Should There Be Limits To The 2nd Amendment?

[CatholicsAreKewl]

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/05/09/dod-forces-3d-gun-printer-defense-distributed-to-pull-weapon-specs-off-website/

 

I think the government should force every household to print 5 of these. 

Edited May 9, 2013 by CatholicsAreKewl

[Chestertonian]

It says 'arms' which would be any weapon.

 

From what I can gather, in the eighteenth century the term "arms" wasn't as vaguely defined as it is today. Apparently, they used to use the word "ordinances" when referring to artillery.

 

You could well be right, though. I have no idea.

[jeffboom]

My interpretation of the 2nd is that trained citizens should be able to use anything that the government can use against us.

 

The pro-gun lobby likes to quote "shall not be infringed" but fails to quote "well regulated" in the same context.

 

The two clauses of the second amendment are not tied;

 

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. 

 

One does not have to be in a "well regulated" militia in order to keep and bear arms. The second clause is not dependent on the first. 

[Winchester]

Not from a constitutional point of view because the actual constitution does not support your viewpoint. What you mean to say is the perspective of the constitution you wish existed, your interpretation of the constitution that existed prior to the 14th amendment.

I'm not using the novel interpretations of the Supremes, nor do I subscribe to the incorporation myth.

 

Like I said, your side has won. Enjoy the victory. Maybe you and GB can golf together, or something.

 

[Socrates]

The two clauses of the second amendment are not tied;

 

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. 

 

One does not have to be in a "well regulated" militia in order to keep and bear arms. The second clause is not dependent on the first. 

 

Exactly.

 

 

Also, a study of history and the writings of the founding fathers shows that interpretation, common among modern "liberals," to be completely bogus.  Pretty much all of the founding fathers, including the framers of the Constitution, spoke of the importance of an armed citizenry as a check against tyranny foreign and domestic.  They were skeptical of a standing army, seen as a means for governments to oppress the citizenry.  In the founder's vision, the people would be the army, rather than having a military and civilian class.  Militias were all under the governance of the individual states, not the federal government.

 

(A quick google search can bring up lots of lists of quotes from the founders on this topic.)

 

That is completely contrary to the notion of the right of the people to own and bear arms being dependent on the approval of the federal government.

 

The "well-regulated militia" phrase was intended to give a reason for the importance of an armed citizenry to a free state, not a condition on the right to own and bear arms.

[Socrates]

OH HAPPY HAPPY JOY JOY A NEW AND REFRESHING TOPIC NEVER DISCUSSED ON PHATMASS BEFORE!

 

Is it modest for Michael Voris to bring guns to a gay marriage ceremony in Latin?

[4588686]

 

I'm not using the novel interpretations of the Supremes, nor do I subscribe to the incorporation myth.

So what does the 14th amendment *really* say?

[jeffboom]

 
So what does the 14th amendment *really* say?

 

AMENDMENT XIV SECTION 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

SECTION 2.

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

SECTION 3.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

SECTION 4.

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

SECTION 5.

The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

[Winchester]

 
So what does the 14th amendment *really* say?

 

I'm sure you can google it. Remember, contracts involving threat of violence are null and void. Well, unless the threatening party is government.

[T-fish]

Guns are for sissies. Jesus didn't need a gun. I believe the apostles were told to carry swords. Angels have swords. Idiots have guns.

[jeffboom]

Guns are for sissies. Jesus didn't need a gun. I believe the apostles were told to carry swords. Angels have swords. Idiots have guns.

 

We can't all be as smart as you, T-fish.

[T-fish]

http://www.roadsideamerica.com/story/20796

 

[havok579257]

I'm sure you can google it. Remember, contracts involving threat of violence are null and void. Well, unless the threatening party is government.

 

survival of the fittest.  kill or be killed.  only the strong survive.  cull the herd.  let the poor fend for themselves.  let those who have, take more.  let those who have not, have what little they have taken away. 

 

 

just summing up your preferred form of law.

[Nihil Obstat]

survival of the fittest.  kill or be killed.  only the strong survive.  cull the herd.  let the poor fend for themselves.  let those who have, take more.  let those who have not, have what little they have taken away. 

 

 

just summing up your preferred form of law.

Yes, he said literally every one of those things, while eating babies and punting kittens.

Basically, Winchester and I are literally Hitler.

[CatholicsAreKewl]

Yes, he said literally every one of those things, while eating babies and punting kittens.

Basically, Winchester and I are literally Hitler.

It doesn't work that way. I called I was Hitler first.