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.
how does it make you feel that you had to add words to that phrase to modify its meaning? the phrase is there, so i have no issue with you including it but you added a couple of very meaningful words that arent there.
corrected. I noticed how you didn't correct the person I quoted, who also changed the words.
and if you knew the history of the 2nd amendment, including the multiple drafts that existed, and where it originated from, you would know that the intent was "for the purposes of a militia". but it was my mistake for adding that in to an already improper quotation of the text.
corrected. I noticed how you didn't correct the person I quoted, who also changed the words.
for one thing, i tend to only read posts from people that i will likely disagree with and want to counter. i dont want to waste time with people that agree with me; they are no fun.
however, from your post it looks like he left out words that i would probably deem not meaningful. my position is that without words like the ones you added (which qualify gun ownership with regulation membership requirements) then you wouldnt be changing the meaning if you left out the militia part. the idea is that the first part doesnt take away from the second part.
without doing further research into the meanings of "well regulated" and the intentions of the men who wrote the amendment; what i would take away from that sentence is that the militia is made up of citizens so that if citizens were needed to repel an invader; they could use their own weapons. i wouldnt be surprised if the founders would have expected citizens to have some form of planning for such events and offer training and organization in a time of need. i think that would be great to have.
for one thing, i tend to only read posts from people that i will likely disagree with and want to counter. i dont want to waste time with people that agree with me; they are no fun.
however, from your post it looks like he left out words that i would probably deem not meaningful. my position is that without words like the ones you added (which qualify gun ownership with regulation membership requirements) then you wouldnt be changing the meaning if you left out the militia part. the idea is that the first part doesnt take away from the second part.
without doing further research into the meanings of "well regulated" and the intentions of the men who wrote the amendment; what i would take away from that sentence is that the militia is made up of citizens so that if citizens were needed to repel an invader; they could use their own weapons. i wouldnt be surprised if the founders would have expected citizens to have some form of planning for such events and offer training and organization in a time of need. i think that would be great to have.
the original drafts also included that citizens would not be compelled to own arms. the words he left out are certainly meaningful, and he reworded it to say that "no infringmenets" vs "shall not be infringed". leaving out "well regulated" and "militia" is a common tactic by people who oppose any form of gun control, because they like to create the misconcpetion that the constitution allows people to posses guns with no governmental infringement. further, if people knew anything about the numerous SCOTUS decisions, it has been repeatedly affirmed by the SCOTUS (by both 'liberal' and 'conservative' judges) throughout history that the government can regulate firearm possession.
so....people can argue all they want about what should and shouldn't be done, but as soon as people start claiming the constitution provides that no infringements on gun ownership is the law of the land....they are wrong. and they've been wrong since the day the constitution was drafted.
because they like to create the misconcpetion that the constitution allows people to posses guns with no governmental infringement. further, if people knew anything about the numerous SCOTUS decisions, it has been repeatedly affirmed by the SCOTUS (by both 'liberal' and 'conservative' judges) throughout history that the government can regulate firearm possession.
so....people can argue all they want about what should and shouldn't be done, but as soon as people start claiming the constitution provides that no infringements on gun ownership is the law of the land....they are wrong. and they've been wrong since the day the constitution was drafted.
thats fair enough but i think that the vast majority of people accept a certain amount of government regulation and arent really arguing for zero limits/rules.
the original drafts also included that citizens would not be compelled to own arms. The words he left out are certainly meaningful, and he reworded it to say that "no infringmenets" vs "shall not be infringed". Leaving out "well regulated" and "militia" is a common tactic by people who oppose any form of gun control, because they like to create the misconcpetion that the constitution allows people to posses guns with no governmental infringement. Further, if people knew anything about the numerous scotus decisions, it has been repeatedly affirmed by the scotus (by both 'liberal' and 'conservative' judges) throughout history that the government can regulate firearm possession.
So....people can argue all they want about what should and shouldn't be done, but as soon as people start claiming the constitution provides that no infringements on gun ownership is the law of the land....they are wrong. And they've been wrong since the day the constitution was drafted.
you gotta love the "we are better so our opinions matter more" elitist leftist argument.
Guns, God & gays. Gays are more accepted than ever. Northerners don't inject Jay-sus into every single conversation - PTL! And over 60% of New Jerseyans favor gun control. NJ rednecks should move if they can't handle reality.
im trying to understand why its so difficult for you to name some features ?
You sound exactly like the kid who used to sit in the back of the classroom and after the teacher gave an explanation and asked "does everyone understand" you were always the one who raised his hand with a puzzled look on his face.
Guns, God & gays. Gays are more accepted than ever. Northerners don't inject Jay-sus into every single conversation - PTL! And over 60% of New Jerseyans favor gun control. NJ rednecks should move if they can't handle reality.
When over 90% of the population wants some form of increased background check/gun control that's neither left or right.....it's called Majority.....however, with the NRA and gun manufacturer lobbyists giving out wads of cash to political campaigns it seems the "will of the people" gets ignored.
thats fair enough but i think that the vast majority of people accept a certain amount of government regulation and arent really arguing for zero limits/rules.
the vast majority, you are right. the vast majority of people are perfectly ok with background checks. the vast majority of people are perfectly ok with letting the ATF have the ability to use a computer to search gun sales records when investigating a crime. But the problem is, the NRA, and other groups, have squashed the laws. Of the laws that do exist, they made sure ammendments were attached to them that crippled the ability to enforce them.
If a crime is committed, the ATF has to get paper records from gun stores they believe the gun was purchased at. They have to manually look through the paper records to find the gun sale record. And they are not allowed to use any technology to assist in the search....all because of the manufactured paranoia that exists about a list.
it's irrational how a very very small group of people control this topic. and that's not to let gun control advocates off the hook either, because many of them are irrational as well. it's another relatively simple thing to improve, but nothing will ever get done because of the lunatics screaming at each other.
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 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.
