2nd Amendment Debate. - Page 3
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > 2nd Amendment Debate.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-21-2013, 01:41 AM   #21
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Garadex's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 1,267
Liked 225 Times on 176 Posts
Likes Given: 228

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.
1. It should.

2. Yes

3. Yes

4. A check to make sure that the person buying is not severely mentally ill, Along with more help to the mentally ill. Gun registration should never be done we don't need another Nazi Germany.

5. All accessories legal.

6. Pretty much.

Also as someone said before just let us buy guns that Soldier/Marines have, and keep violent felons in prison until they die naturally or are executed. (Should happen more often by the way)
__________________

I'm gonna stop you right there, you just said an AR-15 is a high-powered rifle. It is obvious you don't know anything about guns and I shall ignore anything you say from this point on.

Garadex is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 01:43 AM   #22
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,698
Liked 2605 Times on 1481 Posts
Likes Given: 2004

Default

While it has been undoubtedly proven "gun control"

is a failed social experiment, and Ted Nugent's

statement "The 2nd Amendment IS my
Concealed Weapons Permit!"

sounds good, you may want to make sure his

attorney will be willing to represent you, also,

in the event you decide to take that stance,

in the wrong state.

__________________
therewolf is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 02:00 AM   #23
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lima,Ohio
Posts: 3,074
Liked 2745 Times on 1233 Posts
Likes Given: 2644

Default

For those of you who missed my earlier post. Why is the 2nd amendment the only one under attack by certain states? They don't attack the 1st or 3rd or 4th or 5th........... So how can gun control be a state issue? It's called the United States Constitution for a reason. Sounds like some of these states don't want to be united anymore. The last time that happened Mr. Lincoln declared war on them.

__________________
rjd3282 is offline  
3
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 02:36 AM   #24
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hawkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: austin,tx
Posts: 4,424
Liked 3136 Times on 1872 Posts
Likes Given: 2184

Default

i'm feeling like its deja vu all over again.....

i feel like we had a similar discussion not terribly long ago, so i think i might bow out of this one gents...but thanks for the discussion....but it is always a good topic that brings lively discussion..i'll be following, but as an observer this time...i think i stated my opinions on this a few times.....

adios mo fo's

__________________
hawkguy is offline  
3
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 03:33 AM   #25
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Reno,Texas
Posts: 10,211
Liked 6576 Times on 3639 Posts
Likes Given: 27929

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkguy View Post
t

i'm a pretty good boy outside of the cave....
BTW, have you made it into the trail yet?

Quote:
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.
Our Federal Government hasn't been acting in accordance to the Constitution for many decades. That should be changed now.

I don't believe gun culture to be a regional thing. Look at California and New York as examples. These are two very antigun states that we have a LOT of members from.

Quote:
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.
Another thing to change. Murder should come with an automatic life sentence or the death penalty. Rape too. As it is now, we do need some buffer to stop criminals from having guns, but all gun control to this point as failed miserably. How will more help?

Quote:
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.
Agreed.

Quote:
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.
Good is good, better is better.

Quote:
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 problem with this is that the man with the machine gun has a distinct advantage.

Quote:
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....
There are enough people in the military using SAWs and other machineguns for me to call it common. We should have those weapons too. You really didn't answer the question though. How is 30 rds different enough from 31 rounds that 31 rds should be banned?

Quote:
good points. and something to consider. this is why i debate, not to beat MY viewpoints into others, but to gain insight and knowledge.
This is one of the reasons I like a good debate as well.

Quote:
i don't like open carry....i'm on the fence....that is where i am.
About it being a right?

Quote:
how do you stop murder? you can't! how do you stop rape? you can't!
Then why try to create more laws that only effect the good guys?

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

Quote:
state it is illegal....issue consequences...that is it.
Murder, rape, and assault is already illegal. Why have the gun laws?

Quote:
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..
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Franklin's Contributions to the Conference on February 17 (III) Fri, Feb 17, 1775


Quote:
yes..in reality...like keeping criminals locked up...it fails.

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

Quote:
unfortunately, i agree.
Then my point is proven.

Quote:
again, average grunt/swat team...equal enough imo. and citizens CAN have full auto belt fed remember? heh....if ya got the $$$$$...
In order to buy a machinegun, you MUST go through an extensive background check and pay $200 for a tax stamp (sometimes, this takes 6 months or more). The gun itself is registered. The ONLY reason it's expensive is because it is illegal to buy one made on or after May 19, 1986. I call that a violation of my rights.

Quote:
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.
I drew that line awhile back. It hasn't budged since.

Quote:
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...
Agreeing to disagree seems like a good idea. This is just not something I'd easily budge on.

As said before, those laws already exist. Our government doesn't care. If they want to do it, they'll do it.

Quote:
whew! that was a bunch of typing....
Yes it was.

Quote:
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!
A good debate is always fun.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkguy View Post
i'm feeling like its deja vu all over again.....

i feel like we had a similar discussion not terribly long ago, so i think i might bow out of this one gents...but thanks for the discussion....but it is always a good topic that brings lively discussion..i'll be following, but as an observer this time...i think i stated my opinions on this a few times.....

adios mo fo's
Quitter!
__________________
texaswoodworker is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 03:42 AM   #26
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
DrumJunkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Here in the holler....
Posts: 4,823
Liked 1616 Times on 944 Posts
Likes Given: 1894

Default

States have the right to enact any law that does not directly contradict the Constitution. Upon becoming states they had to agree to the Constitution as the law of the land. Anmd what si not covered by the Constitution is to be passes on to the states. It's really very simple. I'm not real bright and I understand it.

We should have full access to what the military does. And before some smart as$ says what about [insert big scary thing here] stop it. You just sound stupid. Yes, if you can afford a carrier with all the planes missels, guns and ammo have at it. Just remembert if you use it to break the law then you can and should be dealt with accordingly. Now how many people will actually go buy a nuke? Be realistic now, or you will just sound stupid.

Part of owning guns is being able to have them at your disposal. Open carry, concealed carry, in your rump carry for all I care. I honestly do not give a crap what anyone thinks about how someone else carry a personal defense tool. If you do then you have way too high an opinion of yourself and are just as guilty of restriction as the asshats that pass laws. If you believe in a citizen not being able to use their rights then you are part of the problem. It's just a slightly different flavor that some others. If you believe you need a permission slip form your overlords to use your rights then you don't have rights. You have permission to engage in a privilege. I have no right to drive, so I had to pass tests and not do stupid things or I lose the privilege. Tell me how that is any different than needing any type of permit to own or carry a firearm as you see fit?

Bottom line is any law that curtails a citizens right to bare arms is wrong, this is a simple truth.

__________________

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson

DrumJunkie is offline  
4
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 03:53 AM   #27
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Reno,Texas
Posts: 10,211
Liked 6576 Times on 3639 Posts
Likes Given: 27929

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrumJunkie View Post
in your rump carry
I hear that can be a bit uncomfortable.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/gun-hidden-in-butt-765912

What do you call this kind of carry?

http://newspirates.com/?p=5066
__________________
texaswoodworker is offline  
DrumJunkie Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 04:52 AM   #28
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
JW357's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 6,716
Liked 3727 Times on 2284 Posts
Likes Given: 1224

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by texaswoodworker

I hear that can be a bit uncomfortable.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/gun-hidden-in-butt-765912

What do you call this kind of carry?

http://newspirates.com/?p=5066
http://youtu.be/z3RDk9l4uTw
__________________

Always have clean socks.

JW357 is offline  
texaswoodworker Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 09:19 AM   #29
I don't come with an "edit" option....
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Mason609's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Quincy,MA
Posts: 1,693
Liked 833 Times on 521 Posts
Likes Given: 4414

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.
How about this for SCOTUS' interpretation??

Many people seem to be forgetting about the Heller decision back in 2008, and again in 2010 when the SCOTUS affirmed the fundamental right to bear arms.

In both, they looked at the 14th Amendment. While four members of the majority said the amendment was "incorporated" through the 14th Amendment's guarantee that the states may not "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"

Justice Thomas agreed with the outcome of the case but said the right was more correctly located elsewhere in the 14th Amendment, in a clause that forbids laws that abridge "the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States."

As has been said, the FF wanted to get away from the "mob rule" of democracy. That includes putting state's rights above the individual.
__________________

Insert witty comment here......


Veritas Aequitas

Vincit Omnia Veritas

Vincere est Vivere

Mason609 is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2013, 09:34 AM   #30
I don't come with an "edit" option....
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Mason609's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Quincy,MA
Posts: 1,693
Liked 833 Times on 521 Posts
Likes Given: 4414

Default

Quote:
=texaswoodworker;1341158]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?
Basically, yes (and is backed up by the 14th)

Quote:
Does it protect ALL guns (everything from black powder to full auto MGs)
I'd say it covers all arms (just not nuclear, chemical or biological)

Quote:
Does it protect both open and concealed carry?
Yes

Quote:
Does it make background checks and gun registration illegal?
Hmmm... personally, I have no issue with background checks. Of course, that could be because I know everything in my background, and no matter how deep they went, there's nothing that would disqualify me.

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

Quote:
Does it ban ALL anti gun laws?

Let the debate begin.
Yes. As well as those that are labeled as "consumer safety" (we have those here in MA, which is why we can't have certain guns)



Now, I pose a question...

What about restrictive laws? The kind that provide restrictions due to age, mental capacity, and such..
__________________

Insert witty comment here......


Veritas Aequitas

Vincit Omnia Veritas

Vincere est Vivere

Mason609 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 08:50 PM
Vp debate Mosin Politics, Religion and Controversy 76 10-14-2012 04:01 AM
Age old debate stevem8 Semi-Auto Handguns 21 06-16-2012 03:11 AM
GOP Debate Ploofy Politics, Religion and Controversy 31 09-30-2011 06:11 AM
AR Debate. Comeswithbacon AR-15 Discussion 20 07-11-2011 07:23 PM