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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-17-2007, 02:45 PM
 
1,330 posts, read 4,537,686 times
Reputation: 476

Advertisements

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?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-17-2007, 03:00 PM
 
Location: Maine
15,089 posts, read 19,732,985 times
Reputation: 17201
The 2nd Amendment was written well over 200 years ago. Equating a "well regulated militia" of the 1780s with the 21st century National Guard is silly. Times have changed.

I fully support every law-abiding citizen's right to own a firearm for sport and self-defense, but I have no problem banning fully automatic weapons, armor piercing rounds, etc. And I have no problem with stricter licensing and training laws. I have no problem banning violent felons from owning firearms.

Making all firearms illegal is only going to turn millions of law-abiding citizens into criminals, and it isn't going to do anything to curtail the law-breakers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2007, 03:12 PM
 
Location: Small patch of terra firma
1,275 posts, read 2,124,589 times
Reputation: 536
winnie, I'm a law abiding citizen, not traffic laws though, and I own a gun. I do not believe the 2nd amendment gives me the basic right to own my gun. Your correct on the background on the amendment. People though just omit the predicate statement "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state" and think that's ok, but it actually changes the intent dramatically. But the 2nd amendment doesnt give everyone the right to own any type of firearm.

If you child says "parent, in order to arrive at school safely and on time, I need my personal car." But if they are out joyriding on weekends when there is no school, is it right for them to say "I need my personal car, I told you that". No, it was so they could "arrive safely and on time at school".

Last edited by madicarus2000; 01-17-2007 at 03:13 PM.. Reason: misspelling
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2007, 03:17 PM
 
Location: Haddington, E. Lothian, Scotland
752 posts, read 594,360 times
Reputation: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by winnie View Post
What exactly is the Second Amendment and what rights does it give its citizens?
A great topic.

All rights, even those defined in the constitution, are circumscribed by law. Observe the amendments to the Bill of Rights, eg:

Amendment I:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

* Your right to free speech is unlimited unless your free speech involves slander, sedition or perjury.

* Your right to assemble is unlimited unless you choose to assemble someplace where the police tell you to move on.

Amendment VII:
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

* So when was the last time your $100 speeding ticket was heard by a trial by jury? And where not, escalated to the Appelate Court?

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

* Unless your name is Hamid.

Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

* So are you ready to agitate for the speedy trial of every jailed criminal waiting for their day in court?

So even our most fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution are abridged in one way or another. Why do gun rights advocates think that #2 out of 10 is somehow sacrosanct?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2007, 03:22 PM
 
1,393 posts, read 870,405 times
Reputation: 462
winnie, you make some good points. But, first off EVERYONE has to be honest. I don't think any gang member or criminal that uses guns for violence will be the first in line for this.
If you need answers to many gun questions and rights to why we must keep this amendment visit National Rifle Association . their are Representatives willing to answer any question. That's if you want an answer to why we should keep the 2nd amendment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2007, 03:24 PM
 
Location: Haddington, E. Lothian, Scotland
752 posts, read 594,360 times
Reputation: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by wildberries61 View Post
winnie, you make some good points. But, first off EVERYONE has to be honest. I don't think any gang member or criminal that uses guns for violence will be the first in line for this.
If you need answers to many gun questions and rights to why we must keep this amendment visit National Rifle Association . their are Representatives willing to answer any question. That's if you want an answer to why we should keep the 2nd amendment.
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2007, 03:36 PM
 
Location: Small patch of terra firma
1,275 posts, read 2,124,589 times
Reputation: 536
Quote:
Originally Posted by winnie View Post
What exactly is the Second Amendment and what rights does it give its citizens?
The US Constitution and Bill of Rights dont describe what rights were are guaranteed or given, it sets the boundaries for government authority. It states what lines they cannot cross. Over time the idea has morphed into the idea that our Rights are identified in the Constitution so if it isnt there, then that means we didnt have that right. That's another false statement.

With that line of thought, is owning a firearm a fundamental right retained by the people (9th amendment) or something that the state have the right to regulate, or the people have the right to regulate (10th amendment).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2007, 03:44 PM
 
Location: in my imagination
11,020 posts, read 18,113,212 times
Reputation: 7663
what I had to say about this I said in this thread...I'll copy and paste my reply though...again.

Gun Right's

reply#1

Quote:
Originally Posted by bnepler
The real reason for the Fathers of the Constitution" and the 2nd amemdment is a tyranical government. The vote may not really count some day. The gun will. Think it won't, try Venezuela.

Im in agreement with that.Think it can't happen here?Maybe unlikely and would be in a extreme case but the power of corruption is always possible.Many tyrannies came to power with "good intentions" to make everything "safe".Criminals can create havoc,but a criminal government can murder thousands if not millions as history proves.

Its been my experience on this debate,or other heated debates on the internet that it turns into a shouting match with no one wanting to loose the argument.Usually who benefits are the lurkers who can sit back and absorb it with thought.

But my opinion is the right to defense,whether for yourself,loved one or freedom is a natural right.Rights are not defined by a government,government should only uphold the Bill of Rights...and yes ALL of the Bill of Rights is meant as individual rights.Of course if the people wish,a amendment can be overturned....

Ever heard a strange noise at night and become painfully aware how vulnerable you were?Would the cops reach you in time?As long as there are bad people wanting to do harm people have a right to defend themselves.

Though,with freedom comes personal responsibility.Follow the rules of safety and your weapon will never harm unintended.Always treat it as loaded.Never put your finger on the trigger untill ready to shoot.Check and clear the weapon before handling.Know your local laws regarding self defense and positively indentify said intruder to not mistaken a loved one.

Children,its within any ones right to own(depending the area) or not own,if you feel unsafe with it because of children fine.Just don't vote away other peoples right to self defense.While there may be tragic mistakes someone (usually without a shot fired) could be saved.Statistics can swayed anyway depending on motivation.

For the comment that the founding fathers ment well but didn't see the future...I think the opposite is true.They saw into it well,today's society has forgot and become fat and complacient.And the fact that value of life seems lessened in society these days.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2007, 03:44 PM
 
Location: Maine
15,089 posts, read 19,732,985 times
Reputation: 17201
Quote:
Originally Posted by madicarus2000 View Post
The US Constitution and Bill of Rights dont describe what rights were are guaranteed or given, it sets the boundaries for government authority. It states what lines they cannot cross. Over time the idea has morphed into the idea that our Rights are identified in the Constitution so if it isnt there, then that means we didnt have that right. That's another false statement.
Exactly.

The Constitution does NOT give you ANY rights. Your rights are God-given. "Inalienable" as Jefferson said. The Constitution protects your rights, but it does not grant them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2007, 03:46 PM
 
Location: in my imagination
11,020 posts, read 18,113,212 times
Reputation: 7663
and my reply #2

reply#2
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexander59
I hate them, and would ban them altogether but I know that taking them away would not solve the problem any more than saying our illegals have to go home. Its not going to happen so I concede this unless we could get rid of them completely, that's a pipe dream. So as long as criminal have guns everybody should have the right to own them. I hate saying that. I have lost friends and one friend accidentally shot another friend, my uncle was killed in a hunting accident by a bozo that thought he was a deer.
I do not understand the second amendment, that says a well armed militia, does that mean the people? I thought a militia was the national guard.

For those of you that feel the need the constitution protects you and as I have said before I may not like everything the constitution protects but I will fight for it.

to answer a few things on a few posts,
once the militia(national guard) was considered citizens who often brought their own private arms when called upon.This changed with the militia act of 1903 when national guard troops effectively became Federal troops,hence why guard units have been sent overseas to war most recently Iraq.

I applaude you for saying while you don't agree with the right,you understand the need for it sorta speak.Unfortunately some feel morally superior feeling it is uncivilized funny enough many times those who are politicians and celebrities who live in gated communities and or have aemed bodyguards protecting them.

licenses...once you do that it becomes a privilage not a right.And it sets in motion who,what and where can have.And licenses with cost in fees,raise the fees....a round about way of banning them.

Agreed a dog and or alarm is a good idea,but its a deterent that can be overcome.A criminal who is motivated can overcome those security measures while a personal weapon will stop them.Depending on your household,for instance me I am single with my girlfriend sometimes staying if I know someone is the house I know its a criminal,I would in the dark hold off in the bedroom,call the cops and if the criminal enters my bedroom then...though Im not saying its not someones right to confront them though.

for my original post to give a example....hurricane Katrina.Unfortunately there were police and national guard who went house to house without warrents and with guns drawn disarmed the people leaving in a time of true crisis disarmed against hoodlems out looting and robbing.And too many of the army and police did it because "they were just following orders".People are still trying to get back their firearms that have been "misplaced" by the officials.

Unloaded weapons are useless,might as well keep a baseball bat instead.True that proper storage should be used depending like a steel safe,but proper handling of a loaded weapon will not fall into the wrong hands....

no,those that are pro gun do not see someone who is not as defective,actually propaganda wise anti gun movements tend to paint that picture toward the pro crowd...they have effectively propaganded the NRA as "perpetuators of violence" "backwoods rednecks" and "uncaring" while the NRA and similar clubs have always promoted safety and the right to own.

To answer the question "why the fascination?"Its not a fascination with violence,though a understanding of the possibility of violence.

But there is also the fact that shooting is a action sport.Someone who knows nothing about golf might think its just about hitting a ball with a club while actually its about a melding of the person and club,concentration,practice....same with shooting.

It takes alot of practice with control of trigger,breathing,eyes properly using sights.There are many things about it.Some like doing long distance,400 yds to 1000yds hitting oil drum sized targets.Different positions,using a timer.Its challenging that makes it fun.Some enjoy handloading which with their load may make a inch grouping at a 100yds while a factory load would only do a 3 inch group...and different firerams delivering that depending.

Some like doing cowboy action shooting,sometimes its just fun to plink and its a great way to relieve stress.Personally I like military surplus among others,the history in them,did it defend or attack Normandy?...or Iwo Jima...could it one time been in my fathers hands?Was itused in the trenches of WW1?

So hope that answers a little.
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.

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