They Want to Take Your Guns

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by tsuke, Apr 17, 2017.

  1. tsuke

    tsuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2015
    Messages:
    6,087
    Likes Received:
    227
    Trophy Points:
    63
    They Want to Take Your Guns

    The second amendment is always a hot topic yet one of the most misunderstood. I have seen plenty of liberals and conservatives who do not fully understand the legal arguments surrounding the issue. For today I thought I would take a break from current events and give a brief explanation of them.

    When conservative commentators say that liberals are trying to take away your guns people say they are hysterical but they are accurate. The second amendment reads " A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of the free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The conservatives say that since a well regulated militia is necessary people should be allowed to bear arms. Whereas liberals say that you do not have the right to bear arms unless you are part of a well regulated militia. There is no middle ground. You either have the right or it is granted to you by the government and can be taken away at their pleasure.

    In this particular argument the conservatives are correct.

    Rights and Privileges

    Every single item on the Bill of Rights is something granted to you because you are an American citizen. There is an argument as to whether those rights are granted to anyone on American soil but that is a separate issue which I will not touch on today. Suffice it to say that you do not need to do anything to earn these rights. If the second amendment were to be interpreted the way liberals wanted it to be, then you would have to join a well regulated militia to have the right to keep and bear arms.

    What do you call a right that you have to do something to attain? That is correct. It ceases to be a right and becomes a privilege instead. The ability to bear arms is now contingent on your decision to join a militia. If there is no militia at the time then you cannot bear arms. If you have a child it is similar to giving him an allowance. He does not have a right to it but may earn it by doing chores or by some other method.

    It is called the Bill of Rights no Bill of Rights and Privileges.

    Protection and Deregulation

    As Senator Cruz said in his debate against Senator Sanders in healthcare the bill of rights enumerates your protections from the government. The government cannot infringe on your freedom of speech, they cannot require excessive bail, they cannot quarter soldiers in your house. If interpreted the way liberals insist on then this would be the only amendment that would impose regulations or things the government can do to you. Alternatively if this was read to be protections given to the members of the militia then this would be unique as this would be the only amendment in the bill of rights to give its protections to a very small subset of people as opposed to the entire population.

    Historical Context

    We should all keep in mind that the bill of rights were made right after the Revolutionary War. The fact that a majority of Americans at that time were armed helped greatly. The army could draft people that were already armed relieving them of some need to supply them and they could draft people who already had some idea of what to do with firearms. It was similar to the British in the past forcing all the peasants to practice with the longbow for one hour every Sunday. This directly contributed to great victories such as Agincourt. At that point in time America was not yet secure in its independence and another invasion by England was not out of the question.

    Remedy

    Liberals are wrong on their interpretation of the second amendment but they are not without remedy. If they truly believe that the amendment is no longer relevant then they can work to repeal it instead of using a shortcut and having the Supreme Court rule it out of existence.
     
  2. ButterBalls

    ButterBalls Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    51,200
    Likes Received:
    37,543
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They may want them, but they're never going to get them :) These types of discussion are lame, Obarry in his time in office put more guns in the hands civilians than any time in fifty years. It's no longer feasible to even entertain the idea ;)

    [​IMG]

    And this graph doesn't even cover Obarry's last three years in office :)
     
    Wild Bill Kelsoe likes this.
  3. toddwv

    toddwv Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    30,444
    Likes Received:
    6,429
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Oh, this again.
     
    VietVet and Durandal like this.
  4. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    All you need to do it watch California and the liberal eastern states - after every failure of their already draconian gun laws to prevent a crime, they tighten the laws even more.

    No one on the anti-gun side with tell you how much gun control is "enough" - none of them will tell you at what point they will not seek additional restrictions on the rights of the law abiding.

    There's a reason for this; the perception of this reason depends on if you are one of Stalin's "useful idiots", or Stalin.
     
  5. tsuke

    tsuke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2015
    Messages:
    6,087
    Likes Received:
    227
    Trophy Points:
    63
    the second amendment is the only one that is violated regularly like this. When the first is violated with libel laws for instance the courts take tremendous care to make sure it only applies to the most extreme circumstances.
     
  6. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If the constitution read "the right to have an abortion shall not be infringed", "infringed" would take on an entirely new meaning.

    Imagine if a woman had to obtain a $480 permit and pay a $1000 tax to have an abortion.
    Imagine if a woman had to wait 3 days and undergo sex ed training before she could have an abortion on demand.
    Imagine if a woman had to undergo mental screening before she could have an abortion.
    In each of these cases, the face-melting screams from the left would be heard on the moon.
     
    DOconTEX, nra37922 and SeaFury like this.
  7. Sirius Black

    Sirius Black Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2011
    Messages:
    7,560
    Likes Received:
    6,403
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The flaw in these arguments is that there are already recognized legal limits placed on a citizens right to have a gun. A convicted felon can not own a gun he/she has lost that privilege.
     
  8. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Fixed that for you.
    How does that translate to the constitutional acceptability of restrictions on the rights of the law abiding?
     
  9. Diablo

    Diablo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2016
    Messages:
    2,772
    Likes Received:
    2,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Evangelical gun lovers.
     
    Guno and toddwv like this.
  10. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Thank you for not adding any substance whatsoever to the topic.
     
    nra37922 likes this.
  11. Diablo

    Diablo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2016
    Messages:
    2,772
    Likes Received:
    2,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  12. Durandal

    Durandal Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    55,518
    Likes Received:
    27,044
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    We can't have enough gun control precisely because of the 2nd Amendment. We as a nation can never go far enough with gun control laws to make a positive difference as long as that amendment exists and is interpreted as it has been up to the present.

    It is what it is.
     
  13. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
  14. Diablo

    Diablo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2016
    Messages:
    2,772
    Likes Received:
    2,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Did you read it?
     
  15. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Thus, the 2nd is doing exactly what it is supposed to do.
     
    SeaFury likes this.
  16. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yup.
    What, exactly, am I supposed to find interesting here, and why?
     
  17. PeppermintTwist

    PeppermintTwist Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2014
    Messages:
    16,704
    Likes Received:
    12,220
    Trophy Points:
    113
    you beat me to it, but I was going to say..."this **** again?"
     
    Guno and toddwv like this.
  18. toddwv

    toddwv Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    30,444
    Likes Received:
    6,429
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is no such thing as an absolute right. Freedom of speech has significant limitations. The Bush Era Patriot Act and subsequent renewals as well as the right-wing's "War on Drugs" has all but ensured that no American is "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures."

    Like it or not abortion is a right under the 4th yet the right-wing continually attempts to make its availability difficult and onerous as they continue to defile the 4th.

    So how would you feel if every time you went to buy a gun, you had to go 3 states away, were shown graphic pictures of children that shot themselves or were shot by others, and were forced to have a prostate exam before purchasing?
     
    PeppermintTwist and glloydd95 like this.
  19. toddwv

    toddwv Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    30,444
    Likes Received:
    6,429
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I like yours better. :D
     
    PeppermintTwist likes this.
  20. Diablo

    Diablo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2016
    Messages:
    2,772
    Likes Received:
    2,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The article is self-explanatory. Don't you want to understand why you like guns?
     
  21. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you cannot explain why this article is meaningful to you and thus should be meaningful to others, there's no reason for me to consider it with any seriousness.
     
  22. Diablo

    Diablo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2016
    Messages:
    2,772
    Likes Received:
    2,310
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Suit yourself. Don't shoot yourself, though.
     
  23. glloydd95

    glloydd95 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    1,919
    Likes Received:
    424
    Trophy Points:
    83
    You are quite right here. The Patriot Act is an abomination of unconstitutional law that is, in a way, a sign that to an extent the terrorists have already won.

    The "War on Drugs" is such a monumental waste of time, money, and life, that it has done more damage to America than the drugs themselves would have.
     
    Bravo Duck and SeaFury like this.
  24. Durandal

    Durandal Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    55,518
    Likes Received:
    27,044
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Who's to say? It's not worded to support the modern notion of being armed against the government, but rather to be armed as part of a militia, and this was a time before today's professional, federal military existed.
     
  25. nra37922

    nra37922 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2013
    Messages:
    13,118
    Likes Received:
    8,506
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    They Want to Take Your Guns

    Don't have any guns anymore. Nope, not a one. Sold all of mine for cash to a nice biker dude. Had to be nice as his jacket had something Angels on it.
     

Share This Page