Second Amenment thoughts

[eldermike]

Why were the Bill of Rights, or the first ten Constitutional amendments, written, anyway? They were written because several states were initially opposed to the Constitution on the grounds that it contained no explicit protection of individual rights. The Bill of Rights were promised in recognition of these legitimate concerns.

The Bill of rights purpose: to limit the powers of government.

 

[Polycarp1]

Take away my liberal card, but I think the Second Amendment pretty much means what it says. I support training and license to carry restrictions as a reasonable restriction that do not infringe upon the right to keep and bear, but that's about it.

Make that two of us.

 

[HollandScotts]

Why are you supporting terrorism? Are you a terrorist?

Only to a facist would defending ones rights and freedom be considered an act of terrorism.

For example, to own and drive a car one must have a license (after taking, usually 2 tests), insurance and registration. Why not with a gun? They are both potentially lethal, yes?

Requiring registration of guns is the first step to confiscation. It's unConstitutional.

/Oh, and who here belongs to a state militia?

No one. Now what does that have to do with the fact that one can be called up anytime once needed?

 

[Sphere]

Only to a facist would defending ones rights and freedom be considered an act of terrorism.

Taking arms against the government--an ideology that militant (and usually racist) extremists hold, is terrorism.

Aside from your use of the word "fascist" being incorrect.

 

[HollandScotts]

Taking arms against the government--an ideology that militant (and usually racist) extremists hold, is terrorism.

So our founding fathers were terrorists?

Aside from your use of the word "fascist" being incorrect.

How so? Facist put race and state before the individual rights and freedom. Anyone who claims taking up arms against the state is terrorism is putting the state before everything because it completely ignores the very good and honorable reasons that people have taken up arms against their governments in the past.

 

[gengwall]

Requiring registration of guns is the first step to confiscation. It's unConstitutional.

Although it might be the first step to confiscation (which would be unconstitutional), it is not in and of itself unconstitutional. It does not infringe on the people's right to have and bear arms.

The court in this case is going to come up with a ruling that both sides will claim as victory. They will uphold the individual rights analysis of the amendment but allow reasonable regulation, including licensing, background checks, and restrictions on machine guns, etc. The DC ban will not stand to that scrutiny, but it also will not be completely gutted. My guess is that they will say DC can't universally ban handguns, but they can make you jump through a lot of hoops to own one. The appellee in the case - Mr. Heller - will be the first to jump through those hoops and keep and bear a legal handgun in his home.

 

[Sphere]

So our founding fathers were terrorists?

Ask the British.

Extremist militant groups (classified as domestic terrorists) in the US advocate the taking up arms against the government.

I was just pointing out the irony in....:

The day the slave driving federal bureacracy attempts to take my weapons is the day I'm going down taking out as many feds as I can.

There perhaps is nothing more Anti-American than this filth.

Advocating murder against US citizens/agents while supporting terrorism.

The same kind of senseless violence against US citizens that would make even Osama Bin Laden jump for joy.

 

[BeamMeUpScotty]

Requiring registration of guns is the first step to confiscation. It's unConstitutional.

So you don't have a driver's license or register your car?

 

[Meshavrischika]

So you don't have a driver's license or register your car?

those aren't protected under the amendments. they are a privilege. different animal.

 

[MrJim]

Take away my liberal card, but I think the Second Amendment pretty much means what it says. I support training and license to carry restrictions as a reasonable restriction that do not infringe upon the right to keep and bear, but that's about it.

 

[MrJim]

Ask the British.

Extremist militant groups (classified as domestic terrorists) in the US advocate the taking up arms against the government.

I was just pointing out the irony in....:



There perhaps is nothing more Anti-American than this filth.

Advocating murder against US citizens/agents while supporting terrorism.

The same kind of senseless violence against US citizens that would make even Osama Bin Laden jump for joy.

Guess he decided he's not going to be sheep. Maybe figured there is something worth defending in the constitution and bill o' rights. Maybe figures life is worth protecting. Guess at some point he figures that the government can actually become the enemy of the citizen and when they begin to act on laws deemed unconstitutional then he is standing on the same ground as other people throughout history have stood against tyrannical governments~stood and defended and died, or rolled over, complied, perhaps end up in an "education" camp somewhere...

Anti-American? Hardly seems that way...bet George & Thomas might disagree with ya

 

[Sphere]

There isn't any difference between advocating the murder of US citizens (federal agents) and doing what say....Timothy McVey did.

He carried out a terrorist attack, on a federal building--in retaliation to what he perceived to be "injustices" at Waco.

Kind of like how right wing radicals here, advocate the murder of federal agents for what they perceive to be an "injustice" of the constitution.

I'm going down taking out as many feds as I can.

Here MrJim, see the above? When someone supports the murder of federal agents, then they support the murder of American citizens. Which means they are Anti-American and terrorists. Just like Timothy McVey was. It's a very simple connection to make. This is why many fascist right militias are classified as domestic terrorist organizations.

If these nuts hate America so much, they are entitled to leave.

 

[LonesomeTexan]

Guess he decided he's not going to be sheep. Maybe figured there is something worth defending in the constitution and bill o' rights. Maybe figures life is worth protecting. Guess at some point he figures that the government can actually become the enemy of the citizen and when they begin to act on laws deemed unconstitutional then he is standing on the same ground as other people throughout history have stood against tyrannical governments~stood and defended and died, or rolled over, complied, perhaps end up in an "education" camp somewhere...

Anti-American? Hardly seems that way...bet George & Thomas might disagree with ya

you know the left has gone way too far off the deep end when they advocate fascist gun control measures and are convinced that people who are willing to die for liberty are the real terrorists. if the federal government forcefully comes to take my weapons, I will forcefully defend myself and my constitutional liberty.

 

[GrinningDwarf]

So you don't have a driver's license or register your car?

Where does the Constitution guarantee your right to own a car? Or, to put it in 18th century terms, where is the Constitutional guarantee of the right to own a horse?

 

[CaDan]

There isn't any difference between advocating the murder of US citizens (federal agents) and doing what say....Timothy McVey did.

He carried out a terrorist attack, on a federal building--in retaliation to what he perceived to be "injustices" at Waco.

Kind of like how right wing radicals here, advocate the murder of federal agents for what they perceive to be an "injustice" of the constitution.



Here MrJim, see the above? When someone supports the murder of federal agents, then they support the murder of American citizens. Which means they are Anti-American and terrorists. Just like Timothy McVey was. It's a very simple connection to make. This is why many fascist right militias are classified as domestic terrorist organizations.

If these nuts hate America so much, they are entitled to leave.

I think you are confusing rebels with terrorists. I know the US Code has a rather broad definition of "terrorist" that includes most rebels, but that definition is not particularly helpful.

 

[MrAnteater]

Is that so? You have 3 and a half times the murder rate that we do, 2 and a half times the rate of firearm murders, And 1 and a half times the murder rate with handguns.

http://www.guncontrol.ca/Content/Cda-US.htm

We have gun control.

Or do you attribute this to a different cause? Considering that we're essentially identical culturally, racially and demographically.

Your quoting gun statistics from a gun hating group like that? Hardly a credible source.

The studies I've read come directly from FBI crime data. And the conclusions are unmistakable. Gun gun control has never worked.

 

[MrJim]

There isn't any difference between advocating the murder of US citizens (federal agents) and doing what say....Timothy McVey did.

He carried out a terrorist attack, on a federal building--in retaliation to what he perceived to be "injustices" at Waco.

Kind of like how right wing radicals here, advocate the murder of federal agents for what they perceive to be an "injustice" of the constitution.



Here MrJim, see the above? When someone supports the murder of federal agents, then they support the murder of American citizens. Which means they are Anti-American and terrorists. Just like Timothy McVey was. It's a very simple connection to make. This is why many fascist right militias are classified as domestic terrorist organizations.

If these nuts hate America so much, they are entitled to leave.

I bet King George thought the same thing

 

[AmericanChristian91]

Actually i consider 4 reasons why the 2nd Amendment should stay the way it is.

1. Guns can be used for Self defense.
2. Just in case in the future of the USA a Foreign Army invades.
3. Just in case we have to stand up against the government if they try to take away our freedom and rights.
4. Guns can be used for Sport to.

 

[MrJim]

Here MrJim, see the above? When someone supports the murder of federal agents, then they support the murder of American citizens. Which means they are Anti-American and terrorists. Just like Timothy McVey was. It's a very simple connection to make. This is why many fascist right militias are classified as domestic terrorist organizations.

I recall someone once saying that "a terrorist is what the big army calls the little army"...

 

[Fantine]

Well, if the Supreme Court decision knocks down the Washington, DC gun laws, Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, and Alito will be the most egregious offenders in terms of "legislating from the bench," something talk show hosts often accuse the 'liberals' in the court of doing.

When you take the term "well-regulated militia" and morph it into "any vigilante with an ax to grind" that's some pretty serious legislating from the bench.