Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com

Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/)
-   Legal and Activism (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/)
-   -   Do you really support the Second Amendment? (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/do-you-really-support-second-amendment-25340/)

opaww 03-29-2010 10:05 PM

Do you really support the Second Amendment?
 
When anyone says will I support the Second Amendment but…they are really saying that they do not in fact support the Second Amendment because the Second Amendment is unconditional not like the other rights.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Here we have Amendment I, show me where it says that no one can restrict any of these rights? It plainly says “Congress shall not”, putting a restriction on a given federal government body “the Congress”. No restrictions on the state at all so we had to have a 14th Amendment to stop states from enacting laws denying the rights as recognized by our First Amendment.

Contrary to popular opinion the right to yell fire in a crowded theater is not a federal law, restriction nor even a mandate. But comes from state laws not actually restricting the actual speech but rather placing consequences for the words you utter that may cause harm to body or reputation (slander) of persons. Even here we must still use due process of law before we can find someone guilty of an offence of free speech, or any of the listed rights in the First Amendment.


AMENDMENT XIV
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.

Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.

Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


Amendment II

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.


The Second Amendment has no restrictions place on it, as does the First Amendment. It clearly states, “Shall not be infringed”, this alone is the most powerful statement in the whole of the Second Amendment. It does not say shall not be infringed “except”, it does not say shall not be infringed by Congress, nor just the brady bunch. It says “shall not be infringed” clearly restricting any infringement by anyone, except through due process of law.

The Second Amendment needs no protection of the 14th Amendment because it is automatically incorporated to any and all governing bodies. The Bill of Rights was created to restrict government from violating the listed rights and this included all forms of government in the USA unless specified other wise as is in the First Amendment.

Due process of law was always held to mean until sentence was served in full then all rights were restored fully. In the middle of the 20th century we seen the advent of new meanings calling some violations of law to be felony’s and the restrictions of life time punishment for the felony’s to continue well after the time was served.

Today we see some rights restored by the courts except the Second Amendment. Very few have ever had their Second Amendment rights restored even after a court ruled in their favor. The BATFU still holds the right to deny you the Second Amendment rights regardless if a court rules to give it back to you.

It was never once a felon always a felon, until the middle of the 20th century and the need of socialists to control the people of this country and for them to decide what rights you should have. Then we saw the corruption of the meaning and miss-interpretation of the wording of the rights so they could get people to believe it was all wrong for 200 years.

Then we saw the adding of some laws as felons this continued until today where almost everything is a felony, or can be made into a felony for convenience. The rights everyone had is slowly being eroded to a point where most people just shrug their shoulders and say it does not effect me or there is nothing I can do about it. Removing a right is simple today sense most people will not band together and stop it.

If you say, “I support the Second Amendment except,” you are leading more credence to the division of our power to stop further restrictions on rights. Once rights are gone it takes spilling of blood and/or dam near a miracle to get them back.

opaww

ThorsHammer 03-29-2010 11:09 PM

I am not a citizen, yet, still I support and work to uphold the constitution. People frequently ask me why I am a member of the NRA. "Why do you care, you're not a citizen." I usually look these @$shats straight in the eye and respond: "Well, you don't, so someone has to look out for your rights." And then I usually get a blanket "Why don't you move back to Sweden?" response to which I reply "Since you seem hell-bent on living in a socialist society that's your best bet. Want me to help you pack your bags?"

amoroque 03-29-2010 11:27 PM

Great piece there Opaww!

I never thought about it that way before, but, you are 100% right. The 2nd amendment is the only one that was not meant to be changed or had any exceptions made to.

bkt 03-30-2010 10:37 AM

Natural or God-given rights exist; they are not granted. They are preconditions that cannot be changed -- look up the word "unalienable". It is something that cannot be changed.

It is akin to:

"Congress shall make no law causing the sun to rise in the west and set in the east."

Even if Congress did make such a law, it wouldn't change the facts.

When threatened, all living organisms will naturally defend their lives, the lives of those around them, and in the case of humans, they will also defend their wealth, property and most importantly their liberty.

We do not need a bill of rights acknowledging our right to breathe, drink water, eat food, wear clothes and use shelter. Why? Because it's a given: we need these things to live. The same goes for being able to defend ourselves, but the Framers knew through past experience that would-be tyrants first disarm a populace, and 2A exists specifically to eliminate that threat.

Anyone who is against 2A is either an idiot and ignorant of history or a would-be tyrant.

user4 03-30-2010 03:26 PM

Okay, so we all agree that gun rights are inalienable. So, why is it such a pain in the ass to buy a gun? Why is it ANYONE's business?

bkt 03-30-2010 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ineffable (Post 260486)
Okay, so we all agree that gun rights are inalienable. So, why is it such a pain in the ass to buy a gun? Why is it ANYONE's business?

Some laws exist as a deterrent -- such as requiring people to pay well over $150 (in my county) to get a permit to buy a handgun. Other laws exist to desensitize us to eventual future laws that make it even more difficult to buy a firearm (eg: filling out a 4473).

The real question is this: Why have we tolerated this crap?

opaww 03-30-2010 08:25 PM

What bkt said

Puff 03-30-2010 08:59 PM

There is also in our Bill of Rights ( the first 10 amendments ) No.9.

Article IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be
construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.




One of the issues the sighners of The Declaration of Independence had with the King of England was that "He has affected to render the military
independent of and superior to the civil power."

Take a few minutes to reread the Declaration Of Independence and
the issues our founding fathers had with the King - you will see
several things in there that are happening today.

M14sRock 03-31-2010 04:18 AM

Very well written, O. You rock.

Cory2 03-31-2010 05:15 PM

So my question is this: How am I supposed to convience other people? I have only a small circle of friends and I post on this site. All of my friends believe whole heartedly in the secondamendment and everyone on this forum does too. How else can we reach out to the public? Talking to like minded people about what we both know isn't getting our cause anywhere.

We can vote in novemember but you see what that got us last time. We need a way to reach out to a larger group of people i just dont know how. Maybe some of you older people who have more experience in politics (as i am only 21) can help me figure it out.


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:14 PM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.