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 08-04-2019, 09:51 AM
 
39,786 posts, read 41,146,672 times
Reputation: 16474

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
"It's very rare for SCOTUS to reverse itself."

Not really. MANY old rulings have been overturned by later courts.

There isn't many, on average about one per year and they are usually overruling decisions made a long a time ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-04-2019, 09:55 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
67,204 posts, read 34,226,645 times
Reputation: 14468
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeyJude514 View Post
There, I said it.

In their defense, they had no idea what that amendment would result in some 200+ years later, no way to know the kind of advanced weaponry that would be invented and fall into hands they don't belong in, no way of knowing how Americans would misuse and abuse the amendment in ways they never intended.

But here we are.

It's time to consider amending the Constitution again.
The problem has come, as the government has disarmed the public, when in public.
Evil has always been around.


The only thing a shooter hates to hear... Return fire.
People have a right to bear arms, not just Citizens.
Only you can protect yourself, unless you are someone else's property.


Concord & Lexington, cemented they made the right choice.
They came for our guns... We killed them, with our guns.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 09:55 AM
 
39,786 posts, read 41,146,672 times
Reputation: 16474
Quote:
Originally Posted by njbiodude View Post
The second amendment states:
While the second half states that people should be able to bear arms its a continuation from the first clause. A well regulated militia does not mean a bunch of private citizens stockpiling dangerous weapons in their closet and shooting whoever they feel like. It means literally forming a local militia to keep the federal government in check, and it must be well regulated.

The term well regulated at the time meant effective or in good working order, a clock that kept good time was well regulated.


Sorry to burst your bubble.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 09:57 AM
 
Location: Florida
3,642 posts, read 986,046 times
Reputation: 2874
Quote:
Originally Posted by dude1984 View Post
The 2nd amendment wasn't a mistake, but it's outdated. Guns won't prevent government tyranny or aggression with modern military fire power (which filters down to local police).

Assault rifles, high capacity magazines, and other mods that improve killing capacity need to be banned.
Actually, the problem with this theory is that the military is made up of men and women who are citizens of this country, and will think twice about shooting their own people. Also, all of those advanced weapons are being designed by civilian contractors, and then they sell the weapons to the military , so it'a another way for people to keep and bear arms on a military level. Just claim you are a defense contractor. THis is another reason why the government hasn't outright try to ban the second amendment, because there are such defense contractors and pockets of well armed militia who do have permits to own military grade weapons that will fight back, and the corrupt government isn't quite ready for that. Main reason being, while we are busy fighting a civil war, it would be all too easy for us to be attacked from the outside from China or Russia, or another enemy we never knew we had.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 09:59 AM
 
30,250 posts, read 15,727,034 times
Reputation: 20359
Quote:
Originally Posted by njbiodude View Post
The second amendment states:

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

While the second half states that people should be able to bear arms its a continuation from the first clause. A well regulated militia does not mean a bunch of private citizens stockpiling dangerous weapons in their closet and shooting whoever they feel like. It means literally forming a local militia to keep the federal government in check, and it must be well regulated.

Imagine for example if San Francisco decided they wouldn't deport anyone and during the next ICE raid the SF militia showed up with tanks and told the immigrations officers to get lost or be killed. Or if a farming district in Iowa refused to abide by the national tariffs and when threatened by the Federal government deployed it's local militia to make it's case.

That is what Jefferson envisaged by keeping power in the hands of the people.
If it's for the military, why is it in the Bill of Rights which is the section where rights are given to the individual for protection against the government?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 10:01 AM
 
Location: California
682 posts, read 497,024 times
Reputation: 990
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
The term well regulated at the time meant effective or in good working order, a clock that kept good time was well regulated.

Sorry to burst your bubble.
The language meant functional. A functional, working militia. Sorry. But while it states in there we should have local militias nowhere does it state private citizens can have whatever weapons they desire, even if it poses a threat to others safety.

It literally states localities should be able to have a militia to keep the government in check and that private citizens can join.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 10:04 AM
 
Location: California
682 posts, read 497,024 times
Reputation: 990
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
If it's for the military, why is it in the Bill of Rights which is the section where rights are given to the individual for protection against the government?


Because private citizens can voluntarily join a well regulated militia. Again it does not say all citizens shall be able to bear weapons without restriction. In fact it says the opposite.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 10:05 AM
 
Location: Haiku
4,484 posts, read 2,691,029 times
Reputation: 6582
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
So, you're basically saying you have no idea why they wrote the 2nd.

It wasn't about hunting. They wrote the 2nd specifically for allowing citizens to resist government aggression.
Bingo! But the 2nd is used to justify concealed carry of handguns which has nothing to do with government aggression. That to me is the big stretch that has occurred.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 10:07 AM
 
30,250 posts, read 15,727,034 times
Reputation: 20359
Quote:
Originally Posted by njbiodude View Post
Because private citizens can voluntarily join a well regulated militia. Again it does not say all citizens shall be able to bear weapons without restriction. In fact it says the opposite.
Which makes them part of the government.

The Bill of Rights protects the individual from the government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 10:07 AM
 
39,786 posts, read 41,146,672 times
Reputation: 16474
Quote:
Originally Posted by njbiodude View Post
The language meant functional. A functional, working militia.

You can't have a functional militia if they don't have weapons and the expectation is they would have their own weapons.



Quote:
It literally states localities should be able to have a militia to keep the government in check.

Comma's have meaning and are used to split different ideas, phrases etc.
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

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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 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