• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights?

What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights?

  • A license/permit required to exercise certain or all 1st amendment rights

    Votes: 5 15.6%

  • A license/permit required to exercise certain or all 2nd amendment rights

    Votes: 18 56.3%

  • Registration requirement of some or all of your books and other 1st amendment related things

    Votes: 2 6.3%

  • Registration requirement of some or all of your firearms and other weapons.

    Votes: 26 81.3%

  • A ban on certain books,religions, what the press can report and etc.

    Votes: 3 9.4%

  • A ban on certain weapons.

    Votes: 19 59.4%

  • A ban on certain individuals from exercising 1st amendment rights

    Votes: 3 9.4%

  • A ban on certain individuals form exercising 2nd amendment rights

    Votes: 16 50.0%

  • A total ban on 1st amendment rights

    Votes: 2 6.3%

  • A total ban on 2nd amendment rights

    Votes: 3 9.4%
  • Total voters
    32
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

Well, as it turns out, I have yet to respond to this thread...

What first comes to mind when seeing the poll question, namely:
What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights?
Click to expand...
The first thought I have is "None!", but I shall proceed to examine each possible poll answer.
I take it as a given that there are as many opinions as to what those two amendments mean/are meant to mean/restrict/whatever as there are people.
Mine will be partially displayed here.

A license/permit required to exercise certain or all 1st amendment rights
Click to expand...
No. Not a good idea. I would think the majority of US citizens are of the opinion that any infringement on 1st amendment rights is a bad thing.
A license/permit required to exercise certain or all 2nd amendment rights
Click to expand...
Now, here I think some very limited permit/license might be useful. Punishing violent criminals by taking away their rights to some or all weapons seems reasonable.
Restrictions based on mental conditions seems a very gray area to me.
All other persons should have no restrictions, at most a 5ish min background check to ensure they are not a violent criminal, after which they can purchase the weapon.
Restrictions on who can carry concealed seem another gray area. What part of the constitution supports such?
Restrictions on how one can store, transport, and otherwise deal with a firearm they own seem another gray area. What part of the constitution supports such?
Registration requirement of some or all of your books and other 1st amendment related things
Click to expand...
No. But I am sure some people want to restrict books that describe some things (what specific things depends on the person). Books never hurt anyone, but people getting ideas from books might. Is that the books fault? Or the persons?
Registration requirement of some or all of your firearms and other weapons.
Click to expand...
While I am opposed to this in some respects, the idea of preventing violent criminals from legally owning firearms seems reasonable, so a quick check to see if you are one...
A ban on certain books, religions, what the press can report and etc.
Click to expand...
No. Blatant violation of 1st amendment.
A ban on certain weapons.
Click to expand...
Possibly a violation of the 2nd amendment. Opinions on what the 2nd amendment's wording mean are many and varied.
A ban on certain individuals from exercising 1st amendment rights
Click to expand...
No. That would probably violate several other amendments, not to mention the 1st.
A ban on certain individuals form exercising 2nd amendment rights
Click to expand...
As noted above, I find the removal of the firearm ownership right from violent criminals seems reasonable. Any other limitation would need very careful examination.
Additionally, the precise meaning of "2nd amendment rights" is constantly in dispute, if not in the courts, in the minds and thoughts of many persons.
A total ban on 1st amendment rights
Click to expand...
Nah, that would probably violate the 1st amendment.../sarcasm
A total ban on 2nd amendment rights
Click to expand...
Nah, that would probably violate the 2nd amendment.../sarcasm
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

The Mark said:
While I am opposed to this in some respects, the idea of preventing violent criminals from legally owning firearms seems reasonable, so a quick check to see if you are one...
Click to expand...

How would a firearm registration prevent a violent criminal from owning a firearm? Wouldn't a violent criminal get his gun from a private owner or through illegals means?
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

jamesrage said:
How would a firearm registration prevent a violent criminal from owning a firearm? Wouldn't a violent criminal get his gun from a private owner or through illegal means?
Click to expand...
Well, possibly, although some might try to buy one, which is why I said:

The Mark said:
While I am opposed to this in some respects, the idea of preventing violent criminals from legally owning firearms seems reasonable, so a quick check to see if you are one...
Click to expand...
Bold blue emphasis added...
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

repeter said:
You know, we should go watch a movie together sometime. I might feel like yelling, "fire" and if you happen to die in a stampede...well, I was inside my 1st amendment rights ;)
Click to expand...

That isn't an exercise of your 1st amendment rights. That is milicious mischief and rendering of a false alarm. Both of which are punishable by jail time.

If somebody dies as a result, then it's a felony punishable by a life sentence (in most states).
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

Vader said:
That isn't an exercise of your 1st amendment rights. That is milicious mischief and rendering of a false alarm. Both of which are punishable by jail time.

If somebody dies as a result, then it's a felony punishable by a life sentence (in most states).
Click to expand...
Kind of. It's actually willful endangerment on face if malicious intent can't be proven. The history of where rights end is pretty interesting though, and the thing most people don't seem to understand is that rights all pretty much end in the same way; Time Place Manner.

For instance, owning an automatic.....no problem; firing it in a crowded theater; major problem. It's the same as yelling fire, if there is no clear and present danger in doing so, such as in a park.....it's harder to prove that the right has ended, but in a crowded building......you cause a stampede and you bet you're then liable criminally and potentially civilly for all damages caused. Probably though, my favorite two tests of the right are fighting words and incitement to riot, but hey, those will come up later if the attempted gun grabbers need more debate to realize they lost.
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

The Mark said:
Well, possibly, although some might try to buy one, which is why I said:

Bold blue emphasis added...
Click to expand...

So basically your idea does not stop criminals from owning firearms and it just gives the government a database which can be used against those who do legally own firearms.
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

Goobieman said:
What, exactly, is the 2nd amendment equivelant to yelling fire in a a theater?
What, exactly, is the 2nd amendment equivelant to slander? Libel?
Click to expand...

Your argument hinges on the notion is that there should be an equivalent restriction for every amendment Not every action has equivalent reactions. That is a fallacy.

Walking around drunk in public will not carry the same equivalent punishment as driving drunk. Kidnapping a person will not have the same equivalent punishment as car jacking.

Murdering somebody does not have an equivalent punishment in robbery. People who steal $100,000,000 will not get the same punishment as somebody who kills 10 people.

Different issues. Different restrictions, laws, 'infringements'.

Your argument is a fallacy. The 1st amendment and the 2nd amendment carry different restrictions and different laws around them.
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

You know, we should go watch a movie together sometime. I might feel like yelling, "fire" and if you happen to die in a stampede...well, I was inside my 1st amendment rights
Click to expand...

That isn't an exercise of your 1st amendment rights. That is milicious mischief and rendering of a false alarm. Both of which are punishable by jail time.
If somebody dies as a result, then it's a felony punishable by a life sentence (in most states).
Click to expand...

Oh, you mean like if say Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh say something like Obama is coming to get your guns, or that the government is stealing your money, or taking away your freedoms, and someone flies a plane into or blows up a federal building because of it? Yea, I get it.
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

How would a firearm registration prevent a violent criminal from owning a firearm? Wouldn't a violent criminal get his gun from a private owner or through illegal means?
Click to expand...

This is the reason I believe we need to start getting some control over how many guns are out there flooding the market. I believe the safety of the people is pushed aside for the profits of the gun runners and they're using the constitution and scare tactics to push their product. If every gun sold was licensed to an owner, and some responsibility taken for owning a gun, it would eventually become more difficult for violent criminals, gang members, and burgulers to get their hands on one. If we would have started this years ago, we'd all be much safer now.
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

jacksbrat said:
This is the reason I believe we need to start getting some control over how many guns are out there flooding the market. I believe the safety of the people is pushed aside for the profits of the gun runners and they're using the constitution and scare tactics to push their product. If every gun sold was licensed to an owner, and some responsibility taken for owning a gun, it would eventually become more difficult for violent criminals, gang members, and burgulers to get their hands on one. If we would have started this years ago, we'd all be much safer now.
Click to expand...
So until that mythical time when guns are all gone we'll just have to put up with armed criminals killing law-abiding unarmed people at will, I guess.

Brilliant idea. :roll:
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

Coronado said:
So until that mythical time when guns are all gone we'll just have to put up with armed criminals killing law-abiding unarmed people at will, I guess.

Brilliant idea. :roll:
Click to expand...

False choice. We can restrict guns from getting in the hands of the bad guys more than we do now, without restricting them from getting into the hands of good guys.
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

misterman said:
False choice. We can restrict guns from getting in the hands of the bad guys more than we do now, without restricting them from getting into the hands of good guys.
Click to expand...
How precisely would we do that?
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

Coronado said:
How precisely would we do that?
Click to expand...

I'll let others get into the detailed proposals. Sorry to punt but I can't get too dragged into this one.
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

misterman said:
I'll let others get into the detailed proposals. Sorry to punt but I can't get too dragged into this one.
Click to expand...
Have you never heard of arms dealers before? It doesn't matter what you try, there is a black market for everything, drugs are illegal but guess what, they are everywhere. Guns for certain people are illegal and guess what.....they have them. So what exactly the **** do you think will eliminate the black market?
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

LaMidRighter said:
Have you never heard of arms dealers before? It doesn't matter what you try, there is a black market for everything, drugs are illegal but guess what, they are everywhere. Guns for certain people are illegal and guess what.....they have them. So what exactly the **** do you think will eliminate the black market?
Click to expand...

You're using the same false choice.

By your logic, we should give up on all laws, since they can be broken sometimes.
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

jacksbrat said:
This is the reason I believe we need to start getting some control over how many guns are out there flooding the market. I believe the safety of the people is pushed aside for the profits of the gun runners and they're using the constitution and scare tactics to push their product.
Click to expand...
The funny thing about the United States is that we're free to pursue happiness and do as we please as long as it doesn't infringe upon the rights of others, that is the common limit of every single right, so no matter what you think, the right exists. No matter what your opinion is of what should be, the constitution exists, don't like it too bad.
If every gun sold was licensed to an owner, and some responsibility taken for owning a gun, it would eventually become more difficult for violent criminals, gang members, and burgulers to get their hands on one. If we would have started this years ago, we'd all be much safer now.
Click to expand...
False throughout, and I have a right to own a gun, not a priveledge, I do not need a license to own firearms, and am not required to register them because it is a right, not a priveledge.
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

misterman said:
You're using the same false choice.

By your logic, we should give up on all laws, since they can be broken sometimes.
Click to expand...
Laws cannot legally infringe upon rights, therefore the only choice is to default against laws which are in direct violation of the constitution unless they are necessary and proper, which means they must have a provable need, provide a provable and undeniable utility, and they must not infringe upon the rights of those who are in good standing as citizens. Your idea of an option fails on all fronts.
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

LaMidRighter said:
Laws cannot legally infringe upon rights, therefore the only choice is to default against laws which are in direct violation of the constitution unless they are necessary and proper, which means they must have a provable need, provide a provable and undeniable utility, and they must not infringe upon the rights of those who are in good standing as citizens. Your idea of an option fails on all fronts.
Click to expand...

I think that's the point ;)
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

LaMidRighter said:
Laws cannot legally infringe upon rights, therefore the only choice is to default against laws which are in direct violation of the constitution unless they are necessary and proper, which means they must have a provable need, provide a provable and undeniable utility, and they must not infringe upon the rights of those who are in good standing as citizens. Your idea of an option fails on all fronts.
Click to expand...

Oh, well that settles it.

No, lots and lots of options have been ruled constitutional.
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

jacksbrat said:
This is the reason I believe we need to start getting some control over how many guns are out there flooding the market. I believe the safety of the people is pushed aside for the profits of the gun runners and they're using the constitution and scare tactics to push their product. If every gun sold was licensed to an owner, and some responsibility taken for owning a gun, it would eventually become more difficult for violent criminals, gang members, and burgulers to get their hands on one. If we would have started this years ago, we'd all be much safer now.
Click to expand...

LOL is that hilarious

Every ounce of crack sold in the USA is banned with a five year minimum federal sentence for anything over a few rocks. And its real hard to get crack

Machine guns are heavily regulated. Any machine gun made after 1986 (may 19 to be exact) cannot be owned by non governmental agents unless you are a Class three dealer or TItle II manufacturer with government contracts. And yet gangs have no problems getting those things

Your idiotic scheme is designed to ckeep honest people from getting guns not criminals.

I think I will pass on your suggestions since you clearly know little about the subject

People who are willing to do 20 years for bankrobbery, 25 years for drive by shootings and life for murder aren't going to worry about gun bans, gun laws, gun restrictions, licenses etc. with 300 Million guns in America, most of which are (thankfully) not registered and with the Government (federal state and local) buying hundreds of thousands each year and losing tens of thousands each year, the supply of guns to the people we most want to stop from having them is unlimited.
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

Coronado said:
How precisely would we do that?
Click to expand...

maybe he will dress up in a tutu and tiara and wave his magic wand and spread fairy dust throught the magical kingdom
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

False throughout, and I have a right to own a gun, not a priveledge, I do not need a license to own firearms, and am not required to register them because it is a right, not a priveledge.
Click to expand...

That might be your opinion, but it's not mine. And you know what they say about opinions.

Poor ole Matt Dillion. He didn't have the NRA around to tell him he had no right to make everyone coming into Dodge to check their guns at the livery stable.
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

TurtleDude said:
maybe he will dress up in a tutu and tiara and wave his magic wand and spread fairy dust throught the magical kingdom
Click to expand...
That's what it would take to make his ridiculous fantasy occur.
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

jacksbrat said:
That might be your opinion, but it's not mine. And you know what they say about opinions.
Click to expand...
It's not his opinion, it's the law of the land.
jacksbrat said:
Poor ole Matt Dillion. He didn't have the NRA around to tell him he had no right to make everyone coming into Dodge to check their guns at the livery stable.
Click to expand...
Get some new material.
 
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights

Coronado said:
That's what it would take to make his ridiculous fantasy occur.
Click to expand...

exactly

pillowheaded utopianesque dreamers are part of the Anti-Rights Coaltion.

They are the ones who actually believe that gun control is crime control. People like Josh Sugarmann, Chuck Schumer and Sarah Brady see them as the useful fools of the ARC
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom