"Stop Hiding Behind the Second Amendment"

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Phoebe Bump, Dec 21, 2015.

  1. RevAnarchist

    RevAnarchist New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 22, 2010
    Messages:
    9,848
    Likes Received:
    158
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It doesn't matter dude. The SCOUS is God in the USA. Please take your medicine.
    reva
     
  2. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,349
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    They took the meaning of separation from a letter written to a church from Jefferson. Trouble is that word would have never been spoken except the church was worried Jefferson would put laws against the church and they wrote a letter to Jefferson asking him about it. He wrote back to assure them he wouldn't and didn't expect the church to meddle in government affairs, it would be like a wall of separation. But what he meant, is that there would be no interference by either side. Interference is the key meaning here, because up till the 1947 US Supreme Court, we never had separation from day one. As a matter of fact, the two sides mingled a lot.
     
  3. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    457
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    10USC311 defines the Militia of the United States. The organized Militia must get their "wellness of regulation" from our federal Congress via Article 1, Section 8.

    - - - Updated - - -

    dude; you brought it up, not me; I have no need to appeal to ignorance of the law since our Founding Fathers did an Most Excellent job at the convention and made sure our supreme law of the land is both very clear and very unambiguous.
     
  4. Penrod

    Penrod Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2015
    Messages:
    12,507
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    48
    It also says they can not stop the free practice of religion either but that has not stopped them from doing so.
     
  5. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    457
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Of course it matters; and, no they are not the final arbiters since we have a Tenth and Ninth Amendment.

    - - - Updated - - -

    It means we have no established Church of the United States nor any Church of <insert State Name here>.
     
  6. Object227

    Object227 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    3,806
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    That still doesn't mean regulating Arms. There is NOTHING in the language anywhere that the govt may regulate my private Arms.
     
  7. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,349
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No government established church sir. As the church of England who had almost as much power as the government.
     
  8. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    457
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    States do that, not our Second Amendment which deals with what is necessary to the security of a free State.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Yes, you are quite correct.
     
  9. Object227

    Object227 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    3,806
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    States do what? Regulate my private Arms? If they do, that violates the 2A.. the 2nd part of 2A is the ONLY place in the Constitution where the subject of Arms appears. And it is quite clear that "the People" refers to each individual person regardless of whether he's serving his country or not.
     
  10. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,349
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    If you read what our forefathers said, including the two who wrote the Second Amendment, you'll see they wanted every man armed and knowing how to use their gun in case America was attacked, the government got to intrusive into their lives and to be able to protect themselves and their families. The government was new. They weren't sure how it would work out so they wanted the population to be prepared for what ever came up.
     
  11. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    457
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, States do that and it is a States' right to regulate forms of Commerce within a State.

    In United States constitutional law, police power is the capacity of the states to regulate behavior and enforce order within their territory for the betterment of the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of their inhabitants.[1] Under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the powers not specifically delegated to the Federal Government are reserved to the states or to the people. This implies that the Federal Government does not possess all possible powers, because most of these are reserved to the State governments, and others are reserved to the people.


    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.

    Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Dude, this is what defines the Militia of the United States: 10USC311. No one is claiming our Founding Fathers wanted mere gun lovers without a clue and without a Cause.
     
  12. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,349
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    As with the First Amendment, their writings weren't that clear. Even back then they were asking for clarification of the Second Amendment. As with the First Amendment and I am sure some of the others, you have to go back and read their words as to what they meant.
     
  13. Penrod

    Penrod Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2015
    Messages:
    12,507
    Likes Received:
    51
    Trophy Points:
    48
    That hasnt stopped them
     
  14. Object227

    Object227 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    3,806
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Defining the militia has NOTHING to do with Arms. You can scream as loud as you want. Telling us who the militia is has NOTHING to do with Arms. Only part 2 of 2A has anything to do with Arms.
     
  15. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,349
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No, but your only trying to say the cause was for only one thing and if you read their writings, it was meant for three and really four things. They also needed their guns to hunt for food.
     
  16. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    457
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    There is nothing ambiguous about federal Constitution. Only reading comprehension issues.

    - - - Updated - - -

    so what; it hasn't stopped the States, either.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Wellness of regulation must be prescribed by our federal Congress for the Militia of the United States.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Nope; the security of a free State means Only one Thing and is the End, intent and Purpose of our Second Amendment; the Means may be sacrificed to the End.
     
  17. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,349
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well sir I suggest you do a lot more reading, because your as wrong as wrong can be. If you want to try and take the Second exactly as it's written, then you also have to take the First exactly as it's written and there is no separation of church and state in it. You must be pretty young. If you were older, I think you would have grabbed this about 60 pages back.
     
  18. Object227

    Object227 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    3,806
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Ok then kindly tell me what part 2 of the 2A means. Here it is:

    So what? What does that have to do with anyone's private Arms??
     
  19. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    457
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    The limitation on Establishment of Religion is that form of separation of Church and State. There can be no Church of the United States nor any Church of <insert State here>.
     
  20. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    457
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    It means, within the context of the first clause, that the People who are a well regulated militia may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union:10USC311.

    Nothing. States have the police power to regulated Arms sales as does the federal government in the federal districts.
     
  21. TrackerSam

    TrackerSam Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2015
    Messages:
    12,114
    Likes Received:
    5,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If Obama interpreted the 2nd as you do, he'd have outlawed gun ownership by now, or some other grabboid would have. Your argument is old, it's been tried, and it's failed.
     

    Attached Files:

  22. Marine1

    Marine1 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    31,349
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There is no limitation of an establishment, except a state religion and Congress would have to do that.You only have to look at our history to know that. From day one we pay the clergy to say morning prayer before congress. In 1812 the President set aside a day of mourning. Up to the mid 1870, services were held in the State Capital, even Jefferson attended them. In the 1860's President Lincoln set aside one day a week of worship for the troops. In God we trust was put on our money, Christmas and Thanksgiving were made National Holidays, in 1950's In God We Trust was made our National Motto Where is that separation?
     
  23. Object227

    Object227 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    3,806
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    No it doesn't. Part 1 of the 2A does not set any context. It's a justification clause. The justification for the right of the people to keep and bear Arms is that it is necessary for individuals to be able to keep and bear Arms for their security. A person's security is always under some kind of threat from: Criminals, predatory animals, foreign invaders, your own govt should it become tyrannical. You are trying to say our founders wanted to regulate or control Arms except when people were serving in the militia and that's a lie.
     
    TheResister likes this.
  24. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    457
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    How would he do that if gun regulation as Commerce is a States' right?

    - - - Updated - - -

    It is the Intent and Purpose and as such must fix the Context as a Standard for the second clause.

    Well regulated Militias have recourse to the Socialized use of Arms.
     
  25. Object227

    Object227 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    3,806
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Can you quote the author of the 2A telling you this in so many words or in words that can only be interpreted to mean what you say above?? Do you even know who wrote the 2A?
     

Share This Page