would you vote to repeal the 2nd ammendment

[vegas giants]

They didn't specify nuclear weapons.

What kind of arms do you suppose they were talking about?

Any arms of any kind. They were quite clear

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Very very well said. I agree with you and grew up- in the 60's myself: my friend's big brother used to shoot jack rabbits in the field near our house.

You are quite correct; thank you for posting.

LOL thanks for the flowers, it's just my honest recollections.
If I had remembered any instance where anyone said "Oh he has a lot of guns, he's some Right wing a-hole" I would admit to it.

We did KNOW quite a few "right wing a-holes who had tonz o'gunz".
But I honestly didn't see much difference between their gun ownership and the reefer toking motorcycle mechanic guy who listened to the Dead and Hendrix all day long and chanted "Hell NO, we won't GO!", and waxed poetic about Timothy Leary and what not. He had a shotgun, a "Saturday Night Special" (don't remember what kind it actually was) and a couple of old hunting rifles.

And the only thing I remember was "Hey dude, don't **** with my pistol, you don't know what you're doing and don't **** with any man's guns anyway, you dig?"
And as we got older, he never really changed all that much, and he is still pretty much the same guy today except he's an old fart now...still owns the motorcycle shop, too.

Oh yeah, one of the "other guys" worked at the One Hour Martinizing" (dry cleaning) shop in downtown Bethesda.
Hair all the way down his back, in a ponytail, smoked weed with us sometimes after work, commuted all the way to Bethesda and back every day from Martinsburg, West (by God) Virginia where he had bought a cute little house for him and his gorgeous hippie girl wife.
He kept an old revolver under the counter of the dry cleaners.
This guy was about as "PEACE and ANTI-WAR" as it got.
His FATHER (who threw him out of the house at sixteen because of his hair!) played an instrumental role in the overthrow of Salvador Allende, through his job at the CIA. (Bethesda MD IS "spook central" in case you didn't know)
I suspect that played a large role in his political views.

Far as I know, he now OWNS the dry cleaners and is still there every day.
NRA MADE guns political, and that's about when I let my membership there lapse, too.
The Charlton Heston regime is when all that crap really started in earnest.

 

[rocket88]

is that an arm a citizen would normally keep and BEAR and is it an arm useful for self defense? People who ask questions like this are generally not serious and if they are-it proves they don't understand that the underlying natural right that the second is based upon is the right of self defense. Nukes are not useful for self defense

Perhaps, but it is not specified. Self-defense is not mentioned in the 2nd Amendment.

 

[rocket88]

I did NOT say that.

Here's what I actually said:

They never said firearms. The words firearm, gun or self defense are not there.

 

[rocket88]

there is no document from any founder that even remotely hints that any of them thought the federal government should have any say. But since the right recognized in the second was designed to cement and guarantee the natural right of self defense, one can honestly state that weapons that are designed to destroy areas are not self defensive weapons that citizens would keep and bear

The right was put there because citizen militias were the primary defense of the nation. There was no standing army at that time. Thus, militias are mentioned, self-defense is not.

 

[TurtleDude]

Perhaps, but it is not specified. Self-defense is not mentioned in the 2nd Amendment.

doesn't matter-if you study constitutional history and theory, there is no doubt that the inalienable right that the founders believed existed-since the dawn of man-was the natural right of self defense. So when anti gun types try to pretend that if one says the government cannot ban AR 15s you must also support the right to own nukes, we know they are dishonest or clueless.

read this-it is well written though the host site will bother many

Why can't I own nuclear weapons? The Second Amendment guarantees it! [THREAD THREE]

 

[TurtleDude]

The right was put there because citizen militias were the primary defense of the nation. There was no standing army at that time. Thus, militias are mentioned, self-defense is not.

so you are claiming that a right-a right the founders believed existed since the dawn of man-requires membership in a government directed organization to exist?

 

[vegas giants]

They never said firearms. The words firearm, gun or self defense are not there.

It's quite clear that they said arms. They could have easily firearms....and did not

 

[vegas giants]

I agree as written, the Second Amendment is very ambiguous, and contains too many commas (3). . . Understandably, this creates a lot of confusion.

I propose it be rewritten so it is crystal clear to ALL Americans, not just the Constitutional Law experts.

It should read something like this:

Each individual's Right to buy, sell, possess, transfer, and carry firearms shall not be infringed IN ANY WAY.

Any Lawmaker who proposes infringements of this Right shall be impeached, convicted, and removed from office.

So my 4 year old can then carry in.preschool.....right?

 

[SkyChief]

So my 4 year old can then carry in.preschool.....right?

As long as the preschool permits it.

Most don't.

 

[Irredentist]

so you are claiming that a right-a right the founders believed existed since the dawn of man-requires membership in a government directed organization to exist?

Technically a militia doesn't have to be a government directed organization. The founders emphasized a philosophy which deeply distrusted standing armies. In their eyes, most likely self defense and defense of the state were the same thing.

 

[rocket88]

so you are claiming that a right-a right the founders believed existed since the dawn of man-requires membership in a government directed organization to exist?

Not at all, what i'm saying is that ownership of firearms is not meant to be completely unlimited and unregulated.

It doesn't say self-defense and it doesn't say firearms. It says arms, and nukes are certainly a form of arms. I'm all in favor of limiting citizen access to nuclear arms, and i'm in favor of certain regulation of any weaponry.

 

[rocket88]

As long as the preschool permits it.

Most don't.

Why does the preschool have the right to disallow it?

 

[vegas giants]

As long as the preschool permits it.

Most don't.

So.preschools can restrict my constitutional rights??? Can they not admit the black kids???

 

[vegas giants]

Why does the preschool have the right to disallow it?

My point exactly. He is already carving out gun control exceptions

 

[TurtleDude]

Not at all, what i'm saying is that ownership of firearms is not meant to be completely unlimited and unregulated. 1

It doesn't say self-defense and it doesn't say firearms. It says arms, and nukes are certainly a form of arms. I'm all in favor of limiting citizen access to nuclear arms, and i'm in favor of certain regulation of any weaponry.2

1. the founders saw the states as having the proper power to regulate the use of firearms

2. The founders saw weapons as being in one of three classes

arms-individual weapons

ordnance-bombs, grenades, petards or rockets

artillery-cannons, howitzers and mortars

 

[Irredentist]

Not at all, what i'm saying is that ownership of firearms is not meant to be completely unlimited and unregulated.

It doesn't say self-defense and it doesn't say firearms. It says arms, and nukes are certainly a form of arms. I'm all in favor of limiting citizen access to nuclear arms, and i'm in favor of certain regulation of any weaponry.

I think it's doubtful that heavy weaponry was what the founders had in mind when they referred to "arms". In the classical sense, arms refers to weapons that you can carry with your arms. Hence the name.

 

[vegas giants]

Not at all, what i'm saying is that ownership of firearms is not meant to be completely unlimited and unregulated.

It doesn't say self-defense and it doesn't say firearms. It says arms, and nukes are certainly a form of arms. I'm all in favor of limiting citizen access to nuclear arms, and i'm in favor of certain regulation of any weaponry.

I think if the founders wanted it restricted to firearms they would have said firearms

 

[vegas giants]

I think it's doubtful that heavy weaponry was what the founders had in mind when they referred to "arms". In the classical sense, arms refers to weapons that you can carry with your arms. Hence the name.

Like nuclear arms?

 

[Irredentist]

Like nuclear arms?

Nuclear weapons aren't "arms" in the classical sense, as the founders would have understood them. Arms historically were weapons that you carried with your arms. Not artillery or things of that nature.

 

[rocket88]

I think it's doubtful that heavy weaponry was what the founders had in mind when they referred to "arms". In the classical sense, arms refers to weapons that you can carry with your arms. Hence the name.

Probably not. They orobably didn't have semi-automatic assault rifles in mind either.

 

[vegas giants]

Nuclear weapons aren't "arms" in the classical sense, as the founders would have understood them. Arms historically were weapons that you carried with your arms. Not artillery or things of that nature.

The founders knew what firearms meant. They could have said that but chose not to. They clearly meant any arms

 

[rocket88]

Nuclear weapons aren't "arms" in the classical sense, as the founders would have understood them. Arms historically were weapons that you carried with your arms. Not artillery or things of that nature.

So what if i could carry a nuckear bomb in my arms? Like a suitcase nuke.

 

[Drawdown]

I've been engaging with a poster that believes the 2a should be repealed. So, what say you? Would you vote to repeal the 2nd amendment? yes or no

Not repeal and nothing more. If it were a repeal and replace maybe depending on what the replace said.

 

[SkyChief]

My point exactly. He is already carving out gun control exceptions

The Second Amendment prohibits Congress from infringing on the right of the People to keep and bear arms - not preschools.

Any establishment may refuse to admit someone who is armed. Even Courts and State buildings may refuse armed people from entering buildings. And so can preschools.