2nd Amendment zealots think the Constitution was written just for them.
How is your right to keep and bear arms currently infringed?The Second Amendment was not written for gun zealots - - the Bill of Rights (of which the Second Amendment is included) was written for CONGRESS - - it tells them which ten Rights they cannot mess with.
Of course Congress still passes Laws which infringe on our Constitutional Rights, but this is no fault of the Framers or the Constitution itself - - rather, it is the fault of the lawmakers who choose to ignore the words "shall not be infringed". They are to blame. They are not accountable for passing Laws which infringe on the Right to keep and bear arms.
The idea that the 2nd Amendment is sacrosanct is flat out incorrect.
"The notion that the Second Amendment was understood to protect a right to take up arms against the government is absurd. Indeed, the Constitution itself defines such an act as treason. Gun regulation and gun ownership have always existed side by side in American history. The Second Amendment poses no obstacle to enacting sensible gun laws. The failure to do so is not the Constitution’s fault; it is ours.
Five types of gun laws the Founding Fathers loved
A leading historian of constitutional thought says the contemporary Second Amendment debate is founded on serious misunderstandings.theconversation.com
Nearly every gun control Law or statute is an infringement (at least to some degree) on the right to keep and bear arms.How is your right to keep and bear arms currently infringed?
None of our rights are absolute. None.Nearly every gun control Law or statute is an infringement (at least to some degree) on the right to keep and bear arms.
The Second Amendment explicitly states that the Right to keep and bear arms "shall not be infringed".
There is zero wiggle-room for small or minor infringements.
Nearly every gun control Law or statute is an infringement (at least to some degree) on the right to keep and bear arms.
The Second Amendment explicitly states that the Right to keep and bear arms "shall not be infringed".
The Second Amendment is absolute. The words "shall not be infringed" make it absolute. It is the only Right that is qualified with the words "shall not be infringed".None of our rights are absolute. None.
Name one that is...
"The Second Amendment explicitly states that the Right to keep and bear arms "shall not be infringed".""2nd Amendment zealots think the Constitution was written just for them."
I dare you to show me one pro-gun person who's said that.
I doubt you cannot, which really means this thread is worthless
If you don't like the 2nd then there is a procedure for changing it. Try that.The Second Amendment was not written for gun zealots - - the Bill of Rights (of which the Second Amendment is included) was written for CONGRESS - - it tells them which ten Rights they cannot mess with.
Of course Congress still passes Laws that infringe on our Constitutional Rights, but this is no fault of the Framers or the Constitution itself - - rather, it is the fault of the lawmakers who choose to ignore the words "shall not be infringed". They are to blame. They are not accountable for passing Laws which infringe on the Right to keep and bear arms.
"The Second Amendment explicitly states that the Right to keep and bear arms "shall not be infringed"."
from this thread...
How would a national gun database infringe on the right to keep and bear arms?
Slippery slopes are an indication of an argument without substance.because a radical Democrats could pass a law saying if you voted Trump you were an insurrectionist and boom!
your labeled and your guns taken
no thank you - target violent people, don't target me
Slippery slopes are an indication of an argument without substance.
Almost all gun owners are law-abiding and non-violent...until they are not.
But we have ways to restrict people operating those.as are people who drink alcohol and drive cars are not drunk drivers until they are
or a knife owners are law abiding and non-violent until they are
no, no more laws that target gun owners
keep violent people in prison, put mentally ill in institutions if they're showing violence, if someone talks violence, let police have long, hard looks at them where they can't hurt anyone ........... stop the drugs/gangs, empower women to conceal carry if they're afraid of spousal abuse ........... those things really WOULD matter
Which rights does the 9th tell Congress they can't mess with? The right to be safe from gunfire while attending school (something that is a legal requirement for young Americans)?The Second Amendment was not written for gun zealots - - the Bill of Rights (of which the Second Amendment is included) was written for CONGRESS - - it tells them which ten Rights they cannot mess with.
Of course Congress still passes Laws that infringe on our Constitutional Rights, but this is no fault of the Framers or the Constitution itself - - rather, it is the fault of the lawmakers who choose to ignore the words "shall not be infringed". They are to blame. They are not accountable for passing Laws which infringe on the Right to keep and bear arms.
But we have ways to restrict people operating those.
And who should gun laws target?
If incarceration worked, we'd already be the safest country on Earth. You mean like 4/91? This is exactly what I meant in the OP. Gun owners are willing to take rights from others just to protect theirs.
Slippery slopes are an indication of an argument without substance.
Almost all gun owners are law-abiding and non-violent...until they are not.
The 9th Amendment doesn't specifically name a Right. The Framers were concerned that future generations might argue that, because a certain right was not listed in the Bill of Rights, it did not exist.Which rights does the 9th tell Congress they can't mess with? The right to be safe from gunfire while attending school (something that is a legal requirement for young Americans)?
The Second Amendment IS absolute. The proof is in what the Framers wrote in the Amendment, i.e., the Right to keep and bear arms "shall not be infringed".None of our rights are absolute. None of them. Prove me wrong.
In your opinion are ALL gun owners "2nd Amendment zealots", or just the gun owners who cite the 2nd Amendment as an argument that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed?A textbook example of the myopic viewpoint of 2nd Amendment zealots.
Working on it, and MAGA is helping. We appreciate your guys’ support in the effort.If you don't like the 2nd then there is a procedure for changing it. Try that.
Did you post this? " the Bill of Rights (of which the Second Amendment is included) was written for CONGRESS - - it tells them which ten Rights they cannot mess with." Which one of your answers do you want to stand by?The 9th Amendment doesn't specifically name a Right. The Second Amendment specifically protects the Right of the People to keep and bear arms.
The Second Amendment IS absolute. The proof is in what the Framers wrote in the Amendment, i.e., the Right to keep and bear arms "shall not be infringed".
It is not possible to be more absolute than that. The 2A is the ONE enumerated Right that IS absolute.
In your opinion are ALL gun owners "2nd Amendment zealots", or just the gun owners who cite the 2nd Amendment as an argument that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed?
no we don'tBut we have ways to restrict people operating those.
And who should gun laws target?
If incarceration worked, we'd already be the safest country on Earth. You mean like 4/91? This is exactly what I meant in the OP. Gun owners are willing to take rights from others just to protect theirs.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?