• 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!

Why the Second Amendment Exists.

Howard the Duck said:
THE people PLURAL have the right as initially granted by the second amendment.
Click to expand...

And only collective rights to free speech and from unreasonable search and seizure, too?
 
CLAX1911 said:
Lol, he's being ridiculous. People are made up of individuals.
Click to expand...

You have to understand where they come from

first they are left wingers

then they see the NRA and gun owners as the enemy

then they start contemplating what can they do to harass and annoy their enemies

so they start advocating idiotic gun laws that they pretend are motivated by a desire to control crime

then they are confronted by the Second Amendment and those who point out that their schemes are unconstitutional

at that point they start "studying the second amendment" in order to reinterpret it to "allow" the idiocy they wish to visit upon gun owners

sadly they never really go beyond that-which is why their
"interpretations" never make any sense when those "interpretations" are attempted to fit in the rest of the constitutional fabric.
 
Howard the Duck said:
It isn't people mentioned in the second amendment. Rather it's THE people. A group. Plural. You allegedly are a person, one of THE PEOPLE, but you will never be THE PEOPLE.
Click to expand...

But I'm part of the people so yes it applies to me as well as others. Not sure the reasoning behind repeatedly telling me the constitution applies to everybody
 
Slavister said:
There are citizens that own nukes privately?
Click to expand...

I dunno. You claimed they had a right to and you were all worried about it. I thought you would have all the info.
 
Howard the Duck said:
No. If they meant individuals they would have said so. But they didn't.
Click to expand...

So individuals don't have the right to free speech, free exercise of religion or freedom from unreasonable search and seizure?
 
Visbek said:
Is it?

Was she in a militia? Because for some reason, the 2nd Amendment explicitly refers to militias, but not self defense from criminals.

Did the ratifiers want women to carry guns with them all the time? Seems unlikely. Women couldn't vote, certainly weren't eligible for militia or military service, in some cases had limited property rights. I.e. I'm reasonably certain that, to whatever extent original intent matters, this wasn't on the list.

So much for simplicity.
Click to expand...

In 1787 the term "Militia" referred to all white men between 15 and 50 years old. Today that would translate to "All Adults". It was meant to enable free men to defend themselves form all enemies foreign and domestic, which included criminals and tyrannical governments.
 
Rucker61 said:
"Tis true. Rights pre-existed the BOR. If you don't know that, it's understandable why you hold the position you do.
Click to expand...

This is one of those things that you guys will argue forever about. There is nothing anyone can do to educate you and this duck is too smart to waste his precious time. No, thank you. I won't be involved any further. I'm sure you'll pretend that I never left and make up duck dialogue for me in my absence.

Shame on you in advance for that.
 
Howard the Duck said:
You are not a militia.
Click to expand...

It says the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed it never says the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

I don't have to be in the middle Asia because I'm part of the people
 
Rucker61 said:
The Second can't possibly protect the arms of the Militia.
Click to expand...

He completely fabricated some bizarre alternate universe where the Second Amendment doesn't say what it clearly says.

My question is who's going to fall for this stupidity does he buy it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom