Again, my opponent cannot prove my argument is incorrect or that legal gun control laws violate the second amendment.
Bill of Rights, Amendment 1, Dec 15 1791
a•bridge
əˈbrij/
verb
past tense: abridged; past participle: abridged
1. shorten (a book, movie, speech, or other text) without losing the sense.
"the cassettes have been abridged from the original stories"
synonyms: shorten, cut, cut short, cut down, curtail, truncate, trim, crop, clip, pare down, prune;More
2. LAW
curtail (rights or privileges).
Yet we have both libel and slanders laws wherein an individual or group can be convicted of using speech to intentionally injure another person or group.
Defamation Law: The Basics - FindLaw
And like gun control laws, freedom of speech is legally amended to protect the welfare of the whole. So we have here two cases of the very same context, wherein the constitution is not violated.
So just like the assault weapons ban of 1994 and other such gun control measures, there is no violation of the second amendment.
End Post # 8
there are only 2 restrictions on the 1st amendment.
1. Inciting a riot.
2. Shouting something that would lead to mass hysteria and cause other people to be hurt.
Defamation Law falls under Tort Law. It refers to false statements about a person, communicated as fact to one or more other persons by an individual or entity (such as a person, newspaper, magazine, or political organization), which causes damage and does harm to the target’s reputation and/or standing in the community. Defamation is addressed primarily by state legislation. However, Constitutional Law may also apply, as the right of freedom of speech also extends to certain defamation claims. Defamation is categorized as either Slander or Libel.
Oral defamatory statements are categorized as slander. Damages for slander are generally more difficult to identify and prove; although when malice is involved, it can be easier to accomplish. These statements must also be represented as fact, rather than just an opinion, to be considered slanderous. Slander of title refers to a remark regarding property ownership which maligns the owner and his/her ability to transfer the property, and results in a monetary loss.
"I don't think we should have firearms where people are drinking," he said. "But I'll tell you this, everybody needs … to start having a security plan. We need to be able to protect ourselves because they're coming."
Gun control can and does infringe on the peoples right to bear arms.
In that same post he admits that the bill of rights were given to people; as was the second amendmentThe 1st draft of the 1sst amendment read:
Therefore, in his own words, ludin contradicts the idea that keep and bear rights pre-existed the second amendment.The 2nd amendment is a right given to the people it puts a limit on government of what the government can do. That is why it is part of the Bill of Rights.
Cowboy president Theodore Roosevelt recalled with approval that as a Dakota Territory ranch owner, his town, at the least, allowed "no shooting in the streets." The editor of that town's newspaper, The Bad Lands Cow Boy of Medora, demanded that gun control be even tighter than that, however. Like leaders in Miles City and many other cow towns, he wanted to see guns banned entirely within the city limits. A.T. Packard in August 1885 called "packing a gun" a "senseless custom," and noted about a month later that "As a protection, it is terribly useless.”
Old West cattlemen themselves also saw the need for gun control. By 1882, a Texas cattle raising association had banned six-shooters from the cowboy's belt. "In almost every section of the West murders are on the increase, and cowmen are too often the principals in the encounters," concurred a dispatch from the Texas Live Stock Journal dated June 5, 1884. "The six-shooter loaded with deadly cartridges is a dangerous companion for any man, especially if he should unfortunately be primed with whiskey. Cattlemen should unite in aiding the enforcement of the law against carrying of deadly weapons."
https://www.ndsu.edu/pubweb/~rcollins/scholarship/guns.htmlPioneer publications show Old West leaders repeatedly arguing in favor of gun control. City leaders in the old cattle towns knew from experience what some Americans today don't want to believe: a town which allows easy access to guns invites trouble.
What these cow town leaders saw intimately in their day-to-day association with guns is that more guns in more places caused not greater safety, but greater death in an already dangerous wilderness. By the 1880s many in the west were fed up with gun violence. Gun control, they contended, was absolutely essential, and the remedy advocated usually was usually no less than a total ban on pistol-packing.
“The king’s enemies should not have been armed” is what he is saying. But they were; by the king himself. Militias were formed by both revolutionary and tory forces. “Minutemen” were formed in 1775! So again, ludin makes a completely random statement that he tries to link to some sort racism or “military strategy”. So we must conclude that the king’s colonial governors armed their enemies as a military strategy or because they weren’t black. Well, that’s not right either:During the revolutionary war it would have been critical not to arm your enemies.
At the Battle of Bunker Hill, 150 blacks took their place among the 3,000 Americans who defended that position against the Redcoat attacks.
It’s simply been one ridiculous random statement after another, not linked into any form of an argument that proves, that since 1791 the United States has been using gun control to violate the second amendment.His other argument is to try invalidate what the authors of the constitution says simply because it was 200 years ago
and because they had white hair.
Moderator's Warning: |
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?