• 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!

[W:112, 773]The Gun Show "Loophole"

RaleBulgarian said:
“How one bears their arms”? What does that mean? Whether they hold their firearm in their left or right hand? Slung over the shoulder? Tucked inside the waistband?
Click to expand...

Correct. Everyone has the right to bear their arms in any manner they please, including concealed, without requiring a government issued permit. All Concealed Carry Permits are a violation of the Second Amendment and need to be abolished.
 
Glitch said:
Correct. Everyone has the right to bear their arms in any manner they please, including concealed, without requiring a government issued permit. All Concealed Carry Permits are a violation of the Second Amendment and need to be abolished.
Click to expand...
SCOTUS disagrees with you.

“Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf
 
RaleBulgarian said:
SCOTUS disagrees with you.

“Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf
Click to expand...

First, nobody has ever argued that the Second Amendment was unlimited. That is a false assumption. Second, the Supreme Court has a serious reading comprehension problem, because the phrase "shall not be infringed" in the Second Amendment does indeed mean that government has absolutely no authority to be telling me how I should carry my firearms. Any government restrictions or limitations in how I keep and bear arms is an infringement. Before the Supreme Court incorporated the Second Amendment among the States with their McDonald decision in 2010 the States could put whatever restrictions and limitations on firearms they liked, since the Second Amendment only applied to the federal government and not the States. However, since 2010 the States are bound by the same restrictions as the federal government with regard to the Second Amendment. That phrase "shall not be infringed" in the Second Amendment has applied to the States now since 2010, and many States continue to violate the Second Amendment nonetheless.
 
Glitch said:
In Alaska everyone can carry a concealed firearm, no permit required. However, Alaska does issue CCPs for reciprocity purposes. So if I were to fly to Texas, for example, I could obtain a CCP from Alaska (no tests required) which Texas will recognize. The reciprocity is strictly one way, since Texas has numerous restrictions on its firearms that Alaska doesn't have. California, on the other hand, does not have reciprocity with any other State with regard to CCPs.

Any restrictions or limitations on how one bears their arms is an infringement and therefore a violation of the Second Amendment.
Click to expand...

Why do ***YOU*** think Alaska is the top state for violent crime when it has amongst the country's most liberal gun laws ?
 
Glitch said:
First, nobody has ever argued that the Second Amendment was unlimited. That is a false assumption. Second, the Supreme Court has a serious reading comprehension problem, because the phrase "shall not be infringed" in the Second Amendment does indeed mean that government has absolutely no authority to be telling me how I should carry my firearms. Any government restrictions or limitations in how I keep and bear arms is an infringement. Before the Supreme Court incorporated the Second Amendment among the States with their McDonald decision in 2010 the States could put whatever restrictions and limitations on firearms they liked, since the Second Amendment only applied to the federal government and not the States. However, since 2010 the States are bound by the same restrictions as the federal government with regard to the Second Amendment. That phrase "shall not be infringed" in the Second Amendment has applied to the States now since 2010, and many States continue to violate the Second Amendment nonetheless.
Click to expand...
When you’re sitting on the high court, your opinion will matter. For now, it doesn’t. Not even a little. ;)
 
TypicalRussian said:
The same reason why people argue men cant make laws on Abortion
Click to expand...

I'm lost, what reason is that ?


Would your "argument" stretch to only slave owners can have a opinion on slavery ?

Or only pedophiles hold an opinion on child porn ?
 
Rich2018 said:
I'm lost, what reason is that ?


Would your "argument" stretch to only slave owners can have a opinion on slavery ?

Or only pedophiles hold an opinion on child porn ?
Click to expand...

No, I am not agreeing with it, but seing that you are liberal, this argument is used A LOT
 
Casper said:
I thought Liberals believe that everyone's opinion counts? Hmmm, being a Liberal I disagree with that train if thought.
Click to expand...
What gives you the mistaken impression that I’m a liberal?
 
Rich2018 said:
What is hypocritical ?

What do they do different than what they say ?
Click to expand...

MEn cant have an opinion because it doesnt effect them

Non gun owners cant have an opinion because it doenst effects them
 
TypicalRussian said:
MEn cant have an opinion because it doesnt effect them
Click to expand...

Depends if the fetus about to be aborted is male


Non gun owners cant have an opinion because it doenst effects them
Click to expand...


10,000 homicides and 70,000+ injuries a year would seem to disprove that
I think it's a fair assumption that some of those tens of thousands weren't gun owners.
 
Rich2018 said:
Depends if the fetus about to be aborted is male





10,000 homicides and 70,000+ injuries a year would seem to disprove that
I think it's a fair assumption that some of those tens of thousands weren't gun owners.
Click to expand...

its fair to assume the millions of dead babies were male
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom