2nd amendment

[ontheroad]

So, remember no biting, said, Yac, and a thread that ended in May revisited.

Well, we can always revisit all our arguments pro and con, right?

[jeepejeep]

Originally Posted by FistFightingHairdresser

We should keep the 2nd Amendment. But the 2nd Amendment doesn't guarantee the right of 5 year olds to carry a Glock into Kindergarten.

Even the Bill of Rights is governed by the laws of Common Sense. When the NRA finally decides to fire Noah the Senile, maybe they'll see the light.

Charlton Heston hasn't been the President of the NRA for about 5 years! Get current!

[Huckleberry3911948]

Originally Posted by winnie

What exactly is the Second Amendment and what rights does it give its citizens?

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.

Many people who study the constitution say that the 2nd amendment was solely intended to establish the National Guard and the citizen's collective right to keep and bear arms.

Now if you think of this law in the context in the times in which it was written, we had just gone through a war and we joined 13 colonies into 1 country. Many of these colonies were concerned at the time the Constitution was drafted that we were essentially giving all our power to another tyrant and that the colony was losing its rights to protect itself and have some say in governing its own people. Thus the 2nd amendment was drafted to ensure each colony had the fundimental right to keep and bear arms (in that time period that often meant "armies") and to form a militia.

Many argue that the Second Amendment in itself does not provide for the rights of individuals to keep and bear arms.

Now this is what I think: I agree that the Second Amendment does not provide enough evidence as written to provide individual's right to own firearms. But I DO think without question that the citizens should have the right to bear arms.

So I would suggest that another amendment be added to the Constitution specifically protecting the right of law abiding citizens to "keep and bear arms" and that licensure for ownership and carrying handguns should be dealt with at the federal level and a nationwide license to carry should be issued to those who apply and qualify for one. Which would include a background check, identity verification and a reasonable fee to cover the government's cost to complete the neccessary checks and services. It should not expire or be revoked/suspended unless the licensee has committed a crime, refused to pay child support or taxes or has given authorities reason to believe he/she poses a danger to another..such as a domestic abuse situation or bitter divorce.

The benefits would be that a citizen who owns firearms could go state to state without worry of additional fees and laws of his new state, it would be a uniform process for every American, they would not have to renew the license and they would also have an amendment that is written without a doubt to protect their rights.

I'm surely going to have to duck into a hole with my flame suit on for this one... but what is your take? Should there be an amendment? Would uniform regulation at the federal level help or hurt the rights of individuals?

when the good guys have guns it makes the job of the bad guys much much harder.

[jeepejeep]

Originally Posted by jgussler

No, most people were not given back their guns. Nagel has been brought up on contempt of court twice because he has not given them back.

Imagine some of these are old antique keepsakes that was passed on from generation to generation and now have no possibility of return

Just out of curiosity Winnie, have you ever fired an assault rifle?

Most of the guns are still sitting in barrels and I've seen pictures of some of them. They are rusted badly and have just been thrown around and some are now worthless. Nagen should be jailed for this!