The Right To Bear Arms

[Wry Catcher]

Try taking our firearms and see what happens.

Ask David Koresh.

Ask the families of the 4 ATF agents killed in the initial raid. Reno ordered a tank to pour flammable gas inside the compound and Cav helicopters to murder over 70 innocent Christians as they ran out the back from the inferno, a totally illegal act. The good that came from it was a message to Clinturd he couldn't continue to murder Americans with opposing political views. Reno is dead and burning in Hell for it and I hope to outlive Clinton so I can piss on his grave. I'm sure your smug response is based on the premise you communists will murder those who won't surrender their weapons sometime in the future. Try it.....the Military will win the first few days, and then take such horrific loses they'll turn on their officers, who in turn will rout the government that ordered it.[/QUOTE]

I see, you've been in the reading room of the Ministry of Truth.

 

[sealybobo]

The Supremes can no more abolish the 2nd than they can any other amendment in the Bill of Rights.......those are cast in granite.

Funny. The 2nd Amendment means whatever SCOTUS says it means at any point in time. It currently stands as a fossil.

And or your state. Michigan for example almost passed a law saying you can open or conceal carry without taking the cow class. I would love that. I want to take guns up north and worry I’ll get a felony for transporting them wrong. I should be able to drive around lock and loaded. If not then we don’t really have the right, right?

Seems like my right has been limited.

Limited, perhaps – but not ‘violated.’

Again, the Second Amendment right is not ‘absolute. “It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” ibid

Yea but how can conservatives not defend any mans right to carry a gun?

They talk about any new gun legislation being unconstitutional but so what? Whatever laws that exist now that say I can’t walk in the woods with my loaded gun, unless I take a class is too.

I shouldn’t have to take a class. Talk about registering and monitoring all gun owners. The government knows where all you ccw permit carrying card members live. You’ve registered yourselves.

The truth is even republicans don’t want everyone walking around armed.

 

[sealybobo]

where do you get your propaganda and rhetoric from?

there is no such Thing as well regulated militia of Individuals of the People in our federal Republic.

People own weapons. Militias do not. People have the right to bear arms. Militias do not.

where do you get your propaganda and rhetoric from?

Our Second Amendment clearly expresses what is necessary to the security of a free State.

Congress is responsible for arming the militia.

The second amendment prevents Congress from making laws preventing people from owning guns. That's pretty much it.

it is about the security of our free States, not natural rights.

The Supreme Court holds differently. Are you more of an authority than they are? If so, cite your qualifications.

If the Supreme Court leaned left would you still be singing it’s praises?

 

[buckeye45_73]

The Supremes can no more abolish the 2nd than they can any other amendment in the Bill of Rights.......those are cast in granite.

Funny. The 2nd Amendment means whatever SCOTUS says it means at any point in time. It currently stands as a fossil.

And or your state. Michigan for example almost passed a law saying you can open or conceal carry without taking the cow class. I would love that. I want to take guns up north and worry I’ll get a felony for transporting them wrong. I should be able to drive around lock and loaded. If not then we don’t really have the right, right?

Seems like my right has been limited.

Limited, perhaps – but not ‘violated.’

Again, the Second Amendment right is not ‘absolute. “It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” ibid

Yea but how can conservatives not defend any mans right to carry a gun?

They talk about any new gun legislation being unconstitutional but so what? Whatever laws that exist now that say I can’t walk in the woods with my loaded gun, unless I take a class is too.

I shouldn’t have to take a class. Talk about registering and monitoring all gun owners. The government knows where all you ccw permit carrying card members live. You’ve registered yourselves.

The truth is even republicans don’t want everyone walking around armed.

I do except criminals....you get convicted you lose your rights....no issue with that

 

[Rustic]

The Supremes can no more abolish the 2nd than they can any other amendment in the Bill of Rights.......those are cast in granite.

Funny. The 2nd Amendment means whatever SCOTUS says it means at any point in time. It currently stands as a fossil.

And or your state. Michigan for example almost passed a law saying you can open or conceal carry without taking the cow class. I would love that. I want to take guns up north and worry I’ll get a felony for transporting them wrong. I should be able to drive around lock and loaded. If not then we don’t really have the right, right?

Seems like my right has been limited.

Limited, perhaps – but not ‘violated.’

Again, the Second Amendment right is not ‘absolute. “It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” ibid

Yea but how can conservatives not defend any mans right to carry a gun?

They talk about any new gun legislation being unconstitutional but so what? Whatever laws that exist now that say I can’t walk in the woods with my loaded gun, unless I take a class is too.

I shouldn’t have to take a class. Talk about registering and monitoring all gun owners. The government knows where all you ccw permit carrying card members live. You’ve registered yourselves.

The truth is even republicans don’t want everyone walking around armed.

Firearm registration is unconstitutional...
South Dakota now allows concealed handguns to be carried without a permit - CNN

 

[progressive hunter]

People own weapons. Militias do not. People have the right to bear arms. Militias do not.

where do you get your propaganda and rhetoric from?

Our Second Amendment clearly expresses what is necessary to the security of a free State.

Congress is responsible for arming the militia.

The second amendment prevents Congress from making laws preventing people from owning guns. That's pretty much it.

it is about the security of our free States, not natural rights.

The Supreme Court holds differently. Are you more of an authority than they are? If so, cite your qualifications.

If the Supreme Court leaned left would you still be singing it’s praises?

not the job of SCOTUS to lean one way or the other,,,

 

[Cellblock2429]

By Peter Weber

That's the opinion of Rupert Murdoch's conservative New York Post. And it's not as far-fetched as it may seem.

Well, let's read the text of the Second Amendment, says Jeffrey Sachs at The Huffington Post:

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.​

It's astonishingly clear that "the Second Amendment is a relic of the founding era more than two centuries ago," and "its purpose is long past."

As Justice John Paul Stevens argues persuasively, the amendment should not block the ability of society to keep itself safe through gun control legislation. That was never its intent. This amendment was about militias in the 1790s, and the fear of the anti-federalists of a federal army. Since that issue is long moot, we need not be governed in our national life by doctrines on now-extinct militias from the 18th century.​

"Fair-minded readers have to acknowledge that the text is ambiguous," says Cass Sunstein at Bloomberg View. Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote the majority opinion in Heller, was laying out his interpretation of a "genuinely difficult" legal question, and "I am not saying that the court was wrong." More to the point: Right or wrong, obsolete or relevant, the Second Amendment essentially means what five justices on the Supreme Court say it means. So "we should respect the fact that the individual right to have guns has been established," but even the pro-gun interpretation laid out by Scalia explicitly allows for banning the kinds of weapons the shooter used to murder 20 first-graders. The real problem is in the political arena, where "opponents of gun control, armed with both organization and money, have been invoking the Second Amendment far more recklessly," using "wild and unsupportable claims about the meaning of the Constitution" to shut down debate on what sort of regulations might save lives.

More: Is the Second Amendment obsolete? - The Week

/——/ Here’s a good reason to bear arms- protecting our borders from invaders, and apparently it’s working.
Mexico warns of 'deep concern' over armed groups on U.S. border - Reuters

 

[hadit]

People own weapons. Militias do not. People have the right to bear arms. Militias do not.

where do you get your propaganda and rhetoric from?

Our Second Amendment clearly expresses what is necessary to the security of a free State.

Congress is responsible for arming the militia.

The second amendment prevents Congress from making laws preventing people from owning guns. That's pretty much it.

it is about the security of our free States, not natural rights.

The Supreme Court holds differently. Are you more of an authority than they are? If so, cite your qualifications.

If the Supreme Court leaned left would you still be singing it’s praises?

How is it singing praises to note that the SC has a lot of authority on the Constitution?

 

[watchingfromafar]

Firearm registration is unconstitutional...

So said the spider to the fly---

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The Supremes can no more abolish the 2nd than they can any other amendment in the Bill of Rights.......those are cast in granite.

Funny. The 2nd Amendment means whatever SCOTUS says it means at any point in time. It currently stands as a fossil.

And or your state. Michigan for example almost passed a law saying you can open or conceal carry without taking the cow class. I would love that. I want to take guns up north and worry I’ll get a felony for transporting them wrong. I should be able to drive around lock and loaded. If not then we don’t really have the right, right?

Seems like my right has been limited.

Limited, perhaps – but not ‘violated.’

Again, the Second Amendment right is not ‘absolute. “It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” ibid

Yea but how can conservatives not defend any mans right to carry a gun?

They talk about any new gun legislation being unconstitutional but so what? Whatever laws that exist now that say I can’t walk in the woods with my loaded gun, unless I take a class is too.

I shouldn’t have to take a class. Talk about registering and monitoring all gun owners. The government knows where all you ccw permit carrying card members live. You’ve registered yourselves.

The truth is even republicans don’t want everyone walking around armed.

Firearm registration is unconstitutional...
South Dakota now allows concealed handguns to be carried without a permit - CNN

And exactly what is your per person per mile saturation in SD again? Are people really beating a path to live there? Remember, cupcake, I lived there for a few years and the best view I had was SD in my rear view mirror.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The Supremes can no more abolish the 2nd than they can any other amendment in the Bill of Rights.......those are cast in granite.

Funny. The 2nd Amendment means whatever SCOTUS says it means at any point in time. It currently stands as a fossil.

And or your state. Michigan for example almost passed a law saying you can open or conceal carry without taking the cow class. I would love that. I want to take guns up north and worry I’ll get a felony for transporting them wrong. I should be able to drive around lock and loaded. If not then we don’t really have the right, right?

Seems like my right has been limited.

Limited, perhaps – but not ‘violated.’

Again, the Second Amendment right is not ‘absolute. “It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” ibid

Yea but how can conservatives not defend any mans right to carry a gun?

They talk about any new gun legislation being unconstitutional but so what? Whatever laws that exist now that say I can’t walk in the woods with my loaded gun, unless I take a class is too.

I shouldn’t have to take a class. Talk about registering and monitoring all gun owners. The government knows where all you ccw permit carrying card members live. You’ve registered yourselves.

The truth is even republicans don’t want everyone walking around armed.

Conservatives who claim that a new firearm regulatory measure is ‘un-Constitution’ are both ignorant and wrong.

Otherwise, that one must take a training course and have a license to carry a concealed firearm does not violate the Second Amendment.

Citizens may argue that such laws are pointless and ineffective, but they can’t claim that those laws are un-Constitutional.

 

[Cellblock2429]

The Supremes can no more abolish the 2nd than they can any other amendment in the Bill of Rights.......those are cast in granite.

Funny. The 2nd Amendment means whatever SCOTUS says it means at any point in time. It currently stands as a fossil.

And or your state. Michigan for example almost passed a law saying you can open or conceal carry without taking the cow class. I would love that. I want to take guns up north and worry I’ll get a felony for transporting them wrong. I should be able to drive around lock and loaded. If not then we don’t really have the right, right?

Seems like my right has been limited.

Limited, perhaps – but not ‘violated.’

Again, the Second Amendment right is not ‘absolute. “It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” ibid

Yea but how can conservatives not defend any mans right to carry a gun?

They talk about any new gun legislation being unconstitutional but so what? Whatever laws that exist now that say I can’t walk in the woods with my loaded gun, unless I take a class is too.

I shouldn’t have to take a class. Talk about registering and monitoring all gun owners. The government knows where all you ccw permit carrying card members live. You’ve registered yourselves.

The truth is even republicans don’t want everyone walking around armed.

Conservatives who claim that a new firearm regulatory measure is ‘un-Constitution’ are both ignorant and wrong.

Otherwise, that one must take a training course and have a license to carry a concealed firearm does not violate the Second Amendment.

Citizens may argue that such laws are pointless and ineffective, but they can’t claim that those laws are un-Constitutional.

/——/ Until the USSC rules they aren’t unConstitutional we sure can make that claim. It’s called the 1st Amendment

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The Supremes can no more abolish the 2nd than they can any other amendment in the Bill of Rights.......those are cast in granite.

Funny. The 2nd Amendment means whatever SCOTUS says it means at any point in time. It currently stands as a fossil.

And or your state. Michigan for example almost passed a law saying you can open or conceal carry without taking the cow class. I would love that. I want to take guns up north and worry I’ll get a felony for transporting them wrong. I should be able to drive around lock and loaded. If not then we don’t really have the right, right?

Seems like my right has been limited.

Limited, perhaps – but not ‘violated.’

Again, the Second Amendment right is not ‘absolute. “It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” ibid

case law clayton to the rescue,,,AGAIN,,,

and he still cant get it right

lol

Dig up Scalia and argue with him about it; that’s a direct quote from Scalia.

 

[Wry Catcher]

where do you get your propaganda and rhetoric from?

Our Second Amendment clearly expresses what is necessary to the security of a free State.

Congress is responsible for arming the militia.

The second amendment prevents Congress from making laws preventing people from owning guns. That's pretty much it.

it is about the security of our free States, not natural rights.

The Supreme Court holds differently. Are you more of an authority than they are? If so, cite your qualifications.

If the Supreme Court leaned left would you still be singing it’s praises?

not the job of SCOTUS to lean one way or the other,,,

Than why have Trump and McConnell chosen to pack the Supreme Court?

 

[progressive hunter]

The second amendment prevents Congress from making laws preventing people from owning guns. That's pretty much it.

it is about the security of our free States, not natural rights.

The Supreme Court holds differently. Are you more of an authority than they are? If so, cite your qualifications.

If the Supreme Court leaned left would you still be singing it’s praises?

not the job of SCOTUS to lean one way or the other,,,

Than why have Trump and McConnell chosen to pack the Supreme Court?

exactly how are they packing the court???

they guys he put in care more about the constitution than those progressive kunts obama put in

 

[Rustic]

Funny. The 2nd Amendment means whatever SCOTUS says it means at any point in time. It currently stands as a fossil.

And or your state. Michigan for example almost passed a law saying you can open or conceal carry without taking the cow class. I would love that. I want to take guns up north and worry I’ll get a felony for transporting them wrong. I should be able to drive around lock and loaded. If not then we don’t really have the right, right?

Seems like my right has been limited.

Limited, perhaps – but not ‘violated.’

Again, the Second Amendment right is not ‘absolute. “It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” ibid

Yea but how can conservatives not defend any mans right to carry a gun?

They talk about any new gun legislation being unconstitutional but so what? Whatever laws that exist now that say I can’t walk in the woods with my loaded gun, unless I take a class is too.

I shouldn’t have to take a class. Talk about registering and monitoring all gun owners. The government knows where all you ccw permit carrying card members live. You’ve registered yourselves.

The truth is even republicans don’t want everyone walking around armed.

Firearm registration is unconstitutional...
South Dakota now allows concealed handguns to be carried without a permit - CNN

And exactly what is your per person per mile saturation in SD again? Are people really beating a path to live there? Remember, cupcake, I lived there for a few years and the best view I had was SD in my rear view mirror.

Lol
Violent crime is basically nonexistent in western South Dakota, doesn’t cost much to live in western South Dakota, it isn’t overrun with crazy’s like east/west coast and most of Colorado anymore, Regulations are at an minimum, Very few frivolous gun control laws, We do have all four seasons here, Lots of natural resources to take advantage of, No state income tax, Wide open spaces with decent scenery, And certainly is not crawling with people.. Sure it isn’t perfect, But a very decent place to live if you want to be left alone.

 

[sealybobo]

where do you get your propaganda and rhetoric from?

Our Second Amendment clearly expresses what is necessary to the security of a free State.

Congress is responsible for arming the militia.

The second amendment prevents Congress from making laws preventing people from owning guns. That's pretty much it.

it is about the security of our free States, not natural rights.

The Supreme Court holds differently. Are you more of an authority than they are? If so, cite your qualifications.

If the Supreme Court leaned left would you still be singing it’s praises?

How is it singing praises to note that the SC has a lot of authority on the Constitution?

And you love it now that it tilts your way. If they were libs you’d say they were legislating from the bench

 

[sealybobo]

it is about the security of our free States, not natural rights.

The Supreme Court holds differently. Are you more of an authority than they are? If so, cite your qualifications.

If the Supreme Court leaned left would you still be singing it’s praises?

not the job of SCOTUS to lean one way or the other,,,

Than why have Trump and McConnell chosen to pack the Supreme Court?

exactly how are they packing the court???

they guys he put in care more about the constitution than those progressive kunts obama put in

I love this care more about the constitution crap. No, they interpret it the way you like.

Well you’re going to find this new Supreme Court sees it the way rich people and corporations see it.

Are you rich?

 

[sealybobo]

The Supremes can no more abolish the 2nd than they can any other amendment in the Bill of Rights.......those are cast in granite.

Funny. The 2nd Amendment means whatever SCOTUS says it means at any point in time. It currently stands as a fossil.

And or your state. Michigan for example almost passed a law saying you can open or conceal carry without taking the cow class. I would love that. I want to take guns up north and worry I’ll get a felony for transporting them wrong. I should be able to drive around lock and loaded. If not then we don’t really have the right, right?

Seems like my right has been limited.

Limited, perhaps – but not ‘violated.’

Again, the Second Amendment right is not ‘absolute. “It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” ibid

Yea but how can conservatives not defend any mans right to carry a gun?

They talk about any new gun legislation being unconstitutional but so what? Whatever laws that exist now that say I can’t walk in the woods with my loaded gun, unless I take a class is too.

I shouldn’t have to take a class. Talk about registering and monitoring all gun owners. The government knows where all you ccw permit carrying card members live. You’ve registered yourselves.

The truth is even republicans don’t want everyone walking around armed.

Conservatives who claim that a new firearm regulatory measure is ‘un-Constitution’ are both ignorant and wrong.

Otherwise, that one must take a training course and have a license to carry a concealed firearm does not violate the Second Amendment.

Citizens may argue that such laws are pointless and ineffective, but they can’t claim that those laws are un-Constitutional.

Might as well say register yourself as a person they should go after if they ever want to round up the guns.

I shouldn’t have to jump through hoops to exercise my rights. You republicans put up with too many regulations

 

[sealybobo]

The Supremes can no more abolish the 2nd than they can any other amendment in the Bill of Rights.......those are cast in granite.

Funny. The 2nd Amendment means whatever SCOTUS says it means at any point in time. It currently stands as a fossil.

And or your state. Michigan for example almost passed a law saying you can open or conceal carry without taking the cow class. I would love that. I want to take guns up north and worry I’ll get a felony for transporting them wrong. I should be able to drive around lock and loaded. If not then we don’t really have the right, right?

Seems like my right has been limited.

Limited, perhaps – but not ‘violated.’

Again, the Second Amendment right is not ‘absolute. “It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” ibid

case law clayton to the rescue,,,AGAIN,,,

and he still cant get it right

lol

Dig up Scalia and argue with him about it; that’s a direct quote from Scalia.

Maybe he’s just a rino