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iriemon

Are we talking about what the 2dA says or what we think the Court says it says?

I asked you a question. You're not asnwering it.

How do "hand gernades, shoulder fired missiles and RPGs" not fall under the catrgory of "dangerous and unusual weapons" that the court considers outside the protection of the 2nd?

Iriemon · 06-27-08, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goobieman

I asked you a question. You're not asnwering it.

How do "hand gernades, shoulder fired missiles and RPGs" not fall under the catrgory of "dangerous and unusual weapons" that the court considers outside the protection of the 2nd?

How should I know? Ask the court. I have no idea what it means by "dangerous and unusual weapons." That's one of the typically wonderfully vague phrases it uses so it can do whatever it wants.

Goobieman · 06-27-08, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iriemon

How should I know?

So, you plead ignorance on the subject.
Fair enough.

Lightdemon · 06-27-08, 04:45 PM

Perhaps you should have defined "dangerous and unusual weapons" first before asking that question.

What about a fork? It could be dangerous. And certainly unusual, as I don't think weapon when I hear the word "fork."

So how about giving the definition of the phrase, "dangerous and unusual" before you demand an answer for it.