Doug Jones: "The 2nd Amendment has limitations"...translation: i'm coming for your gun!

[BULLDOG]

You've already gone on-and-on and on-and-on. Haven't made much sense yet though.

Ha. Well. You know, people like you are very useful in places like this. I'll tell you why. It's because you invite people like me to speak. It does not matter if you are of the capacity to understand. I do not do it for your benefit. Do you understand?

Of course, I'm politically speaking. I'm sure you're very nice in general every day life.

You are just another typical RWNJ, but I mean that in the nicest possible way.

 

[buttercup]

Well, first god doesn't give anyone rights, the Constitution does.

And second, your guns are a public health menace.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."​

You're free to disbelieve that your natural rights come from God, but I hope you realize that if things were your away, and government gave us our rights, then government can just as easily take them away. And if you don't see that that is precisely what they've been trying to do, then you are naïve or willfully blind.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

The Supreme Court has long said there are limits.

And yet the actual text of the Second Amendment makes it quite clear that there are not. “…the right of the people…shall not be infringed.”

 

[Crixus]

Really? Because I can think of quite a few limitations that have been around for decades.

Is this the level of scare tactics the GOP is resorting to?

Pretty low. Kind of like saying a guy screws kids.

 

[Reasonable]

Shall not be infringed...

When the founders wrote the 2nd, people used single shot muskets.
If they could envision automatic weapons that sprayed hundreds of bullets in seconds they would have never written the 2nd in the words they used..
The 2nd amendment needs a serious update.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Well, first god doesn't give anyone rights, the Constitution does.

And second, your guns are a public health menace.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."​

You're free to disbelieve that your natural rights come from God, but I hope you realize that if things were your away, and government gave us our rights, then government can just as easily take them away. And if you don't see that that is precisely what they've been trying to do, then you are naïve or willfully blind.

buttercup wins the thread.

 

[Natural Citizen]

When the founders wrote the 2nd, people used single shot muskets.

As did their detractors!

 

[WinterBorn]

Really? Because I can think of quite a few limitations that have been around for decades.

Is this the level of scare tactics the GOP is resorting to?

Pretty low. Kind of like saying a guy screws kids.

If you say so. I don't know the context of Doug Jones' comments.

 

[turtledude]

View attachment 161610

no way he can win. UNELECTABLE!

Doug Jones tackles gun rights, abortion and health care in national interview - Alabama Political Reporter

Large % of Americans believe citizens SHOULD NOT have military style weapons.
Jones is a reflection of modern America.

large numbers of morons have no clue about what they are talking about. If CIVILIAN POLICE are issued certain types of firearms FOR SELF DEFENSE IN A CIVILIAN ENVIRONMENT, then OTHER CIVILIANS ought to have access to those same type of firearms as well.

Police are issued firearms for law enforcement.

Your little neighbor watch doesn't qualify.

you're not very bright are you. if a governmental unit issues its civilian employees who are the second responders to a violent crime incident, certain weapons, that government unit is admitting that those firearms are most suitable for its civilian employees to use for self defense against criminals in a civilian environment. Now how can any one then claim such firearms have absolutely no legitimate use among other civilians?

I will put you down as someone who wants criminals to have an advantage over honest citizens

 

[WinterBorn]

Shall not be infringed...

When the founders wrote the 2nd, people used single shot muskets.
If they could envision automatic weapons that sprayed hundreds of bullets in seconds they would have never written the 2nd in the words they used..
The 2nd amendment needs a serious update.

When the founders wrote the 2nd amendment, a single shot rifle was the state of the art military firearm.

 

[Natural Citizen]

We could likely settle this debate with maybe 2 or 3 strategically chosen Federalist Papers.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

If the constitution was taken seriously, the federal government would have no authority in this area because of the second and TENTH amendment. Article One Section 8 does not properly delegate any power to the federal government to restrict, ban, nor control firearms owned by private citizens. The limitations, if any, are at a state level because the bill of rights was not intended to apply to the states and the founders only had the authority to create the powers for the new federal government, not the states. once the bill of rights was incorporated through the 14th amendment, the entire federal structure was sent helter-skelter though.

I would point out that even without the Fourteenth Amendment, the wording of the Second Amendment, together with the Tenth, make it quite clear that not even the state has the legitimate power to infringe this right. The Tenth is mainly about the distinction between powers belonging to the federal government, versus powers belonging to the states, but it also mentions those belonging to the people (which even the states would be prohibited from claiming, just as the federal government is prohibited from claiming those powers that belong to the states). The Second Amendment is explicit on the point of to whom the right/power which it affirms belongs. It belongs to the people. This means that it does not belong to the states, nor to the federal government, and neither is authorized to claim it or to interfere with it.

The Second Amendment further declares that this right “…shall not be infringed.”. Period. End of sentence. It does not say that the states may infringe this right. It does not say that cities or localities may infringe this right. It most certainly does not say that the federal government may infringe this right. It explicitly forbids any and all infringement of this right, from any source.

The Second Amendment is the strongest, clearest, and most absolute language found anywhere in the entire Constitution.

 

[BULLDOG]

Well, first god doesn't give anyone rights, the Constitution does.

And second, your guns are a public health menace.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."​

You're free to disbelieve that your natural rights come from God, but I hope you realize that if things were your away, and government gave us our rights, then government can just as easily take them away. And if you don't see that that is precisely what they've been trying to do, then you are naïve or willfully blind.

God might have given you some rights, but if they aren't in the constitution, you have no right to practice them.

 

[BULLDOG]

The Supreme Court has long said there are limits.

And yet the actual text of the Second Amendment makes it quite clear that there are not. “…the right of the people…shall not be infringed.”

So you want to just dump the rulings of the Supreme Court? How unpatriotic of you.

 

[Natural Citizen]

...if they aren't in the constitution, you have no right to practice them.

Remember the time you couldn't find Judicial Review in Article III of the Constitution?

 

[Natural Citizen]

Tee hee hee hee hee

 

[BULLDOG]

...if they aren't in the constitution, you have no right to practice them.

Remember the time you couldn't find Judicial Review in Article III of the Constitution?

Again, goober. that's not how it works.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Again, goober. that's not how it works.

But remember the time you couldn't find Judicial Review in Article III of the Constitution and then turned around 5 minutes later and said if they aren't in the Constitution, you have no right to practice them?

Do you see how utterly stupid you're making yourself look? Or do you really believe that Individual rights are arbitrary depending on your mood? lolol.

That mindset is why the 2nd exists in the first place. Go color.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

The Supreme Court has long said there are limits.

The Supreme court can "Say" anything....doesn't make it Constitutional OR Right.
ObamaCare was the most UnConstitutional example in modern history and proved the Constitution can be "interpreted" out of existence.

Ultimately, it's those gun rights that are there to insure the Supreme Court doesn't become the Supremely Corrupt Court.......(it will and it has)

Whether or not Constitutional Patriots can and will defend the Constitution is yet to be seen.

 

[turtledude]

The Supreme Court has long said there are limits.

And yet the actual text of the Second Amendment makes it quite clear that there are not. “…the right of the people…shall not be infringed.”

So you want to just dump the rulings of the Supreme Court? How unpatriotic of you.

you seem to be a statist pawn