28th Amendment - Prohibition of Firearms

Discussion in 'Opinion POLLS' started by Shiva_TD, Feb 17, 2016.

?

Ratification of the 28th Amendment

  1. I vote for Ratification

    5 vote(s)
    3.9%
  2. I vote against Ratification

    114 vote(s)
    89.8%
  3. I lean towards Ratification

    5 vote(s)
    3.9%
  4. I lean against Ratification

    3 vote(s)
    2.4%
  1. dnsmith

    dnsmith New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,761
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    We are all subject to police power. But you are wrong about

    the unorganized militia, which was defined to be ALL ABLE

    BODIED men and some women, are all part of the militia, which

    is well regulated (by law) and if you ask George Washington

    and Thomas Jefferson, George Mason, they will tell you.

    "A free people ought not only to be armed, but

    disciplined..."
    - George Washington, First Annual Address, to both House of

    Congress, January 8, 1790

    "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
    - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776

    "I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."
    - Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787

    "What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are

    not warned from time to time that their people preserve the

    spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
    - Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20,

    1787

    "The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a

    nature. They 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, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century

    criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

    "On every occasion [of Constitutional interpretation] let us

    carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was

    adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and

    instead of trying [to force] what meaning may be squeezed out

    of the text, or invented against it, [instead let us] conform

    to the probable one in which it was passed."
    - Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, 12 June 1823

    "To disarm the people...s the most effectual way to

    enslave them."
    - George Mason, referencing advice given to the British

    Parliament by Pennsylvania governor Sir William Keith, The

    Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adooption of

    the Federal Constitution, June 14, 1788

    "I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole

    people, except a few public officers."
    - George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention,

    June 4, 1788
     
  2. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Well regulated militia are exempt from State police power when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.
     
  3. dnsmith

    dnsmith New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,761
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That is correct only for the organized militia. The UNORGANIZED militia based on codified law includes ALL ABLE BODIED MEN BETWEEN THE AGE THRESHOLD, and some women, and they all have the obligation to arm themselves in the event of tyrannical. government. In addition, ALL PRIVATE CITIZENS have the right to keep and bear arms for self protection, hunting, target shooting and all other sporting activities. They also have that right INDEPENDENT OF the militias. If you are below 45 it is YOUR OBLIGATION. I am 80 so my right to keep arms is based on natural right AND the 2nd amendment. I know you are against that, but puny human opinion does not change those facts no matter how much you object.
     
  4. dnsmith

    dnsmith New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,761
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Why are gun control nuts so blase' about all the firearm violence and death. Evidence clearly shows that gun ownership has increased 56% while gun violence has gone down 49% between 1993 and 2014, even more between then and now. Another point is, why do gun control nuts make such preposterous demands? Law abiding gun owners tend to accept that we don't need real assault weapons, hand grenades, sawed off shot guns, full automatic weapons (Real assault weapons.
     
  5. dnsmith

    dnsmith New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,761
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wrong again! All law abiding citizens have a right to keep and bear arms and all are subject to state AND federal laws. Your ignorance is showing again Daniel. All able bodied citizens within certain age restraints ARE PART OF THE WELL REGULATED MILITIA of which there are two types, organized and unorganized. And again, BOTH ARE WELL REGULATED, ie codified by law.
     
  6. dnsmith

    dnsmith New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,761
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    "Well regulated militia do two things. 1. Provided States with control with an organized militia which can be federalize as needed. 2. Provided the entire country with a militia, of which almost 50 million unorganized militia, well regulated and as George Washington said, "Among the many interesting objects, which will engage your attention, that of providing for the common defence will merit particular regard. To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.

    A free people ought not only to be armed but disciplined; to which end a Uniform and well digested plan is requisite: And their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories, as tend to render them independent on others, for essential, particularly for military supplies."

    While many "quotes" from pro gun or anti gun are false or exaggerated, These have been verified as valid and accurate quotes.

    "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
    - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776

    "I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."
    - Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787

    "What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
    - Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787

    "The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They 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, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

    "A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks." - Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 19, 1785
     
  7. dnsmith

    dnsmith New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,761
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Original words of the

    2nd amendment which was

    trimmed down to make it

    easier to read, not

    change the meaning.

    The right of the people

    to keep and bear arms

    shall not be infringed;

    a well armed and well

    regulated militia being

    the best security of a

    free country: but no

    person religiously

    scrupulous of bearing

    arms shall not be

    compelled to render

    military service in

    person. http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llac&fileName=001/llac001.db&recNum=227
     
  8. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    dear, the People are the militia.
     
  9. dnsmith

    dnsmith New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,761
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes we are, and we have a duty to be personally armed to prevent a tyrannical government; and the right to self defense, providing meat for the table (which I do on my big electric scooter, mostly wild hog)
     
  10. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    That is in our First Amendment. The Second Amendment is about the security of a free State.
     
  11. dnsmith

    dnsmith New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,761
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The 2nd amendment covers all of those things in addition to these, " we have a duty to be personally armed to prevent a tyrannical government; and the right to self defense, providing meat for the table (which I do on my big electric scooter, mostly wild hog)"
     
  12. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Those are natural rights and are secured in State Constitutions.

    The first clause of our Second Amendment, declares the Intent and Purpose for the second clause.
     
  13. dnsmith

    dnsmith New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,761
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No Daniel, the first amendment says nothing about the right of the people to bear arms, which is guaranteed in the 2nd amendment.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Wrong Daniel, the first and second clause are dependent clauses, supporting the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
     
  14. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Our First Amendment secures the right to petition government regarding perceived "tyranny", it is not in our Second Amendment.

    I am not wrong. Natural rights are recognized and secured in State Constitutions. The People have a right to keep and bear Arms for defense of self and property. Only well regulated militia may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.
     
  15. dnsmith

    dnsmith New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,761
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Those are natural rights also secured in the US Constitution.
    It is one of the clauses declaring a single intent. The clause, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" is another, both of which relate to the clause, "shall not be infringed." The many quotes from the founders prove that intent.
     
  16. Bastiats libertarians

    Bastiats libertarians Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2014
    Messages:
    2,042
    Likes Received:
    505
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Based on the polling and the high degree of liberals that inhabit this site, I would say the second amendment is here to stay.
     
  17. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    no they are not. Only Due Process is secured in our federal Constitution.

    Natural rights already cover that topic. It is not a federal issue.

    - - - Updated - - -

    No one is trying to get rid of the Second Amendment.

    The problem is, gun lovers simply refuse to love their Republic as much as they claim to love their guns.

     
  18. AveMariaGratiaPlena

    AveMariaGratiaPlena New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    Messages:
    389
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I would be against the ratification of such as amendment as it seems like it would totally ban the possession of firearms in the United States. I believe that people have a right to own firearms but the sale of them should definitely be more strictly regulated.
     
  19. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How could the sale of firearms, which is already covered by significant laws at the federal and even state level, be anymore strictly regulated than it already is?
     
  20. AveMariaGratiaPlena

    AveMariaGratiaPlena New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    Messages:
    389
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well, perhaps they should require more strict background checks before allowing anyone to own a gun?
     
  21. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,715
    Likes Received:
    885
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The foundation for the 2nd Amendment is the natural right of self defense but it does not grant an express protection of firearms. It refers to "arms" and not "firearms" that are a specific form of "arms" and arguably if a non-lethal weapon equal to or more effective than a lethal firearm is ever invented (e.g. the Star Trek stun gun) then firearms would no longer be necessary for self-defense.

    If firearms are not necessary for self defense then the 2nd Amendment protections for firearms based upon that purpose also disappears.
     
  22. DivineComedy

    DivineComedy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    7,629
    Likes Received:
    841
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If fifteen people had rushed the guy with the gun, at least one of them might have been able to stab him with a sword cane, but, oops, those are illegal.

    Once again, the Second is not about self defense, it is about protecting and preserving "consent of the governed" with effective weapons needed for that purpose.
     
  23. dnsmith

    dnsmith New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,761
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And the federal constitution.

    The 1st clause AND the second clause are subordinate to the part that says will not be infringed. IE Daniel both militia, and the people are BOTH NOT TO BE INFRINGED.
     
  24. dnsmith

    dnsmith New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,761
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It is obvious you are not a constitutional scholar as your opinions about the 1st amendment and the 2nd amendment are bunk. As to state constitutions, they are trumped by the US constitution. Especially distasteful in those matters which the federal government has usurped many rights guaranteed in the 9th and 10th amendments.
     
  25. dnsmith

    dnsmith New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,761
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Of course it is. No matter what congress tries to do with the second amendment there is no way a more restricting amendment would be ratified by 3/4 of our sovereign states.
     

Share This Page