U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-11-2015, 11:24 AM
 
32,320 posts, read 26,189,545 times
Reputation: 18950

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
No, it can't. That's an infringement, and therefore unConstitutional. The Second Amendment doesn't say "shall not be infringed, except for repealment."
any amendment can be repealed, read the damned constitution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by freightshaker View Post
Even if it could, are you naive enough to believe that you could get enough support nationwide to repeal the 2nd amendment? Good Luck. It won't happen...
did you bother to read everything i wrote? or did you just get lazy and only read the first part? reread what i wrote that you quoted and note that i indicated that it very likely would never happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-11-2015, 11:39 AM
 
66,317 posts, read 30,202,952 times
Reputation: 8617
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
any amendment can be repealed, read the damned constitution.
Not for a Constitutional right that very clearly stipulates "shall not be infringed." The Second Amendment is the only place that very specific declaration is used in the Bill of Rights.

A repealment is an infringement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2015, 11:46 AM
 
32,320 posts, read 26,189,545 times
Reputation: 18950
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Not for a Constitutional right that very clearly stipulates "shall not be infringed." The Second Amendment is the only place that very specific declaration is used in the Bill of Rights.

A repealment is an infringement.
the problem you have though is that the constitution clearly lays out the procedure for amending the constitution. and the latest amendment supercedes earlier ones. it doesnt matter what the earlier amendment says. if congress produced an amendment that basically says, "the second amendment is hear by repealed", and two thirds of each house votes for it, and then the president signs it, and then 38 states ratify it, then the second amendment would then be repealed.

the shall not be infringed part only deals with laws not amendments.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2015, 11:57 AM
 
66,317 posts, read 30,202,952 times
Reputation: 8617
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
the problem you have though is that the constitution clearly lays out the procedure for amending the constitution.
Yes, and that can be done unless doing so violates the Second Amendment's "shall not be infringed" stipulation, which of course, it would.

Quote:
the shall not be infringed part only deals with laws not amendments.
That's patently absurd. If that were true, the language would have been "shall make no law," as declared in the First Amendment. There's a very distinct difference between the two stipulations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2015, 12:46 PM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,505 posts, read 51,274,872 times
Reputation: 24611
I would like to see a Federal law that applied to all the US areas that enforced the right of all American citizens to buy and keep any type of firearm, from matchlock to full auto machine guns, and carry them, concealed or not, any place they have a legal right to be. I would like to see an end to one and all "gun free zones" as well.


The reason for this law is the fundamental principal of Liberty is to be able to protect yourself, your family and, in some situations, complete strangers from criminal assault. I believe it is a duty of a Free Citizen to be always ready to repulse an assault. This means that everyone, that has not proven untrustworthy such as convicted violent criminals or the criminally insane, should own and carry guns.


This is the opinion of an otherwise very Liberal Democrat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2015, 12:49 PM
 
Location: Austin
29,518 posts, read 16,437,124 times
Reputation: 8061
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
The answer isn't always more guns.
This is true. And the answer is not more laws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2015, 01:47 PM
 
Location: Lost in Texas
9,833 posts, read 5,833,175 times
Reputation: 3404
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
From the looks of things there will be yet another democrat in the white house, common sense gun rights will at some point prevail.


Gun rights have not changed in 7 years.


The answer isn't always more guns.
People who rant and rave about too many guns and wanting gun restrictions actually humor me. What you don't realize is first, you are not in the majority. Second, each of you that cries and wails about gun control send the alarm out to people that don't even own guns and then they run out and buy them before
you take away their rights. You are proliferating gun sales. Good job!!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2015, 01:50 PM
 
32,320 posts, read 26,189,545 times
Reputation: 18950
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Yes, and that can be done unless doing so violates the Second Amendment's "shall not be infringed" stipulation, which of course, it would.

That's patently absurd. If that were true, the language would have been "shall make no law," as declared in the First Amendment. There's a very distinct difference between the two stipulations.
you dont understand that the amendments to the constitution are not sacrosanct. they ALL can be repealed, including the second amendment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2015, 01:57 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
66,282 posts, read 33,642,226 times
Reputation: 14172
Quote:
Originally Posted by njbiodude View Post
How does right to a militia translate into right to have a concealed carry? That ammendment is very vague but meant local militias could be formed to keep the Federal government at bay.

A concealed weapon increases murder odds but it won't help againt a military coup or SWAT teams. If you want to actually "form a militia" and keep the weapons in a compound fine. But mowhere does it say every man can walk around armed everywhere.

Also our constition isnt perfect and maybe its time its changed. Remember when blacks were 60% of a person?


A well regulated militia. It doesn't say the right of the militia. It says:
The right of the people to keep(bingo) and bear(bingo). The people are the militia. The people are the army for Freedom & Liberty in the USA

There is your right to conceal and open carry, all in one. Which shall not be infringed..... Or you could die by that very right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2015, 01:57 PM
 
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
7,233 posts, read 4,106,473 times
Reputation: 18094
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
you dont understand that the amendments to the constitution are not sacrosanct. they ALL can be repealed, including the second amendment.
Even the Constitution itself can be repealed, and there is a mechanism enumerated in the Constitution for how to do it: call a Constitutional Convention.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:36 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top