2nd Amendment Debate. - Page 2
You are Unregistered, please register to use all of the features of FirearmsTalk.com!    
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism >

2nd Amendment Debate.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-20-2013, 10:44 PM   #11
Lifetime Supporting Member
FTF_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
7point62's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Decisive Terrain
Posts: 2,137
Liked 1505 Times on 755 Posts
Likes Given: 1134

Default

The problem with 2A is that it's part of the Constitution; and since the Founding Fathers purposely left the Constitution vague enough to give it elasticity, everything in it is open to interpretation. We may think it gives us the right to keep and bear arms but every word is subject to legal challenge. How the Supreme Court interprets it at any given time is what it ultimately means.
__________________
Hijo de mala leche
7point62 is offline  
3
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2013, 10:48 PM   #12
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
sputnik1988's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: The Bluegrass state
Posts: 2,882
Liked 717 Times on 468 Posts
Likes Given: 1952

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by texaswoodworker View Post
This should be pretty interesting, but most like one sided for the most part.

Does the 2nd Amendment forbid the States from enacting gun control?
Yes, the states are only allowed to make laws that are not covered in the Constitution, Which clearly states that the right "shall not be infringed"

Does it protect ALL guns (everything from black powder to full auto MGs)
No distinctions were made in the 2nd amendment, therefore all guns are covered

Does it protect both open and concealed carry?
Yes

Does it make background checks and gun registration illegal?
The way I see it registration is an infringement, background checks only at FFLs I'm not sure.

Does it cover all the accessories that go with guns such as magazines, scopes, ect.
Absolutely

Does it ban ALL anti gun laws?
Yes, any Anti-gun law is unconstitutional

Let the debate begin.
Answers in blue.
__________________
Just passing through...

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

كافر
sputnik1988 is offline  
3
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2013, 10:53 PM   #13
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hawkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: austin,tx
Posts: 4,626
Liked 3248 Times on 1941 Posts
Likes Given: 2347

Default

t
Quote:
exaswoodworker;1341249]Yep, keep it civil guys. I'm looking at you Hawk
i'm a pretty good boy outside of the cave....

Quote:
I believe strongly in States' rights, but I also believe that the Constitution's power is not discussable. I see it as the supreme law of the land that everyone from the Federal Government, to the smallest Local Government has to follow.
i agree....but this isn't how our fed gov has worked in the last few decades..they have stomped on the constitution with regularity....i'm Leary of the fed at this point to say the leasst, part of why i would rather have some more state control....that and imo, gun culture is very regional.


Quote:
Yes, and no. Should criminals be given guns while in prison? Heck no! Should they be given back that right once they are free? Absolutely. There is a catch though. VIOLENT criminals should never be released. That would solve a lot of problems by itself.
ahhh...i would agree with that...but here's the catch....it isn't reality. unfortunately, violent criminals are released as i type this...that is why there IS a need to have buffers in place and laws that state it is illegal for them to own guns, which are a threat to everyone in their hands.



Quote:
I have yet to see a gun law that would be effective. They all target us, not the criminals. Criminals won't follow laws period. There's no wat to stop that other then to take them off the streets. Gun control is not necessary.
agreed. they SHOULD be off the streets, but they simply aren't. TRUST ME...i'm a ZERO TOLERANCE guy when it comes to violent crime. lock em up...and only let em see daylight if labor is involved.

Quote:
I'm fairly comfortable, but I want a little more comfort. Open carry, Constitutional Carry, and getting rid of the NFA laws and the GCA of 68' laws would be great.
i'm good in good ol TEXAS. if i were in NY, cali, NJ....well....i will never be so i am thankful for that.

Quote:
I disagree. I see no place for compromise when it comes to our rights. As for the definition of arms, well that's pretty simple. The point of the 2nd Amendment is for us to be able to defend our rights from tyrants. Do you really think the Founders would want the citizens armed wit sticks while the tyrants have guns?
i agree. it is obvious that the founders put 2A there to defend from gov corruption and oppression. BUT...........the most advanced weaponry in the world means NOTHING to complacent citizens unwilling to sacrifice for change. i fear a mosin nagant in the hands of a a man willing to die FAR MORE than a belt fed machine gun in the hands of a the unwilling.

the average grunt in the mideast carries an m-16 with 30 rounders...the swat team member carries an AR-15 with 30 rounders....equal enough imo. and i will always believe the CONVICTION of the fighter carries more importance than the weapon....

Quote:
Leaving the politics and irrational responses aside, do you believe we have a RIGHT to it? I do. That is all that matters. We have a right to do it.

Smoking isn't really comparable since it truly does bother most people and can cause health problems if your around it long enough. The only way open carry can bother people is if they allow their irrational fears to bother them.
good points. and something to consider. this is why i debate, not to beat MY viewpoints into others, but to gain insight and knowledge.

i don't like open carry....i'm on the fence....that is where i am.

Quote:
As I said before, there is no compromise when it comes to rights. If you giver them an inch, they WILL take a mile. What have background checks really done? How do they keep criminals from stealing guns, or buying them on the streets anyways?
how do you stop murder? you can't! how do you stop rape? you can't!

laws are moral perimeters, nothing more....none of them STOP anyone ever!

state it is illegal....issue consequences...that is it.

compromise is the only true way we will get solid protection for our rights AND for our safety....look back at history....the founding fathers were just as divided on many issues as we are today on guns....they got business done!....what is different?...the complete inability to compromise due to BS partisanship..

Quote:
That IS the law. It's failed. If the government wants to document the checks, what's really stopping them? Your basically leaving the wolf in charge of the sheep. Look at New Jersey for example. They did it. Plus, the criminals still have guns.
yes..in reality...like keeping criminals locked up...it fails.

it doesn't have to, but it often does anyway.


Quote:
I've yet to see a law like that.
unfortunately, i agree.

Quote:
Why? Why stop at 30? Why is 30 ok, but 31 dangerous?

Actually, soldiers also carry belt fed machine guns with hundreds of rounds in them.
again, average grunt/swat team...equal enough imo. and citizens CAN have full auto belt fed remember? heh....if ya got the $$$$$...

i beleive a line gets drawn with almost everything. every great debate almost always includes where to draw the line....you draw a line, its just different than mine perhaps.

Quote:
I see that inconvenience as a violation of my rights, it's the first step towards gun registration. It also does nothing. Do you really think criminals will go to a gun shop to buy their guns when they can get them cheaper and easier on the streets?
i simply must agree to disagree here. the second amendment does not state you should not be inconvenienced to my knowledge...background checks do not infringe on the right ot bear arms in any way imo....i'm totally against registration cause we know where that goes historically....but i would support background checks that had a specific clause to make registration illegal...but since that won't likely will never happen..i could see myself against check that don't include that protection...

whew! that was a bunch of typing....

Quote:
Yes you did.
well, you know i have my ways.....

seriously, i have gone toe to toe with more liberal gun grabbing types than you can imagine. i have even changed the tune of one or two in my time....but i'll have a good debate with any of you as well......i make the best judgments i can, having given careful thoughts to most matters...and i try in earnest to remain open minded.

my beliefs have never been a popularity contest....maybe that is why i have no friends...LMAO!
hawkguy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2013, 11:07 PM   #14
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lima,Ohio
Posts: 3,439
Liked 3320 Times on 1494 Posts
Likes Given: 3059

Default

For all the people who think it's a "states rights" thing. How about if the state bans your free speech or ignores the 4th and 5th amendments as well. Still think the Constitution is a violation of states rights? Why is the 2A the only thing in the Bill of Rights that libs think are states rights? I bet old racheal madcow on msnbc would throw a hissy fit if her state told her she couldn't say what she wanted. Or if the state police searched her home without a warrant. The first thing she'd say is that this is unconstitutional, so what makes the 2nd amendment any different?
rjd3282 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2013, 11:35 PM   #15
Big TOW
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
WebleyFosbery38's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Irish Settlement CNY
Posts: 7,485
Liked 8220 Times on 4234 Posts
Likes Given: 9466

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by texaswoodworker View Post
This should be pretty interesting, but most like one sided for the most part.

Does the 2nd Amendment forbid the States from enacting gun control?

Does it protect ALL guns (everything from black powder to full auto MGs)

Does it protect both open and concealed carry?

Does it make background checks and gun registration illegal?

Does it cover all the accessories that go with guns such as magazines, scopes, ect.

Does it ban ALL anti gun laws?

Let the debate begin.
I gotta say, I think you said it all. The basis for us bearing arms was clearly not for hunting ducks and Hancock knew that the types of arms we must have access to win were firearms not pigstickers. It was created for us to be able to win a revolution against a tyrannical Government, any Government not just the federal government.

The only folks who really can be limited are those that have diminished rights due to being under some type of government custody or a minor under someones guidance. Even then, the guardian should have more say than the government as to what the minor may or may not do.

Thats the fact that most politicians dont like to recognize even if they call themselves pro-2A. Even the NRA HFMIC failed to mention that in his keynote speech at this years big conference. They dont like that cause they are the government but they havent changed the BOR's, just stomped on them.

The Constitution and our BOR's were written at a time when most of the nation couldnt read or understand a dissertation. It was written to be understood at a 6th grade comprehension level and when read to someone who couldnt read, could be easily understood and followed. It is not a document that needs deep thinkers to encode, decode and interpret, its simple and clear. Using words like Unfettered and unalienable wasnt just for flair, it was a verbal exclamation point.

Trillions a year are spent on lawyers and courts because ambiguity, smoke and mirrors are thrown in our faces to confuse us. KISS, Keep It Simple Stupid.
WebleyFosbery38 is offline  
5
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 12:07 AM   #16
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,698
Liked 2611 Times on 1484 Posts
Likes Given: 2004

Default

These are all noble sentiments, however,

if you are in a state which holds strict

gun law, you will find yourself lunching on Knish,

and playing hide the salami with Biff, in prison,

until it gets straightened out. Fight it you can,

win it you may, but until you do, it may cost thousands

of dollars, and take many months. Meanwhile,

you're learning to yodel "When I'm Calling You" in

soprano. Out of prison? THEN you get to petition the

governor for your gun rights back...
therewolf is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 12:11 AM   #17
Big TOW
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
WebleyFosbery38's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Irish Settlement CNY
Posts: 7,485
Liked 8220 Times on 4234 Posts
Likes Given: 9466

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by therewolf View Post
These are all noble sentiments, however,

if you are in a state which holds strict

gun law, you will find yourself lunching on Knish,

and playing hide the salami with Biff, in prison,

until it gets straightened out. Fight it you can,

win it you may, but until you do, it may cost thousands

of dollars, and take many months. Meanwhile,

you're learning to yodel "When I'm Calling You" in

soprano. Out of prison? THEN you get to petition the

governor for your gun rights back...
What I believe and what I do are sometime two different things all together. Generally, I must follow the laws in my state because Im no fan of prison food or Bo Bo. We are fighting back in NY and we will win, Coumo has cast his shadow on the wrong folks and he wont be asked back. If his Safe Act survives his governorship, it will Parrish quickly once hes gone.
WebleyFosbery38 is offline  
3
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 12:14 AM   #18
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hawkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: austin,tx
Posts: 4,626
Liked 3248 Times on 1941 Posts
Likes Given: 2347

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 7point62 View Post
The problem with 2A is that it's part of the Constitution; and since the Founding Fathers purposely left the Constitution vague enough to give it elasticity, everything in it is open to interpretation. We may think it gives us the right to keep and bear arms but every word is subject to legal challenge. How the Supreme Court interprets it at any given time is what it ultimately means.
good post. and yes....this is the reason the debate will continue....
hawkguy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 12:29 AM   #19
The Apocalypse Is Coming.....
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 7
Liked 22310 Times on 12476 Posts
Likes Given: 53672

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by texaswoodworker View Post
This should be pretty interesting, but most like one sided for the most part.

Does the 2nd Amendment forbid the States from enacting gun control?

Does it protect ALL guns (everything from black powder to full auto MGs)

Does it protect both open and concealed carry?

Does it make background checks and gun registration illegal?

Does it cover all the accessories that go with guns such as magazines, scopes, ect.

Does it ban ALL anti gun laws?

Let the debate begin.
first of all i passionately support the 2nd amendment.

yes, IMO the 2nd does forbid the states from enacting gun control as long as that state is a part of the United States.

IMo, yes again it should or is suppose to protect all firearms with no restrictions as to type.

again, the 2nd is the right to bear arms, and IMO, carrying a firearm open or concealed is bearing a firearm.

reistration of any firearm i oppose very strongly, just because of past events in history have shown that a registration ultimately leads to confiscation, eventually at some point and with a registration, they know who owns what.
now background checks? i am just a little on the fence with that one. simply because, most of us will agree that there are certain people that should be restricted from owning firearms, such as repeat violent criminals, mentally unstable persons, ect.,,,,, but at what level a background check is done and where the information comes from might be where i have some difficulty with it. now if a person has a past criminal history of drugs or violence, or is habitually a repeat offender, has been legally by the courts committed to a mental institution, because they are mentally unstable, if they are in the country illegally and can't prove citizenship or residency, ect..... then i have no problems with it to a degree. i also thingk that a person convicted of even a felony, that was non-violent such as embezzlement for example, that when they are released, they should be able to regain their rights to own firearms.

any firearms attachments or accessories should hold the same as the firearms themselves, with no restrictions. if a person can own a F/A SMG, and they want a 100 round magazine, and also want a silencer, they should be allowed to own them as well, if they so choose to. no restrictions at all on any type of accessories, parts or attachments.

IMO, all gun control laws, bans or restrictions are in violation of the 2nd amendment. imposing taxes and having to have permit is just another revenue generator IMO. if a person is a LAC, they should be able to own whatever they want, with no restrictions or having to pay a tax to the government to own it.

all gun control laws, bans and restrictions have only hobbled and affected the LAC, and has never detered the criminals in any way ever. the past has proven this beyond any doubt.
Axxe55 is offline  
6
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 12:35 AM   #20
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
wittmeba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: The state for Lovers
Posts: 1,097
Liked 576 Times on 325 Posts
Likes Given: 722

Default

Personally I feel some laws should have a life window. They should have an effective date and expiration date. Allow the law makers to reinstate if needed but they should not go on the books forever. They may require modification at time of reinstating - so be it. If they are not slated to be reinstated, they die a natural death and go off the books. Technology and other developments are changing too fast for all laws to live forever.

You have a right to own weapons. Should that include nuclear or chemical warfare weapons? In the days of the cowboys when many laws were booked I think those having guns in their holsters is one thing. To think a neighbor might have a tank is another.


Overall, I personally feel any attempt of gun control is a waste of time. It doesnt affect the problem and that is in the hands of the criminals. They dont follow ANY laws - why would they follow gun control laws? You cant stop the thief from steeling a gun at which it becomes a "black market" item - not traceable. You only know where it may have been purchased and by whom...but it ends there.

What good does it do to control guns of the honest people - the law abiding citizens?

It is a criminal offense to lie on the background check for the purchase of a new weapon.

Gun control may affect the purchase of of new guns but that isnt where the problem lies.

I pretty much agree with texaswoodworker and hawkguy.
__________________
NRA Member - Over 5,000,000 strong!
Criminals don't discriminate. They will attack anywhere!

~ Holsters ~

Never forget these important words:
We the People...
America, take back your country!
wittmeba is offline  
texaswoodworker Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Debate TWMIM Politics, Religion and Controversy 43 10-31-2012 07:50 PM
Vp debate Mosin Politics, Religion and Controversy 76 10-14-2012 03:01 AM
Age old debate stevem8 Semi-Auto Handguns 21 06-16-2012 02:11 AM
GOP Debate Ploofy Politics, Religion and Controversy 31 09-30-2011 05:11 AM
AR Debate. Comeswithbacon AR-15 Discussion 20 07-11-2011 06:23 PM



Newest Threads