Do you believe in the 2nd Amendement?

[zimmer]

I don't care. Because even if the founding fathers believed rights came from invisible magical bunnies, that's just not the case and we have to go with what's actually true, not what a bunch of guys a couple of centuries ago thought was true. That's no basis for a modern society. If we can't justify that kind of thinking today, then that kind of thinking is irrelevant, no matter how emotionally comforting you might find it.

What’s true is Godless societies that have denied their citizens the right to bear arms has killed well in excess of 100 million people.

 

[Harshaw]

I don't care. Because even if the founding fathers believed rights came from invisible magical bunnies, that's just not the case and we have to go with what's actually true, not what a bunch of guys a couple of centuries ago thought was true. That's no basis for a modern society. If we can't justify that kind of thinking today, then that kind of thinking is irrelevant, no matter how emotionally comforting you might find it.

Considering the entire idea of government is made up, we don't "have" to do anything in particular. The fictions you make up are no less fiction because it's you making them up.

 

[6gunner]

I don't care. Because even if the founding fathers believed rights came from invisible magical bunnies, that's just not the case and we have to go with what's actually true, not what a bunch of guys a couple of centuries ago thought was true. That's no basis for a modern society. If we can't justify that kind of thinking today, then that kind of thinking is irrelevant, no matter how emotionally comforting you might find it.

"I don't care." Gee, that's constructive. Well, I care very much about my rights, and I believe those rights are inalienable, and they don't come from "invisible magic bunnies" either... and "I don't care" if people like you don't like it. You want to strip me of my rights? You better get enough people to vote in favor of repealing the 2nd Amendment - or the whole Constitution, since you "don't care" about its intent - or your position is devoid of merit. Of course, as a law enforcement officer I took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, and I will work very hard to block any effort to corrupt or dismiss it.

 

[Lursa]

I don't need hints as I have my own answer thanks. I asked if you thought it meant they needed no training and you said no. We agree training is needed....not we can work out the details

I didnt say no. I asked you what indications there were that training was needed, and what training was needed.

 

[6gunner]

The first half of the amendment explains why the amendment was made in the first place. Just because you like the second half and want to pretend the first half isn't there doesn't change reality.

The "first half" gets misrepresented by the anti-gun left constantly. "Well regulated" means properly equipped and functioning as expected. Militia units who won battles during the War of 1812 were praised for their "fine regulation". A properly sighted in rifle is considered "well regulated."

The right to bear arms belongs to the people.

 

[vegas giants]

The "first half" gets misrepresented by the anti-gun left constantly. "Well regulated" means properly equipped and functioning as expected. Militia units who won battles during the War of 1812 were praised for their "fine regulation". A properly sighted in rifle is considered "well regulated."

The right to bear arms belongs to the people.

Our current unorganized militia is not well regulated by any measure

 

[Cephus]

What’s true is Godless societies that have denied their citizens the right to bear arms has killed well in excess of 100 million people.

There is no such thing as your imaginary friend. Grow up.

 

[6gunner]

And I should care what the delusional think, why?

I'm not even a church going guy, and the arrogance of this is offensive in the extreme. One of the best bumper stickers I ever saw said: "Militant Agnostic - I don't know, and YOU DON'T EITHER."

What you believe is fine. But if anyone is supposed to respect your viewpoint then you have to respect theirs. You don't know the Truth of the Universe, and to act like you do destroys your credibility.

 

[Cephus]

"I don't care." Gee, that's constructive. Well, I care very much about my rights, and I believe those rights are inalienable, and they don't come from "invisible magic bunnies" either... and "I don't care" if people like you don't like it. You want to strip me of my rights? You better get enough people to vote in favor of repealing the 2nd Amendment - or the whole Constitution, since you "don't care" about its intent - or your position is devoid of merit. Of course, as a law enforcement officer I took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, and I will work very hard to block any effort to corrupt or dismiss it.

You can believe whatever you want. I care what you can prove. But at the end of the day, your whole argument is just intellectually lazy. You want these rights to be inalienable because that way, you don't have to actually defend them. The same way people want to believe that morals come from some imaginary man in the sky. Because it's an appeal to authority that they don't have to bother thinking about. They don't have to bother defending. It's pure laziness. And as we see here, your whole response is emotional, not intellectual.

That says a lot about you and your capacity to debate.

 

[6gunner]

There is no federal-level militia today.

And there should be. I'd point out Mason's commentary on the subject, but your disdain for the Founders makes me think you wouldn't care what Mason had to say about it.

 

[Cephus]

I'm not even a church going guy, and the arrogance of this is offensive in the extreme. One of the best bumper stickers I ever saw said: "Militant Agnostic - I don't know, and YOU DON'T EITHER."

What you believe is fine. But if anyone is supposed to respect your viewpoint then you have to respect theirs. You don't know the Truth of the Universe, and to act like you do destroys your credibility.

I don't have to respect anyone. Respect is earned, not granted. Try again.

 

[Cephus]

And there should be. I'd point out Mason's commentary on the subject, but your disdain for the Founders makes me think you wouldn't care what Mason had to say about it.

Whether you think there should be, there isn't. Try reality instead of wishful thinking.

 

[6gunner]

You can believe whatever you want. I care what you can prove. But at the end of the day, your whole argument is just intellectually lazy. You want these rights to be inalienable because that way, you don't have to actually defend them. The same way people want to believe that morals come from some imaginary man in the sky. Because it's an appeal to authority that they don't have to bother thinking about. They don't have to bother defending. It's pure laziness. And as we see here, your whole response is emotional, not intellectual.

That says a lot about you and your capacity to debate.

Well, obviously, your "capacity to debate" is based on arrogance and self-righteousness, and a belief that you're smarter than everyone else. Sorry, but you aren't.

The Constitution is based on the idea that we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights. I don't care if you believe in God, Allah, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or that your "creator" is just the biological processes initiated by your parents' hormones; under the Constitution you have rights that were believed to be preexisting even that document. If you want to strip someone of their rights, you HAVE to amend the Constitution via the appropriate, defined process. Period. Otherwise the Constitution means nothing. As for having to "defend" my rights, the fact is that one of the most fundamental rights of existence is the right of self-defense. If we have a right to life, then we have the right to DEFEND that life, and thus the right to possess the most effective tools with which to conduct that defense.

You can't ignore the Constitution just because you find it inconvenient. If you don't believe in the ideology that defined its parameters, then work to change it through the correct processes, or your agenda is not valid.

 

[6gunner]

I don't have to respect anyone. Respect is earned, not granted. Try again.

And your arrogance guarantees you are undeserving of respect. So, there's that.

 

[Cephus]

And your arrogance guarantees you are undeserving of respect. So, there's that.

Then find the ignore settings.

 

[6gunner]

Then find the ignore settings.

Right back atcha, bubba.

See, unlike you, I respect people's rights; including their right to voice an opinion I disagree with. And I reserve the right to rebut them strongly whenever necessary.

 

[Cephus]

Right back atcha, bubba.

See, unlike you, I respect people's rights; including their right to voice an opinion I disagree with. And I reserve the right to rebut them strongly whenever necessary.

Knock yourself out. Because you have no ability to stop anyone from saying something you don't like. You just don't have to look at it if you don't want to. That's what the ignore is for. If you want to respond, feel free. Doesn't bother me a bit.

 

[B'smith]

Our current unorganized militia is not well regulated by any measure

It would seem that every time you pass a background check to buy a firearm you are "regulated". When you pay the tax on ammunition you are additionally "regulated".
Individual firearm ownership is among America's most basic rights.

 

[vegas giants]

It would seem that every time you pass a background check to buy a firearm you are "regulated". When you pay the tax on ammunition you are additionally "regulated".
Individual firearm ownership is among America's most basic rights.

That is not what the term means. It means well trained and in good working order. Out unorganized militia is not well regulated

 

[B'smith]

That is not what the term means. It means well trained and in good working order. Out unorganized militia is not well regulated

As a military veteran I received extensive training however, even untrained civilians are regulated as they/we go about our day. We are supervised by the police, governed, pay taxes, etc. Every functioning member of our society is regulated; "controlled by rules".

Please simply look up the definition of "Regulate" & check the synonyms:

"regulate
verb
1 the flow of the river has been regulated: control, adjust, manage.
2 a new act regulating businesses: supervise, police, monitor, check, check up on, be responsible for; control, manage, direct, guide, govern.

ORIGIN late Middle English (in the sense ‘control by rules’): from late Latin regulat- ‘directed, regulated,’ from the verb regulare, from Latin regula ‘rule.’

 

[vegas giants]

As a military veteran I received extensive training however, even untrained civilians are regulated as they/we go about our day. We are supervised by the police, governed, pay taxes, etc. Every functioning member of our society is regulated; "controlled by rules".

Please simply look up the definition of "Regulate" & check the synonyms:

"regulate
verb
1 the flow of the river has been regulated: control, adjust, manage.
2 a new act regulating businesses: supervise, police, monitor, check, check up on, be responsible for; control, manage, direct, guide, govern.

ORIGIN late Middle English (in the sense ‘control by rules’): from late Latin regulat- ‘directed, regulated,’ from the verb regulare, from Latin regula ‘rule.’

The term was written by our Founding Fathers and its usage in that time can be shown in the Federalist Papers. No one argues this. It means well trained and in good working order

 

[Captain America]

As long as "a well regulated," militia, by extension, includes me, then yes. Yes I agree with the 2nd amendment.

You see, I carry and keep weaponry to protect myself and my family. Mostly from evil-doer's on the road or in my home.

But, it is not lost on me that it is quite possible, that some day, I might be defending myself from that same, "well armed militia" the 2nd Amendment protects.

 

[B'smith]

The term was written by our Founding Fathers and its usage in that time can be shown in the Federalist Papers. No one argues this. It means well trained and in good working order

As you know, when interpreted as a whole it specifies"...the right of the people..".

While I agree that the wording appears contradictory, so far it has been interpreted to be an individual right.....thank goodness!

Right to keep and bear arms - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_keep_and_bear_arms‎
The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution reads: 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."

 

[vegas giants]

As you know, when interpreted as a whole it specifies"...the right of the people..".

While I agree that the wording appears contradictory, so far it has been interpreted to be an individual right.....thank goodness!

Right to keep and bear arms - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_keep_and_bear_arms‎
The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution reads: 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."

It is an individual right....but it also calls for the purpose of that individual right to be a well regulated militia which we do not have.

 

[Brochacholomigo]

Well technically, everything we consider to be a right, and for that matter, government in general, is just a human construct.

Just like biological sex, or gravity!