The definitive guide to the 2nd Amendment

[Lesh]

Your contention is that even though the 2A specifies WHY there was a need for "gun rights" they had other reasons for it...but chose not to enunciate those reasons?

Sorry but that's not how it works. Especially if you're going to try to claim to be a strict constructionist

Since the right is not granted, given, created or otherwise established by the 2nd Amendment, the right to arms in no manner depends on the Constitution for its existence. That is what a strict constructionist believes -- and that has been what SCOTUS has said for going on 140 years.

That's MY contention as well

 

[Lesh]

OR, any federal gun control law is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!

The 1934 Firearms Act itself proves my position. It does not ban any weapon. It levies a tax on certain weapons. That's all congress can do.

Um...Interestingly Congress did just that in 1986

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

managed to stow away in the bilge, to avoid the intelligence fee?

What the fuck does that mean? You are not speaking English. Mexican idioms do not translate to English like you think they do. Google Translate can't work magic.

Any federal gun laws prove Your right wing propaganda, just rhetoric.

A gun law means I am right? What are you saying dan?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The Militia of the United States, is what we are referring to.

Yes, but the 2nd Amendment is referring to state militia.

It secures that States' sovereign right to Arm the State militia.

AND to do so, it prevents CONGRESS and the Federal Government from acting, right?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

My argument has ALWAYS been that the 2nd Amendment's sole operation is to ban federal authority over arms. That's all I have ever argued.

The 2nd limits federal power. Nothing more.

 

[Abatis]

That's MY contention as well

??? I thought you were arguing that the 2nd Amendment only secures civilian possession and use of arms within the confines of enrolled militia activity? . . . That you do not accept any interpretation of the 2nd Amendment that extends federal protection of any right for (what you deem to be) "unlisted" purposes.

 

[Skull Pilot]

and, natural rights are recognized and secured in State Constitutions, not our Second Amendment.

Oh you poor little dimwit. Nothing could be further from the truth. The U.S. Constitution explicitly restricts the federal government to 18 enumerated powers. Restricting firearms is not one of those powers.

You seem confused.

I never said that the Constitution "restricts" anything.

It simply only PROTECTS guns insofar as their need related to a "A Well Regulated Militia"

Wrong

The right to keep and bear belongs to the people as do all rights even those not enumerated in the Bill of Rights

The idea that rights exist within the person and are not granted by the government is the keystone of American government

Natural rights are in State Constitutions, not our Second Amendment.

I never mentioned natural rights Idiot.

ALL rights belong to the people and can neither be granted nor revoked by government

This one idea is what separates the USA from every other country

 

[Cecilie1200]

Not in the Constitution, no. That IS how it works, since you will notice that no other Amendment in the Bill of Rights has any explanatory clause AT ALL.

So you acknowledge that your claims don't emanate from what is in the Constitution

And THEN you note that this is the ONLY Amendment that tells us why it is there....which reinforces MY claim...not yours.

The Constitution was not a careless document. Everything in it was there for a reason

By the way...how was the vacation?

"So you acknowledge whatever it is I want to hear, regardless of what you said, because I didn't read it anyway, I was too busy conducting both sides of the debate in my head!"

Read your own frigging post to which I'm responding, then ACTUALLY READ MY POST, and at least ATTEMPT to have an attention span longer than five seconds, if you can possibly manage it.

Explained it once, not wasting my time on repeating myself to someone not bright enough to understand it and too happy inside her own delusions of adequacy to even try, anyway.

 

[danielpalos]

The Militia of the United States, is what we are referring to.

Yes, but the 2nd Amendment is referring to state militia.

It secures that States' sovereign right to Arm the State militia.

AND to do so, it prevents CONGRESS and the Federal Government from acting, right?

The federal government cannot disarm the several States.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The federal government cannot disarm the several States.

Take your collective horseshit and shove it up your ass. The people are individuals, not states.

The Second Amendment commands the federal government that it shall not regulate firearms or other arms. That is all it does. That is the most reasonable explanation.

Your explanation requires 6° of Kevin Bacon. Mine is simple, straightforward, and plain.

 

[danielpalos]

The federal government cannot disarm the several States.

Take your collective horseshit and shove it up your ass. The people are individuals, not states.

The Second Amendment commands the federal government that it shall not regulate firearms or other arms. That is all it does. That is the most reasonable explanation.

Your explanation requires 6° of Kevin Bacon. Mine is simple, straightforward, and plain.

there are no individual rights outside of the security needs of a free State, in our Second Amendment.

 

[P@triot]

You seem confused. I never said that the Constitution "restricts" anything.

Uh...yeah...genius. I know you never said anything about the U.S. Constitution restricting. I did. I was pointing out how you don’t understand the U.S. Constitution. At all. Allow me to state it again in hopes that you will read and comprehend.

The U.S. Constitution explicitly restricts the federal government to 18 enumerated powers. There are 18 things that the federal government is constitutionally permitted to do. Anything beyond those 18 items are illegal/unconstitutional.

Restricting, banning, controlling, or otherwise infringing on firearm rights are not (I repeat...not) one of those 18 enumerated powers of the federal government. Therefore, it is completely unconstitutional for the federal government to create ANY legislation about firearms.

Clearly it is you who is confused.

 

[P@triot]

10USC246 clarifies it.

Not only does 10USC246 not clarify it, it doesn’t even have the power to clarify it anyway! The U.S. Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land (per the Supremacy Clause) and thus trumps any and all other law! Once again, you desperately grasp at a straw and you come up short. You lose.

 

[P@triot]

there are no individual rights outside of the security needs of a free State, in our Second Amendment.

The 2nd Amendment, the U.S. Constitution, our founders, and all educated people vehemently disagree with you.

...the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

It’s a right. It belongs to the people. Sorry, not sorry, snowflake. I’m armed as we speak, and I have never been a member of the “militia”. You lose.

 

[P@triot]

Natural rights are in State Constitutions, not our Second Amendment.

Snowflake, if natural rights were in our state constitutions, they could be taken away by the federal government. Federal law trumps state and local law.

Additionally, since all 50 states have their own state constitution, we would all have different rights as Americans. But we don’t. Know why? Because all of our rights exist in the U.S. Constitution.

Do you understand now how dumb your sound with your desperate attempts to declare that citizens do not have an unmitigated right to keep and bear arms?

 

[P@triot]

lol. only, appealers to ignorance, claim that. I have nothing but the Truth; unlike the whole and entire, right wing.

Oh the irony!!! The guy who fails to capitalize the first word of a sentence, and who, adds a comma where no comma should be, wants to talk about “ignorance”.

Natural rights are recognized and secured in State Constitutions, not our Second Amendment.

Only in the minds of the ignorant, uninformed, and desperate.

 

[P@triot]

lol. only, appealers to ignorance, claim that. I have nothing but the Truth; unlike the whole and entire, right wing.

The atrocious grammar is how you know one of two things. Either Daniel is a typical uneducated lefty (high school dropout, pot smoker, etc.) or he’s a paid Russian troll. It is unquestionably one of the two.

 

[August West]

You seem confused. I never said that the Constitution "restricts" anything.

Uh...yeah...genius. I know you never said anything about the U.S. Constitution restricting. I did. I was pointing out how you don’t understand the U.S. Constitution. At all. Allow me to state it again in hopes that you will read and comprehend.

The U.S. Constitution explicitly restricts the federal government to 18 enumerated powers. There are 18 things that the federal government is constitutionally permitted to do. Anything beyond those 18 items are illegal/unconstitutional.

Restricting, banning, controlling, or otherwise infringing on firearm rights are not (I repeat...not) one of those 18 enumerated powers of the federal government. Therefore, it is completely unconstitutional for the federal government to create ANY legislation about firearms.

Clearly it is you who is confused.

The next time you`re stopped and disarmed at a metal detector give the police your little infringement speech. They like a good laugh now and then too.

 

[danielpalos]

10USC246 clarifies it.

Not only does 10USC246 not clarify it, it doesn’t even have the power to clarify it anyway! The U.S. Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land (per the Supremacy Clause) and thus trumps any and all other law! Once again, you desperately grasp at a straw and you come up short. You lose.

there is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

 

[danielpalos]

there are no individual rights outside of the security needs of a free State, in our Second Amendment.

The 2nd Amendment, the U.S. Constitution, our founders, and all educated people vehemently disagree with you.

...the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

It’s a right. It belongs to the people. Sorry, not sorry, snowflake. I’m armed as we speak, and I have never been a member of the “militia”. You lose.

fundamentals matter; the first clause must serve some legislative intent and purpose.