Do you notice how gun nuts never talk about any limits to gun ownership?

The Federal Government is severely limited in what it can and can't do about gun rights and regulations. It's left up to the states with very few exceptions.
Bwahahaha! Good grief are you one clueless little monkey. The Supremacy Clause makes it abundantly clear that the U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land. It trumps and and all other law. A state cannot strip, limit, or alter rights. Period. Moron.
Until the 2nd amendment is made clear then it can be interpreted a lot of different ways.
Its already been made clear, Stolen Valor -- its people like you who deliberately misinterpret - that is, lie about - its jurisprudence that cause the "problem" in understanding it.
 
Until the 2nd amendment is made clear then it can be interpreted a lot of different ways.
The 2nd Amendment is law. It is written in black and white and crystal clear. It’s only those who cannot accept that it exists (or that it exists as written) who attempt to make a case that it is “not clear”.
The first 2/3rds of it already has no meaning and should be completely deleted.
Words have meaning. The first part of the 2nd Amendment is the predatory clause. It is merely an explanation for why the founders were doing what they were doing.
You are fighting about the last 1/3 that still has meaning. But it's too vague.
There is nothing “vague” about “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”.
 
If you want it to mean what you think it means, get it amended to say what you claim it does.
It already does! Hence, no action required for those of us true Americans who respect and uphold the U.S. Constitution. The onus is on you anti-American, anti-constitutional fascists to get it amended so that you can strip people of their rights.
Otherwise, since it doesn't, the States have the right to do firearms regulations as their citizens see fit.
Again, the Supremacy Clause makes it abundantly clear that the U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and trumps all other federal, state, and local laws.
And that is in the constitution under the 10th amendment ratified to the Constitution in 1791.
The 10th Amendment did not eliminate the Supremacy Clause, genius. :lmao:
 
You have the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed..Fine, it doesn't say what arms
Sure it does, stupid.
7E40303F-5977-4C8C-9AB9-E705B0999FB8.jpeg

Words have meaning, no matter how much you wish they didn’t. Arms include ALL weapons and ammunition (included, but not limited to, explosive ordinances).
where you can bear them or anything else.
Sure it does, stupid.
E55CD10E-8DF8-4804-9927-A7D33C31C95E.jpeg

Words have meaning, no matter how much you wish they didn’t. It says I can carry my firearms and does not give a stipulation or limitation on that.
 
Until the 2nd amendment is made clear then it can be interpreted a lot of different ways.
The 2nd Amendment is law. It is written in black and white and crystal clear. It’s only those who cannot accept that it exists (or that it exists as written) who attempt to make a case that it is “not clear”.
The first 2/3rds of it already has no meaning and should be completely deleted.
Words have meaning. The first part of the 2nd Amendment is the predatory clause. It is merely an explanation for why the founders were doing what they were doing.
You are fighting about the last 1/3 that still has meaning. But it's too vague.
There is nothing “vague” about “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”.

You do know you already lost this argument. Your own State has firearms regulations very similar to the ones we have in Colorado. To say that there aren't any where you live is just lying.

Now, how about talking to me like you would talk to me in person like I am doing to you. Or would you talk to me like that to my face? Careful, I am old Rocky Mountain Stock. You do the math.
 
If you want it to mean what you think it means, get it amended to say what you claim it does.
It already does! Hence, no action required for those of us true Americans who respect and uphold the U.S. Constitution. The onus is on you anti-American, anti-constitutional fascists to get it amended so that you can strip people of their rights.
Otherwise, since it doesn't, the States have the right to do firearms regulations as their citizens see fit.
Again, the Supremacy Clause makes it abundantly clear that the U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and trumps all other federal, state, and local laws.
And that is in the constitution under the 10th amendment ratified to the Constitution in 1791.
The 10th Amendment did not eliminate the Supremacy Clause, genius. :lmao:

Read the 10th again. And while you are at it, read the 14th. Since even the Supreme Court hasn't made a definitive ruling nor has any of the lower courts as to the 2nd amendment, I suggest you pay close attention to those two laws. Now, unless you are above all the Federal Courts, you are wrong.

And talk to me like you would to my face as I do to you. Remember, I am old Rocky Mountain Stock.
 
[
Now, how about talking to me like you would talk to me in person like I am doing to you. Or would you talk to me like that to my face? Careful, I am old Rocky Mountain Stock. You do the math.
Bullshit - you're an over-plump Stolen Valor boy, still living in your mom's basement, who knows he has to lie to make a point.
 
You do know you already lost this argument. Your own State has firearms regulations very similar to the ones we have in Colorado. To say that there aren't any where you live is just lying.
You do know at one time, your state had slavery. Then the U.S. Constitution was properly enforced and slavery was abolished.

You lost this argument the moment you started talking about how the 2nd Amendment needs to be “updated”. It doesn’t matter what you think needs to be done, it only matters what has been done. And what has been done, is that our right to keep and bear arms has been cemented in the U.S. Constitution and remains so until such time as it is legally and properly amended.
 
Now, how about talking to me like you would talk to me in person like I am doing to you.
That’s exactly what I’m doing, snowflake. Have zero tolerance for assholes like you in person or on the internet. Zero.
Or would you talk to me like that to my face? Careful, I am old Rocky Mountain Stock. You do the math.
If you’re “old Rocky Mountain stock”, I’ll most certainly have to do the math. God knows you won’t be able to.
 
Read the 10th again.
No need to read it again. I’m pretty much the world’s leading authority on the 10th Amendment. It in no way eliminated the Supremacy Clause. It says anything not in the constitution is left to the states. The 2nd Amendment is clearly in the U.S. Constitution, cupcake.
 
You do know you already lost this argument. Your own State has firearms regulations very similar to the ones we have in Colorado. To say that there aren't any where you live is just lying.
You do know at one time, your state had slavery. Then the U.S. Constitution was properly enforced and slavery was abolished.

You lost this argument the moment you started talking about how the 2nd Amendment needs to be “updated”. It doesn’t matter what you think needs to be done, it only matters what has been done. And what has been done, is that our right to keep and bear arms has been cemented in the U.S. Constitution and remains so until such time as it is legally and properly amended.

Hate to break it to you but the State of Colorado didn't become a state until 12 years AFTER the end of the Civil war. In the original State Constitution adopted or ratified in 1876 about slavery it reads and I quote

"shall never be in this state either slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted."

How can a state be a slavery state BEFORE it became a state? The Territory didn't 100% support either the North or the South. yes, there were some weird things happen for both sides due to the supply lines and the fact quite a few Southern sympathizers did come into Colorado before 1961 but they didn't bring their slaves with them. Slavery was NOT tolerated in the same way it was in say the Carolinas.

What the latest hallabaloo is all about is that many are locked up in prison and used for cheap labor and some are calling that a form of slavery. If the bill to change the over 150 year old law iis changed, Colorado becomes the ONLY state in the US that is completely slavery free by that definition. Nice try Sherlock.

No, I didn't lose any argument about the 2 amendment. As long as we have to depend on the Courts to decide how the laws have to be interpreted then our written law is inadequate and in bad need of updating. And iif you try and use your definition, the Courts, largely, for the last 60 years disagree with your interpretation and agree with mine. We have gone over this many times with you trying to find a court ruling to agree with you and you have failed each time. So, I give you another chance, prove me wrong. Prove to me that the 2nd amendment means that it's all inclusive by showing either a state with ZERO firearms Regulations (include Federal in that as well) or a Court Ruling ruling in the last 30 years that removes ALL firearms regulations from any given state.

The ball is back in your court.
 
Read the 10th again.
No need to read it again. I’m pretty much the world’s leading authority on the 10th Amendment. It in no way eliminated the Supremacy Clause. It says anything not in the constitution is left to the states. The 2nd Amendment is clearly in the U.S. Constitution, cupcake.

Hmm, not according to the many Federal Courts, it doesn't. Since it doesn't, that means the states have the right to regulate firearms as long as due process is used. The only exception is under the Heller Ruling which only dealt with normal handguns. In other words, you have the right to have a normal, traditional, serviceable handgun in your home as long as you comply with the regulations and laws of the area that you are in. And the area you are in has to offer attainable regulations so that a normal person may obtain it. That is Heller V in a nutshell. All other things pertaining to firearms belongs to the States and lower Governments. So Heller V does comply with the 2nd amendment. Yah, I know you want it to say something else by presenting the Dissenting View but dissenting means the losers views and has no legal standings.

Now, with that in mind, read the 10th amendment again.
 
Hate to break it to you but the State of Colorado didn't become a state until 12 years AFTER the end of the Civil war.
I don’t hate to inform you that the territory still had inhabitants and that those inhabitants still had slaves. :laugh:

Not to mention that my point still stands. U.S. history is filled with examples of the constitution being violated, and that travesty later being corrected.
 
Read the 10th again.
No need to read it again. I’m pretty much the world’s leading authority on the 10th Amendment. It in no way eliminated the Supremacy Clause. It says anything not in the constitution is left to the states. The 2nd Amendment is clearly in the U.S. Constitution, cupcake.
Hmm, not according to the many Federal Courts, it doesn't.
What federal court stated that the 10th Amendment eliminated the U.S. Constitution and overrode the 2nd Amendment? :uhh:

It is really bizarre how you think you can make stuff up and people will believe it. What gives you such grandiose delusions? Why do you think people will blindly accept your internet propaganda?
 
The only exception is under the Heller Ruling which only dealt with normal handguns. In other words, you have the right to have a normal, traditional, serviceable handgun in your home as long as you comply with the regulations and laws of the area that you are in. And the area you are in has to offer attainable regulations so that a normal person may obtain it. That is Heller V in a nutshell. All other things pertaining to firearms belongs to the States and lower Governments. So Heller V does comply with the 2nd amendment. Yah, I know you want it to say something else by presenting the Dissenting View but dissenting means the losers views and has no legal standings.
Courts can’t make law from the bench. Courts also can’t overrule the U.S. Constitution. The fact that you have to point to court rulings prove that you’re wrong and you know it. Remember, at one time, courts upheld slavery, preventing women from voting, separate but equal, etc. I could go on and on and on. Eventually, all of it got corrected. The same will happen with the 2nd Amendment.

Now, with that in mind, try reading the U.S. Constitution just once before you die.
 
Hate to break it to you but the State of Colorado didn't become a state until 12 years AFTER the end of the Civil war.
I don’t hate to inform you that the territory still had inhabitants and that those inhabitants still had slaves. :laugh:

Not to mention that my point still stands. U.S. history is filled with examples of the constitution being violated, and that travesty later being corrected.

Slavery was not illegal until after the Emancipation Proclamation. Until then, it was left up to the States, not the Feds. For instance, Slavery was legal in Virginia but part of it broke away and outlawed slavery and called itself West Virginia.

Yet, you won't correct the 2nd amendment even though it no longer serves the original purpose it once did. Why, because it plays into your Rexall Ranger persona.
 

Forum List

Back
Top