What Part Of "Shall Not Be Infringed" Does She Not Understand?

[martybegan]

"If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulation."
- Hillary Clinton

Clinton on Individual Right to Bear Arms: 'If It Is a Constitutional Right...'

Which of the constitutionally enumerated rights is absolutely free of reasonable regulation?

So $1000 and 3-6 month wait for a handgun permit for home use in NYC is reasonable?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The militia wasn't defined by government. So just to be clear, you think they put a right of government in the bill of rights. They were afraid government would take it's own guns away and wanted to make sure that didn't happen? What you you think it means?

Kaz, I cannot argue this issue with anyone. Both sides are hardened beyond reason. All I can do is explain my thought, which doesn't matter to anyone but me, I know. But I favor regulation and I favor a ban on combat-type weapons and clips available to civilians. Although I am not a hunter, several in my family are. And I recognize the need for weapon power for many individuals threatened by critters or by humans. So by regulation I mean background checks and I mean banning weapons beyond hunting or protection needs. Some concentrate on the 'shall not be infringed' part and I concentrate on the 'regulate' and 'militia'. And taking into account the times of the writing, I believe it means militias cannot be banned, as they were under British rule, although I recognize none can really know the thought behind 2A. As far as I know, there was never a weapons ban, even under the Brits, just a ban on joining together in a military force. I wish I could explain better. I own a revolver and it is loaded with hollow-point bullets. May I never use it!

Regulated didn't mean government regulation. You should look up the definition of the word. So think about what you are arguing with "regulated." People can have guns, but only as government decides they can have guns.

So then, why did they put it in the bill of rights? Government will give you the gun rights that it decides to give you. Obviously government can do that anyway, right? That isn't a right at all, think about it

And yet all agree, excepting maybe anarchists, that 1A has a limit...i.e. the old no yelling fire in a crowded theater. Everything has a limit.

There is no limit to the 1A. You may yell "FIRE!" in a crowded theater to your heart's content, so long as you are willing to accept the consequences.

It's not a constitutional matter, but a criminal one.

There are many limits on the First Amendment limiting speech, the press and religion

Because there are does not render them constitutional.

 

[Nosmo King]

"If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulation."
- Hillary Clinton

Clinton on Individual Right to Bear Arms: 'If It Is a Constitutional Right...'

Which of the constitutionally enumerated rights is absolutely free of reasonable regulation?

So $1000 and 3-6 month wait for a handgun permit for home use in NYC is reasonable?

It's a start. But your question is not an answer.

 

[martybegan]

"If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulation."
- Hillary Clinton

Clinton on Individual Right to Bear Arms: 'If It Is a Constitutional Right...'

Which of the constitutionally enumerated rights is absolutely free of reasonable regulation?

So $1000 and 3-6 month wait for a handgun permit for home use in NYC is reasonable?

It's a start.

No, its unconstitutional, but such concepts are "beneath you".

Fascist.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

"If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulation."
- Hillary Clinton

Clinton on Individual Right to Bear Arms: 'If It Is a Constitutional Right...'

She's correct, you're not (no surprise there). Read Scalia's decision in Heller, see the 1968 Gun Control Act and consider reality if you can.

Yes, as a matter for the states. The federal government is prohibited from infringing upon the right.

 

[Nosmo King]

"If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulation."
- Hillary Clinton

Clinton on Individual Right to Bear Arms: 'If It Is a Constitutional Right...'

Which of the constitutionally enumerated rights is absolutely free of reasonable regulation?

So $1000 and 3-6 month wait for a handgun permit for home use in NYC is reasonable?

It's a start.

No, its unconstitutional, but such concepts are "beneath you".

Fascist.

Are you a constitutional scholar? Your question is not an answer to my question. Which of the constitutionally enumerated rights is absolutely free of reasonable regulation?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

"If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulation."
- Hillary Clinton

Clinton on Individual Right to Bear Arms: 'If It Is a Constitutional Right...'

What part of reasonable regulation don't YOU understand?

Show me the "reasonable regulation" clause in the Constitution.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

"If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulation."
- Hillary Clinton

Clinton on Individual Right to Bear Arms: 'If It Is a Constitutional Right...'

Billy starts this same thread from time to time with no understanding of the meaning of infringed

I raise the subject from time to time because you goobers can't get it through your thick skulls.

Why don't you tell us all what "shall not be infringed" means, there's a good boy.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

"If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulation."
- Hillary Clinton

Clinton on Individual Right to Bear Arms: 'If It Is a Constitutional Right...'

What part of reasonable regulation don't YOU understand?

Isn't a "well regulated militia" a form of regulation

It's a moot point because the right to regulate rights is permissible by well established court precedent.

Court precedent and case law are not viable or legal means to expand federal power that has been restricted by the Constitution. There is but one avenue to that.

 

[rightwinger]

The court system is fully available to all the citizens of NYC

Nice non-answer.

You just don't like the answer

Your community wants thorough background checks and regulations. There are eight million people in NYC, if they believe those regulations are excessive, they have a court system available to them

It's not an answer. Tell my why the restrictions I stated are reasonable.

Reasonable in ensuring criminals and nut jobs are not sold guns and those who get a permit meet the standards established by the community

it takes 3-6 months and $1000 to accomplish that? Really?

And again, since it is a right, the "community" doesn't have a say in it, or do you want to imply that a location can ban abortion and gay marriage if they feel like it. Or, forget the ban, just add a $1000 fee and a 3 month waiting period to each one.

You are a New Yorker...push for them to hire more people to process gun applications
Prove that $1000 is excessive for the service provided

Yes, the community does have a say in it. They can also put restrictions on abortion clinics (see Texas) or gay marriage

 

[martybegan]

"If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulation."
- Hillary Clinton

Clinton on Individual Right to Bear Arms: 'If It Is a Constitutional Right...'

Which of the constitutionally enumerated rights is absolutely free of reasonable regulation?

So $1000 and 3-6 month wait for a handgun permit for home use in NYC is reasonable?

It's a start.

No, its unconstitutional, but such concepts are "beneath you".

Fascist.

Are you a constitutional scholar? Your question is not an answer to my question. Which of the constitutionally enumerated rights is absolutely free of reasonable regulation?

How is a 3-6 month wait and a $1000 fee reasonable?

How about we apply that to abortions?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Stock up on your guns & ammo now. The corrupt witch is gunning for the 2nd Amendment. I hate to say it, but Trump's pretty much done. The corrupt witch and her rapist husband will likely be occupying the White House again. And they do represent the NWO Globalist Elite.

The goal is to disarm Citizens and create a docile subservient population. They've already accomplished that goal in much of the world. America is probably their final obstacle. Americans still have that pesky ole Constitution thing. The Globalist Elites need to scrap it. So get prepared, your 2nd Amendment rights are about to be attacked like no other time in history.

Good advice

Those of you who stocked up on guns and ammo because Obama was going to take your guns need to double up when Hillary takes over

Yes, they're both working very hard on scrapping the American Constitution. They're NWO Globalist Elite scum. Disarming Citizens and creating docile subservient populations is a vital part of the agenda. It is what it is.

It isn't what it is, except in the addled mind of a conspiracy nut.

Nah, it's the reality. The corrupt slag and her rapist husband represent the NWO Globalist Elite. They are pushing to disarm Citizens and create docile subservient populations.

They wanna get rid of that pesky U.S. Constitution. It's one of the few remaining obstacles for them. So yes, they are coming for the guns. That's not just a loony 'Conspiracy Theory.' It's Conspiracy Fact.

Paranoia strikes deep, into the black hole between your ears it has seeped

Only lunatics believe gun control = gun confiscation and only liars continue to claim this conspiracy is factual. I don't know if you are the former, the latter or both, what I do know is you are wrong.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Nice non-answer.

You just don't like the answer

Your community wants thorough background checks and regulations. There are eight million people in NYC, if they believe those regulations are excessive, they have a court system available to them

It's not an answer. Tell my why the restrictions I stated are reasonable.

Reasonable in ensuring criminals and nut jobs are not sold guns and those who get a permit meet the standards established by the community

it takes 3-6 months and $1000 to accomplish that? Really?

And again, since it is a right, the "community" doesn't have a say in it, or do you want to imply that a location can ban abortion and gay marriage if they feel like it. Or, forget the ban, just add a $1000 fee and a 3 month waiting period to each one.

You are a New Yorker...push for them to hire more people to process gun applications
Prove that $1000 is excessive for the service provided

Yes, the community does have a say in it. They can also put restrictions on abortion clinics (see Texas) or gay marriage

How much have you (all gun owners individually) paid for your gun(s) to protect yourself and your family / property? Is $1,000 to much to pay for the protection of the citizenry of New York?

 

[martybegan]

Nice non-answer.

You just don't like the answer

Your community wants thorough background checks and regulations. There are eight million people in NYC, if they believe those regulations are excessive, they have a court system available to them

It's not an answer. Tell my why the restrictions I stated are reasonable.

Reasonable in ensuring criminals and nut jobs are not sold guns and those who get a permit meet the standards established by the community

it takes 3-6 months and $1000 to accomplish that? Really?

And again, since it is a right, the "community" doesn't have a say in it, or do you want to imply that a location can ban abortion and gay marriage if they feel like it. Or, forget the ban, just add a $1000 fee and a 3 month waiting period to each one.

You are a New Yorker...push for them to hire more people to process gun applications
Prove that $1000 is excessive for the service provided

Yes, the community does have a say in it. They can also put restrictions on abortion clinics (see Texas) or gay marriage

Its not a question of volume, the rules are implicitly designed to make it as hard as possible for anyone to get a permit, law abiding citizens included.

Also, its the government's burden to prove things when they infringe on a right, they should prove why $1000 is required.

So if Mississippi wanted to charge a $1000 fee and a 3-6 month wait on abortions, you would be OK with that?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

You just don't like the answer

Your community wants thorough background checks and regulations. There are eight million people in NYC, if they believe those regulations are excessive, they have a court system available to them

It's not an answer. Tell my why the restrictions I stated are reasonable.

Reasonable in ensuring criminals and nut jobs are not sold guns and those who get a permit meet the standards established by the community

it takes 3-6 months and $1000 to accomplish that? Really?

And again, since it is a right, the "community" doesn't have a say in it, or do you want to imply that a location can ban abortion and gay marriage if they feel like it. Or, forget the ban, just add a $1000 fee and a 3 month waiting period to each one.

You are a New Yorker...push for them to hire more people to process gun applications
Prove that $1000 is excessive for the service provided

Yes, the community does have a say in it. They can also put restrictions on abortion clinics (see Texas) or gay marriage

How much have you (all gun owners individually) paid for your gun(s) to protect yourself and your family / property? Is $1,000 to much to pay for the protection of the citizenry of New York?

The bad guys don't pay the $1000, yet they have guns, so who is protected?

 

[Wry Catcher]

"If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulation."

Our courts agree with her .....even the Heller decision written by Scalia

There is a big big difference to what Scalia thought was reasonable and what the typical Libtard Moon Bat thinks is reasonable.

You can't ever trust the stupid Moon Bats with a definition of reasonable because they are dumbass unreasonable dickheads.

I can give several recent examples of their unreasonableness if you are confused about this point.

Methinks your post / rant above is a very good example of unreasonableness.

 

[martybegan]

It's not an answer. Tell my why the restrictions I stated are reasonable.

Reasonable in ensuring criminals and nut jobs are not sold guns and those who get a permit meet the standards established by the community

it takes 3-6 months and $1000 to accomplish that? Really?

And again, since it is a right, the "community" doesn't have a say in it, or do you want to imply that a location can ban abortion and gay marriage if they feel like it. Or, forget the ban, just add a $1000 fee and a 3 month waiting period to each one.

You are a New Yorker...push for them to hire more people to process gun applications
Prove that $1000 is excessive for the service provided

Yes, the community does have a say in it. They can also put restrictions on abortion clinics (see Texas) or gay marriage

How much have you (all gun owners individually) paid for your gun(s) to protect yourself and your family / property? Is $1,000 to much to pay for the protection of the citizenry of New York?

The bad guys don't pay the $1000, yet they have guns, so who is protected?

Plus, why should gun ownership be limited to well off people?

Why do progressives like they poor people disarmed?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Reasonable in ensuring criminals and nut jobs are not sold guns and those who get a permit meet the standards established by the community

it takes 3-6 months and $1000 to accomplish that? Really?

And again, since it is a right, the "community" doesn't have a say in it, or do you want to imply that a location can ban abortion and gay marriage if they feel like it. Or, forget the ban, just add a $1000 fee and a 3 month waiting period to each one.

You are a New Yorker...push for them to hire more people to process gun applications
Prove that $1000 is excessive for the service provided

Yes, the community does have a say in it. They can also put restrictions on abortion clinics (see Texas) or gay marriage

How much have you (all gun owners individually) paid for your gun(s) to protect yourself and your family / property? Is $1,000 to much to pay for the protection of the citizenry of New York?

The bad guys don't pay the $1000, yet they have guns, so who is protected?

Plus, why should gun ownership be limited to well off people?

Why do progressives like they poor people disarmed?

Because if those poor people ever discover just how much they've been shafted by the Democrats over the years, they could become a health hazard.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You just don't like the answer

Your community wants thorough background checks and regulations. There are eight million people in NYC, if they believe those regulations are excessive, they have a court system available to them

It's not an answer. Tell my why the restrictions I stated are reasonable.

Reasonable in ensuring criminals and nut jobs are not sold guns and those who get a permit meet the standards established by the community

it takes 3-6 months and $1000 to accomplish that? Really?

And again, since it is a right, the "community" doesn't have a say in it, or do you want to imply that a location can ban abortion and gay marriage if they feel like it. Or, forget the ban, just add a $1000 fee and a 3 month waiting period to each one.

You are a New Yorker...push for them to hire more people to process gun applications
Prove that $1000 is excessive for the service provided

Yes, the community does have a say in it. They can also put restrictions on abortion clinics (see Texas) or gay marriage

Its not a question of volume, the rules are implicitly designed to make it as hard as possible for anyone to get a permit, law abiding citizens included.

Also, its the government's burden to prove things when they infringe on a right, they should prove why $1000 is required.

So if Mississippi wanted to charge a $1000 fee and a 3-6 month wait on abortions, you would be OK with that?

Please provide the points and authority to support your claims. You final sentence/question is an example of unreasonableness, of course that's obvious to anyone who thinks about it.

 

[Nosmo King]

Which of the constitutionally enumerated rights is absolutely free of reasonable regulation?

So $1000 and 3-6 month wait for a handgun permit for home use in NYC is reasonable?

It's a start.

No, its unconstitutional, but such concepts are "beneath you".

Fascist.

Are you a constitutional scholar? Your question is not an answer to my question. Which of the constitutionally enumerated rights is absolutely free of reasonable regulation?

How is a 3-6 month wait and a $1000 fee reasonable?

How about we apply that to abortions?

Who knew that is time sensitive, like abortion?

And where's my answer? Which of the constitutionally enumerated rights is not subject to reasonable regulation?