Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Gun "rights" are only a scotus decision away from being changed. Gun "rights" are in conjunction with a "well regulated militia" of which I'm sure you are no part of.
You forget that slavery was a "right" until it was legislated out of existence which in time will happen with firearms...the tide is turning against the gun droolers and ammunition fetistists. Your gun rights are becoming as welcome as Ebola or a fart in an elevator.
HAHA. Well, being that every SCOTUS decision in history has supported the 2nd amendment and determined that it is a personal/individual right and has nothing to do with the clause of "well regulated militia" (and you have to understand the historical context and method of writing of that period - I have other threads that explain that, but I doubt you care), I think we are safe. Note that every single court justice, even the most liberal, has supported this decision that it is an individual right. With the only dissention being the scope. The issue of slavery is so unrelated as to not even comment.
Most American's favor some kind of regulation and restrictions on gun ownership, that's already in place in the US to various degrees. But can you name even one politician that favors an outright gun ban? I will give you a hint - the number is ZERO. Because if they did, they would find themselves without a job next election.
Why is there so much irrational hyperbole in your threads? Ebola? Farts? You are not presenting rational arguments. You are embarrassing yourself and that's why you are becoming a forum punching bag. Note that there are plenty of rational posters that can argue the "increased gun regulation" debate. Even they are not helping you here.
falling TV's kill more children every year than guns...so do:
Misdiagnosed medicine
malpractice
Automobiles
slips and falls
You might want to actually look up the meaning at the time of "well regulated militia"...it means well ARMED! The next sentence clearly say, the RIGHT of the PEOPLE to bear arms shall NOT be infringed.
falling TV's kill more children every year than guns...so do:
Misdiagnosed medicine
malpractice
Automobiles
slips and falls
You might want to actually look up the meaning at the time of "well regulated militia"...it means well ARMED! The next sentence clearly say, the RIGHT of the PEOPLE to bear arms shall NOT be infringed.
So who is the Militia? Every adult in this country? I don't think so.
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are— (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
HAHA. ... every SCOTUS decision in history has supported the 2nd amendment and determined that it is a personal/individual right and has nothing to do with the clause of "well regulated militia" (and you have to understand the historical context and method of writing of that period -.
Actually, I think you need to go back and read the record on the Supreme Court and the Second Amendment.
It is clear that guns have outgrown any place in a modern society. Those of us who are forward thinking understand that the laws will eventually evolve to reflect those changes. It takes time. Maybe a hundred years to rid us of this scourge (and there still can be allowances for people who wish to shoot guns--just not in the public domain).
And yes, the NRA money buys many a politician...for now. Each one of these catastrophes involving guns puts another nail in the coffin of allowing guns in the public's hands. With better education and a public that finally decides enough is enough (maybe the next Newtown takes out a thousand kids) we can, and will, see legislation evolve which resolves the problem of guns in the hands of the general public.
In the meantime, go back and read the Court's decisions on the Second Amendment and report back to us with the facts, not some hyperbole spewed by the agenda driven NRA.
Won't be long till them good ole boys open up in a church or a shopping mall. This new law will really wrk wonders for the gun companies. Not so much as those caught in the crossfire.
Really? Please open your mind and quit being fed by mind-numbing propaganda that's infiltrating this society.
So who is the Militia? Every adult in this country? I don't think so.
Essentially, yes, exactly, yes it is every adult in the country, in the thinking of the founding fathers.
But, it's more complex then that... assuming you have an open mind and are not one of the simple "hit and run" posters, I will repeat some of my previous threads on the subject. The "militia" clause in the 2nd amendment is very misunderstood, hope this clears it up. If you are one of the hit and run posters that plan just repond with rubbish like the OP, then I just wasted my time I guess:
One small note - people often give a modern misintepretion to the "militia" phrase and think it's intended for a state organzied body of troops. That is not correct. Militia as used then is individual, it is not refering to a "state militia" but essentially every man out there. Essentially, everyman is a militia. It has nothing to do with what one today perceives as the national guard or anything like that, the supreme court realizes that and has agreed with the individual rights interpretation.
Also the fact that they are in the same sentence does not mean they are talking about the same related concept. Such was the writing style of that century. The 'militia" clause is giving a reason (private citizens need a weapon for emergencie, in today's semantics it would be a seperate sentance), the second clause gives that doctrine (the right to own a weapon will not be infringed upon, which again would be a seperate sentence and concept).
and...
As I have alreaady explained (and I really hate repeating myself) - you should not confuse the "militia" statement into the right to bear arms. The original concept, the original "text" if you will, was much different then what you have above.
The constitution went through several re-writes of course, as my post above explains the "militia" comment was added in seperate from the right to bear arms. James Monroe first proposed the "right to keep and bear arms" in a rough list of basic human rights. No mention of militia was in it.
Samual Adams then proposed this, a combination of basic rights which later became at least 3 seperate ammendments:
"Be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless when necessary for the defence of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceable and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of their grievances: or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures."
Note that the right to bear arms, and the right to maintain a standing army (militia, if you will) are distinctly seperate, and it includes other basic rights.
By the time of the first voting, that became ammended to the below:
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person"
Note again the seperation between militia and the right. Also note the interesting clause of the right not to serve in the military - 3 concepts here.
From this it got whittled down to the current ammendment.
If that doesn't convince you - then try to understand what The Bill of Rights, the first 10 ammendments to the US Constituion, represent. Are they individual rights or collective rights - once you understand that, the 2nd ammendment becomes clear, and there should be no further need for discussion.
Actually, I think you need to go back and read the record on the Supreme Court and the Second Amendment.
It is clear that guns have outgrown any place in a modern society. Those of us who are forward thinking understand that the laws will eventually evolve to reflect those changes. It takes time. Maybe a hundred years to rid us of this scourge (and there still can be allowances for people who wish to shoot guns--just not in the public domain).
And yes, the NRA money buys many a politician...for now. Each one of these catastrophes involving guns puts another nail in the coffin of allowing guns in the public's hands. With better education and a public that finally decides enough is enough (maybe the next Newtown takes out a thousand kids) we can, and will, see legislation evolve which resolves the problem of guns in the hands of the general public.
In the meantime, go back and read the Court's decisions on the Second Amendment and report back to us with the facts, not some hyperbole spewed by the agenda driven NRA.
The supreme court decision is very clear, I will report to you indeed the facts (boy you guys are gluttons for humiliation aren't you)-
The last landmark case was Columbian vs. Heller in 2008. The actual text is this:
1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home....
The three liberal justices did have a dissenting opinion published as follows:
The question presented by this case is not whether the Second Amendment protects a "collective right" or an "individual right." Surely it protects a right that can be enforced by individuals. But a conclusion that the Second Amendment protects an individual right does not tell us anything about the scope of that right
Entirely consistent with my thread....now remove foot from mouth, and endure your public humiliation.
More guns and less health care. Yea that sounds about right. Guns allowed in bars what can possibly go wrong in that situation. Not going to be good for police when they pull over a drunk driver. Nothing good is going to come from this except some are going to make money such as court systems, hospitals, undertaker, and anyone in between.
Easier to require ALL guns be registered and if caught with an unregistered gun it's automatic 10yrs. No questions asked. If committing a crime with an unregistered gun 15yrs no questions asked. Make it hurt enough if a person touches a gun illegally and the rate will go down. If that's the goal.
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are— (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
Males? I seriously doubt my SIL would want to strap on a gun and become any part of a "civilian militia", or he would have joined the military. I am sure there are millions of males who would say the same.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
