fyi; the Second Amendment allows you to have the other amendments.
For those totally ignorant of history
really?
then why was treason the only criminal act defined in the constitution?
It's not treasonous to over throw a tyrannical government.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
fyi; the Second Amendment allows you to have the other amendments.
For those totally ignorant of history
really?
then why was treason the only criminal act defined in the constitution?
He has said it has flaws.I suspect you could make a argument about most anything written 200 plus years ago being obsolete by today's standards. So the question is do you want to go redefining a constitution that was worked very well for over 200 years to today's standards? If we go down that path I don't think any of us will like what we find at the end of it.
Whether the Constution works depends on who you talk to. obama says it has never worked and was fatally flawed the day it was signed.
really?
link?
idiota
He has said it has flaws.Whether the Constution works depends on who you talk to. obama says it has never worked and was fatally flawed the day it was signed.
really?
link?
idiota
Obama: Constitution is 'Deeply Flawed'
Some of use are and some aren't.Armed or not we are still closer to subjects than free citizens.
things are generally part of the constitution after they're obsolete or they wouldn't be changed. but the reality is, the constitution, except for prohibition, has never been amended to limit rights... it's only ever been amended to expand them.
and it's unlikely that the 2nd amendment would be amended any time soon.
Quite true, the government prefers to limit rights through court decisions.
in most instances rights are enforced by court decisions.
what "rights" are you talking about?
Some of use are and some aren't.Armed or not we are still closer to subjects than free citizens.
fyi; the Second Amendment allows you to have the other amendments.
For those totally ignorant of history
really?
then why was treason the only criminal act defined in the constitution?
Some of use are and some aren't.Armed or not we are still closer to subjects than free citizens.
no... we aren't.
I suspect you could make a argument about most anything written 200 plus years ago being obsolete by today's standards. So the question is do you want to go redefining a constitution that was worked very well for over 200 years to today's standards? If we go down that path I don't think any of us will like what we find at the end of it.
Whether the Constution works depends on who you talk to. obama says it has never worked and was fatally flawed the day it was signed.
fyi; the Second Amendment allows you to have the other amendments.
For those totally ignorant of history
really?
then why was treason the only criminal act defined in the constitution?
It's not treasonous to over throw a tyrannical government.
really?
then why was treason the only criminal act defined in the constitution?
It's not treasonous to over throw a tyrannical government.
It's psychotic to see something that does not exist.
Paranoia is a sickness spread by the NRA.
really?
then why was treason the only criminal act defined in the constitution?
It's not treasonous to over throw a tyrannical government.
It's psychotic to see something that does not exist.
Paranoia is a sickness spread by the NRA.
From the 2008 DC v. Heller ruling, written by Scalia, and one of the very few Supreme Court cases to touch on the Second Amendment at all:
"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Courts opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."
Remember: Written by Scalia, i.e., not one of those liberal judicial activists you hear so much about.
Miller vs U.S. and Lewis vs. U.S. state that only militia type firearms are the only weapons protected by the second amendment.From the 2008 DC v. Heller ruling, written by Scalia, and one of the very few Supreme Court cases to touch on the Second Amendment at all:
"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Courts opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."
Remember: Written by Scalia, i.e., not one of those liberal judicial activists you hear so much about.
More: And Now a Thought From Justice Scalia
Protected by 2nd Amendment.
really?
then why was treason the only criminal act defined in the constitution?
It's not treasonous to over throw a tyrannical government.
It's psychotic to see something that does not exist.
Paranoia is a sickness spread by the NRA.