U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
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)
Reply Start New Thread
Old 10-07-2007, 12:37 PM
Location: Journey's End
10,189 posts, read 24,508,075 times
Reputation: 3826


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?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Old 11-06-2007, 10:57 PM
Location: NY
2,007 posts, read 3,369,876 times
Reputation: 905
Originally Posted by FistFightingHairdresser View Post
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!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-06-2007, 10:59 PM
Location: southern california
55,237 posts, read 72,611,501 times
Reputation: 47464
Originally Posted by winnie View Post
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 11-06-2007, 11:04 PM
Location: NY
2,007 posts, read 3,369,876 times
Reputation: 905
Originally Posted by jgussler View Post
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!
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.

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

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.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

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