The Right To Bear Arms

[Billo_Really]

Why do most of AMERICA think the 2nd is for hunting as dumbass biden states?....Propaganda

Joe Biden has the best smile in politics, so back off!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

by the way it's liberty from the government....if I need to explain this to you, you're a moron...

WTF are you talkin' about?

I didn't say it wasn't!

The 2nd amendment dumbass.....it's there to protect us from the government...and the only reason it's there....but retards like you think as long as a commie is in charge we should give up all of our freedoms, so we can live like peasants.....no thanks

Nonsense.

The Second Amendment protects one’s right to self-defense, and the right to own a handgun in pursuance of that right. Although it prohibits the government from enacting outright bans of certain classes of firearms, such as handguns, it does not prohibit other regulatory measures.

And it’s naïve idiocy to argue the Amendment authorizes citizens to ‘take up arms’ against a Federal government perceived to have become ‘tyrannical.’

 

[M14 Shooter]

One first acts of out new government was to put down a citizen-uprising, and to do so Washington used the militia to put down the uprising. Even an uprising by a number of states, not citizens, using equal weapons was put down, and even more, no foreign government with its armies has ever put down our government?
Yet, some still believe that the second amendment will allow some upset citizens to have guns and if they suspect the government of wrong doing, will use those guns to take down the government. We could have twenty second-amendments and the government would survive mainly because Americans are behind the government, and not behind the upset second-amendment citizens.

All of this is written in total obliviousness to the fact that the people who founded this country did so while exercising their right to rebel against tyranny.
"When in the course of human events..."

The Declaration was simply a form of propaganda to convince others that we had reason for our actions. In the end it took a war, some allies and some years to achieve that independence. Most rebellions against governments label the government as tyrannical how many nations today are involved in a war where the government is accused of tyranny? In the end, however, it is usually the side with the most power that decides.

None of this negates the soundness of what I said. Feel free to try again.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You picture simply proves my point, trhat no one has claimed what you stated.. Thank you.

It doesn't prove your point.

It does not supprt your claim, and so it proves my point that you are arguing straw.
No one has argued what you said. No one.

The fact that it is a fact makes it a fact.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER
You can disagree, but it just makes you wrong.

That decision is the result of a politicized conservative SCOTUS that reversed 200 years of legal precedents and goes against what the Framers had intended.

This is a lie - The Heller decision did not reverse a single SCotUS decision.
Disagree? Cite them.
Further, you can show no such intent from the people who wrote, debates, or ratified the 2nd,

 

[M14 Shooter]

WTF are you talkin' about?

I didn't say it wasn't!

The 2nd amendment dumbass.....it's there to protect us from the government...and the only reason it's there....but retards like you think as long as a commie is in charge we should give up all of our freedoms, so we can live like peasants.....no thanks

Nonsense.

The Second Amendment protects one’s right to self-defense, and the right to own a handgun in pursuance of that right. Although it prohibits the government from enacting outright bans of certain classes of firearms, such as handguns, it does not prohibit other regulatory measures.

That depends entirely on if the regulatory measure in question infringes upon the right to arms.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The Second Amendment protects one’s right to self-defense, and the right to own a handgun in pursuance of that right.

too stupid !! Amendment says nothing about hand guns which were rare at time of amendment

Although it prohibits the government from enacting outright bans of certain classes of firearms, such as handguns, it does not prohibit other regulatory measures.

too stupid!!! it prohibits all regulatory measures that infridge significantly on the right to bear arms

And it’s naïve idiocy to argue the Amendment authorizes citizens to ‘take up arms’ against a Federal government perceived to have become ‘tyrannical.’

too stupid!! that's exactly why the amendment was created- a too liberal government!!!!!! Did you think it was to scare squirrels off?????



"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

 

[regent]

The Second Amendment protects one’s right to self-defense, and the right to own a handgun in pursuance of that right.

too stupid !! Amendment says nothing about hand guns which were rare at time of amendment

Although it prohibits the government from enacting outright bans of certain classes of firearms, such as handguns, it does not prohibit other regulatory measures.

too stupid!!! it prohibits all regulatory measures that infridge significantly on the right to bear arms

And it’s naïve idiocy to argue the Amendment authorizes citizens to ‘take up arms’ against a Federal government perceived to have become ‘tyrannical.’

too stupid!! that's exactly why the amendment was created- a too liberal government!!!!!! Did you think it was to scare squirrels off?????



"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Any other evidence besides Jefferson's opinion? If that was the purpose for the second amendment why didn't the framers put that into the amendment; a few more words and there it would be, along with the militia purpose?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The Second Amendment protects one’s right to self-defense, and the right to own a handgun in pursuance of that right.

too stupid !! Amendment says nothing about hand guns which were rare at time of amendment


too stupid!!! it prohibits all regulatory measures that infridge significantly on the right to bear arms

And it’s naïve idiocy to argue the Amendment authorizes citizens to ‘take up arms’ against a Federal government perceived to have become ‘tyrannical.’

too stupid!! that's exactly why the amendment was created- a too liberal government!!!!!! Did you think it was to scare squirrels off?????



"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Any other evidence besides Jefferson's opinion? If that was the purpose for the second amendment why didn't the framers put that into the amendment; a few more words and there it would be, along with the militia purpose?

Alexander Hamilton: "...that standing army can never be formidable (threatening) to the liberties
of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in the use of arms."
(Federalist Paper #29)

 

[TemplarKormac]

The Second Amendment protects one’s right to self-defense, and the right to own a handgun in pursuance of that right.

too stupid !! Amendment says nothing about hand guns which were rare at time of amendment

Although it prohibits the government from enacting outright bans of certain classes of firearms, such as handguns, it does not prohibit other regulatory measures.

too stupid!!! it prohibits all regulatory measures that infridge significantly on the right to bear arms

And it’s naïve idiocy to argue the Amendment authorizes citizens to ‘take up arms’ against a Federal government perceived to have become ‘tyrannical.’

too stupid!! that's exactly why the amendment was created- a too liberal government!!!!!! Did you think it was to scare squirrels off?????



"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

That's why the term "bear arms" was written into the Amendment. The founders didn't think we would be using muskets and flintlocks forever.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The Second Amendment protects one’s right to self-defense, and the right to own a handgun in pursuance of that right.

too stupid !! Amendment says nothing about hand guns which were rare at time of amendment

Although it prohibits the government from enacting outright bans of certain classes of firearms, such as handguns, it does not prohibit other regulatory measures.

too stupid!!! it prohibits all regulatory measures that infridge significantly on the right to bear arms

And it’s naïve idiocy to argue the Amendment authorizes citizens to ‘take up arms’ against a Federal government perceived to have become ‘tyrannical.’

too stupid!! that's exactly why the amendment was created- a too liberal government!!!!!! Did you think it was to scare squirrels off?????



"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Then you reject the Heller Court’s majority opinion, and consider the ruling wrong – take it up with Justice Scalia.

 

[TemplarKormac]

WTF are you talkin' about?

I didn't say it wasn't!

The 2nd amendment dumbass.....it's there to protect us from the government...and the only reason it's there....but retards like you think as long as a commie is in charge we should give up all of our freedoms, so we can live like peasants.....no thanks

Nonsense.

The Second Amendment protects one’s right to self-defense, and the right to own a handgun in pursuance of that right. Although it prohibits the government from enacting outright bans of certain classes of firearms, such as handguns, it does not prohibit other regulatory measures.

And it’s naïve idiocy to argue the Amendment authorizes citizens to ‘take up arms’ against a Federal government perceived to have become ‘tyrannical.’

"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. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

-Declaration of Independence

 

[Billo_Really]

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Why are you quoting Jefferson? He hardly had anything to do with the final version of the Constitution.

He was in Paris most of the time during its writing.

 

[regent]

too stupid !! Amendment says nothing about hand guns which were rare at time of amendment


too stupid!!! it prohibits all regulatory measures that infridge significantly on the right to bear arms



too stupid!! that's exactly why the amendment was created- a too liberal government!!!!!! Did you think it was to scare squirrels off?????



"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Any other evidence besides Jefferson's opinion? If that was the purpose for the second amendment why didn't the framers put that into the amendment; a few more words and there it would be, along with the militia purpose?

Alexander Hamilton: "...that standing army can never be formidable (threatening) to the liberties
of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in the use of arms."
(Federalist Paper #29)

The federalist Papers were simply a reprinting of some letters to the editor, what else you got? Anything in law or the constitution, not just opinions?
If the framers took the time to write out the second amendment why couldn't they put in the amendment those things some people would want to read a few hundred years later? Very lax of them.

 

[Billo_Really]

It does not supprt your claim, and so it proves my point that you are arguing straw.
No one has argued what you said. No one.

You just want to argue semantics like a little teenager.

This is a lie - The Heller decision did not reverse a single SCotUS decision.
Disagree? Cite them.
Further, you can show no such intent from the people who wrote, debates, or ratified the 2nd,

I've proven my point.

It's not my problem if you lack the integrity to admit that.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The Second Amendment protects one’s right to self-defense, and the right to own a handgun in pursuance of that right.

too stupid !! Amendment says nothing about hand guns which were rare at time of amendment


too stupid!!! it prohibits all regulatory measures that infridge significantly on the right to bear arms

And it’s naïve idiocy to argue the Amendment authorizes citizens to ‘take up arms’ against a Federal government perceived to have become ‘tyrannical.’

too stupid!! that's exactly why the amendment was created- a too liberal government!!!!!! Did you think it was to scare squirrels off?????



"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Then you reject the Heller Court’s majority opinion, and consider the ruling wrong – take it up with Justice Scalia.

So simple minded. Scalia didn't say our second amendment rights weren't unlimited for the sake of having them regulated, they were limited to arms any reasonable civilian could use with the necessary proficiency. That means you can't go down the street with an RPG strapped to your back, or in a truck towing a howitzer behind you. You really need to understand the gist of the statement before you go off making prevaricated assumptions.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No. The importance of Marbury is that the Court ruled a law of Congress unconstitutional. Nothing in the constitution gave the Court that power but they said they had the power and we accepted it. Today, the Court can decide the constitutionally of laws, acts of presidents, acts of states and other constitutional questions all based on Marbury.
Regarding Barron that is correct, the Court ruled that the Bill of Rights applied to the national government not the state governments. Since Barron, however, the Court has been interpreting many rights in the Bill of Rights as applying to the states as well as the national government.

What part of Marbury did I get wrong? The law they ruled unconstitutional clearly expanded the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which, also clearly, is unconstitutional.

No, the Judicial Act of 1789 expansion was piddling compared to the power the court had after Marbury. Original jurisdiction was down in black and white in the constitution and the congress had given it more OJ, and Marshall declared that and the whole act unconstitutional.
Marshall completely outfoxed the new president, Jefferson and his secretary of state, Madison. The Supreme Court became a powerhouse compared to the pre-Marshall Court. As I said, Marbury was the most famous and probably the most important judicial case in our history. It is a basic in political or history courses.

And we ended up with three branches of government instead of two.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You did not give me a literal interpretation, you gave me a liberal interpretation.

I stated word for word what it said.

That is literal.

Sure you did, here is what you said it says. "Drafted by a congressional committee that seemed a bit challenged in the precise use of punctuation, it reads: “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.”

Here is what it says, "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."

No comments about punctuation, no emphasis of everything except the last clause, no extra comma before the last 4 words.

I really thought that extra comma was telling given your pretense that the committee didn't understand punctuation.

Tell me something, what is the literal interpretation of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.?"

 

[TemplarKormac]

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Why are you quoting Jefferson? He hardly had anything to do with the final version of the Constitution.

He was in Paris most of the time during its writing.

You're an idiot.

He was in Paris at the time of the Convention, but kept correspondence with James Madison to keep tabs on the proceedings in Philadelphia. He had plenty to do with the Constitution. He helped play a big role in the development of a limited Federal Government. Through his correspondences, he helped define the powers of the Constitution and the nature of the emerging republic.

Establishing A Federal Republic - Thomas Jefferson | Exhibitions - Library of Congress

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

The 2nd amendment dumbass.....it's there to protect us from the government...and the only reason it's there....but retards like you think as long as a commie is in charge we should give up all of our freedoms, so we can live like peasants.....no thanks

That's not what the Constitution says, shithead!

It clearly states what the 2nd amendment is for and it isn't your bullshit lie.

BTW, if the government wanted your little pea shooter, it'd take it and there's nothing you could do to stop them.

Our government has grown to incorporate a lot of things that are "clearly" not stated in our Constitution: such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the Federal Income tax, as well as a national Health Care System. Perhaps we also need to look into eliminating the government's role in these areas as well, or do you want to now justify and expand YOUR interpretation of what the Constitution just doesn't say?

With regard to the 2nd Amendment here is what some of our Founders, and those who are familiar with their views during that time period, had to say. I'd say their views on the issue are pretty relevant, as they in fact reveal the purpose, TRUE interpretation, and intent behind American's "right to bear arms".

"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."
- TENCHE COXE, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them.
- THOMAS JEFFERSON to George Washington, 1796. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, (Memorial Edition) Lipscomb and Bergh, editors.

Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.
- THOMAS JEFFERSON, Jefferson's "Commonplace Book," 1774_1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
- THOMAS JEFFERSON, Proposed Virginia Constitution, 1776, Jefferson Papers 344.

"Americans [have] the right and advantage of being armed, unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust their people with arms."
- SAMUEL ADAMS

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms . . ."
- GEORGE MASON

"When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor..."
- GEORGE MASON, Virginia Constitution Convention


"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."
- NOAH WEBSTER, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787)

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Why are you quoting Jefferson? He hardly had anything to do with the final version of the Constitution.

He was in Paris most of the time during its writing.

You're an idiot.

He was in Paris at the time of the Convention, but kept correspondence with James Madison to keep tabs on the proceedings in Philadelphia. He had plenty to do with the Constitution. He helped play a big role in the development of a limited Federal Government. Through his correspondences, he helped define the powers of the Constitution and the nature of the emerging republic.

Establishing A Federal Republic - Thomas Jefferson | Exhibitions - Library of Congress

Yes, Jefferson was mentor to Madison and then Madison became Jefferson's Secretary of State. Jefferson created the idea of freedom from liberal government when he wrote the Declaration. When he saw that Washington and the Federalists showed slight liberal tendencies he immediately created the Republican Party and forever destroyed the liberal Federalists! Jefferson called it Second American Revolution!!