Is the 2A absolute

Discussion in 'The Club House' started by locutus, Jan 5, 2018.

  1. Yes

    26 vote(s)
    52.0%
  2. No

    24 vote(s)
    48.0%
  1. locutus

    locutus Well-Known Member Supporter

    17,728
    3,448
    113
    Do you believe the Second Amendment is absolute and no level of government has a constitutional right to place any restrictions whatsoever on any arms for any reason?

    IOW, children, habitual drunkards, felons, the mentally deranged, etc have an absolute right to legally purchase a forearm, hand grenade, etc.
     
  2. Dallas53

    Dallas53 Well-Known Member

    11,674
    8,064
    113
    ain't nothing in life that is absolute, except for death and taxes!

    everyone dies at some point, and everyone pays taxes somewhere along the line.

    and "shall not be infringed...." doesn't mean absolute.
     

  3. Ghost1958

    Ghost1958 Well-Known Member

    1,408
    1,240
    113
    More precise the RTKABA is absolute and existed before the 2A or the nation.

    The 2A was intended as it plainly says to ban any infringement IE interference of the right of the People to be armed.
    So I voted yes.

    As a practical matter the 2A at present is practically non existent. Replaced by gov permission.
     
  4. kfox75

    kfox75 Well-Known Member Supporter

    8,158
    1,988
    113
    no. the 2A, as with anything in life with the exception of death and taxes, is not absolute.
     
    dango and Dallas53 like this.
  5. microadventure

    microadventure Well-Known Member

    827
    428
    63
    if it is absolute, there can be no consequences for the misuse of the arms we keep and bear.
     
    PepeLePewPew, dango and locutus like this.
  6. Ghost1958

    Ghost1958 Well-Known Member

    1,408
    1,240
    113

    All due respect how is that?

    You kill, rape rob etc etc there are laws against all of that if you use a gun ,a pool noodle or no weapon.

    The crime is what should be punished. Not the object used to do it with, if any.
     
  7. Balota

    Balota ... but I used to play keyboards. Staff Member

    8,805
    1,696
    113
    So, I take it that any law that applies to guns but does not interfere with the right of the people to be armed would be OK? Though your previous posts suggest otherwise.

    There are certainly gun laws that are gross violations of 2A. Ridiculous magazine limits, almost anything in NY, NJ or HI, banning full auto, these are clear violations. "Shall issue" carry licenses are (IMO only) not violations. Limitations that protect society against people who are already proven to be dangerous, loose in public, and without remorse are not violations, again IMO only. Such limitations accomplish the over-arching goal of providing a safe environment in which to live, be free and pursue happiness.
     
    dango, locutus, kfox75 and 1 other person like this.
  8. Chainfire

    Chainfire Well-Known Member Supporter

    6,418
    2,684
    113
    Have you lost your mind?
     
    Dallas53 likes this.
  9. Danoobie

    Danoobie Well-Known Member

    591
    463
    63
    Now, I live in a place were I strap on a pistol, grab a rifle, and go for a walk,
    nobody thinks twice about it.

    If I did that where I used to live, in New Jerkistan, people would have gone
    bananas. So long story short, maybe we would LIKE the 2A to be absolute,
    but it absolutely is not. Over the decades, it's been hobbled, by pansy,
    dandied legislators, most with no military service, who don't know their
    *** from a Bazooka.

    Once again, our tax dollars, hard at work, turning our Constitution into
    toilet paper...
     
  10. Ghost1958

    Ghost1958 Well-Known Member

    1,408
    1,240
    113

    Again with all do respect, the 2A granted no authority to any gov unit to pass such a regulation but specifically prohibited it.

    If you are walking down the sidewalk and someone requires you to pay a dollar to continue. Or requires shoes
    Or bans shoes. They have interfered or infringed with you walking down the sidewalk even if they don't stop you entirely.

    Any gun regulation from the first passed to the last interferes or infringes on the peoples RTKABA .

    There is no authority granted in BOR or the COTUS for any branch of gov to do so. Only prohibition of doing so.
     
  11. Danoobie

    Danoobie Well-Known Member

    591
    463
    63
    Well, those prohibitions sure ain't working, are they?
     
    schnuffleupagus, dango and Ghost1958 like this.
  12. Ghost1958

    Ghost1958 Well-Known Member

    1,408
    1,240
    113
    Nope. We have tyrants in both parties who wish to do the impossible and disarm the public.

    But the question posed here as I understand it is.
    Was the 2A an absolute prohibition on any infringement of the RTKABA. Obviously it was and plainly stated so. And is contradicted no where in the COTUS.

    That control and power hungry leeches in gov over the years have violated their oaths and passed such laws, SCOTUS violated theirs and upheld them, and LE violate their oath to defend and protect the the COTUS enforcing those infringements, do not change what the 2As original plainly written prohibiting of such infringement states.
     
  13. Trez

    Trez Well-Known Member

    4,625
    418
    83
    Absolute or not... I just wished I lived "back in the day"

    I can't even imagine how awesome it must of been to order a gun from the back of a catalog and have it shipped right to your door...
    You dont even know the level of envy I feel every time I see those old ads or some old guy tells me what you could buy from a hardware store.... :(
    [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  14. Imurhuckleberry

    Imurhuckleberry Well-Known Member

    176
    333
    63
    No, if it were than the Constitution would not be a living document that can be amended as is needed to protect the rights of the people as our society and civilization changes through the centuries.
     
    dango, locutus and kfox75 like this.
  15. Ghost1958

    Ghost1958 Well-Known Member

    1,408
    1,240
    113

    But the 2A hasn't been legally amended. And won't be. Which is why it has been illegally bypassed.

    What the living document side fails to or refuses to admit is the rights in the BOR are not granted by the bor.
    But rights that existed for every human long before the COTUS.

    Rights our founders fought and died to secure.

    That those rights have been stolen by brute force or threat of same since history began does not invalidate their existence.

    For all thru history including our own the tyrants of history invariably have had their populations use the same tactics to regain those rights if necessary.
     
  16. Dallas53

    Dallas53 Well-Known Member

    11,674
    8,064
    113
    sad to say, but now i'm seeing this thread just turning into a rehash of closed thread of similar subject matter.

    oh well, at least i voted before it gets locked down!
     
    Missouribound and kfox75 like this.
  17. kfox75

    kfox75 Well-Known Member Supporter

    8,158
    1,988
    113
    I wonder if we are the only ones seeing the pattern here..........

    And sorry y'all for blowing my top earlier over 303's post, but it was very disrespectful to put it nicely. Guess I forgot to filter myself at that point.
     
    dango and Dallas53 like this.
  18. Dallas53

    Dallas53 Well-Known Member

    11,674
    8,064
    113
    you're not the one who should be making an apology.

    once they start slinging insults, they are showing their trued colors when they can't debate on civil and intelligent level.

    i definitely see a pattern. and one member who at least 90% of his posts are only in the L&A section!
     
    dango and kfox75 like this.
  19. Imurhuckleberry

    Imurhuckleberry Well-Known Member

    176
    333
    63
    That is why freedom of speech is very difficult. We forget that everyone has the right to express their beliefs, and their beliefs do not necessarily coincide with ours. It is frustrating, but no excuse to disrespect your fellow man/woman.
     
  20. kfox75

    kfox75 Well-Known Member Supporter

    8,158
    1,988
    113
    Well, here's the main rub for me. I do agree that the RTKBA and SD is an absolute right, but I feel that citizenship is not. Committing certain crimes, even if you get out after serving your full sentence, should have repercussions, one of which is loss of citizenship, and the rights attached. that is how the current system works, and IMHO, works well, with some exceptions. Mainly cases where the punishment doesn't fit the crime.

    And that's both ways, either overly strict, or not strict enough.

    However, the basic human right to SD should never be removed, but perhaps the tools legally available need to be in the interest of the safety of the public at large. those violating said laws should be charged with such laws, no plea bargains, no compromises, unless it can be proven that the weapon they are holding came from the act of SD (As it is with someone holding an NFA item they don't own, that is not registered, that came from their attacker in most reasonable states.)

    We had a case here last week, where a man stole over $1,000 worth of merchandise from the local Walmart, punched a greeter as he ran out the door, stoole a customer's car, and led LE on a chase through the city, crashing into a house at the end of the chase, when he was taken into custody.

    here's the kicker, and about the only thing he is fighting at this time.

    The owner of the vehicle stolen kept a hadgun under the seat, so the guy who stole the car is now up on felony charges, as he had a record, and no LTCF, for first degree carrying a firearm without a license, which his lawyer is trying to get dropped, as it wasn't his gun.

    now, if that were a valid defense, then anyone driving a car with an expired registration, as long as it's not their car, should get a pass on that ticket, not shouldn't they? :rolleyes:

    DA said no dice. The charge sticks. :D

    And before anyone jumps in with the "What if your kid is driving your car, and you leave\forget to remove, ect your pistol or NFA item from the car", there are laws protecting those in your household here in PA from being charged in those cases. Odds are, as there is no registration of handguns here (NFA, there is under federal law), you can expect a phone call, and chances are you will have to go to the agency's location to get it back, but your kid doesn't get charged with a crime, as long as it's your weapon.

    As I have said before, certain crimes, some of which should be a permanent lock up or death sentence IMHO, you should permanently lose all rights for the rest of your life. Some should be a case of X number of years outside, with good behavior, you can petition the court to overturn it, and as long as good reason does not exist to deny, it should be granted. others, full rights upon release.

    but, if someone is trying to kill you, and you have done Nothing to create or further such an attack, then your crime should be irrelevant at that point, and full rights of SD, as granted by God, should apply. Just options, in some cases, on what you can use, should be restricted, if your past actions deem it to be so.

    no simple answers to the problem, no matter how you look at it. So yes, in a way, I do kind of agree with Jim Rau, Ghost, and 303tom, just not to the point of arming all criminals once they set foot outside the gates, or it being legal for them to buy a firearm upon release, in certain cases.

    I can see both sides of the coin, and both sides do make some valid points. My issue with it is, there is no reasonable and civil debate on it, just "You're wrong, and idiot, and a Liberal Troll!" from that side.

    And that's what A p!sses me off to no end, and B. makes them seem like a child with a temper, which makes more antis have something to base what is otherwise, an irrational fear, making their point foir them, as they then paint all of us with the same brush.

    Both sides lose when that happens, hence my blowout earlier.

    i'm just enough of a man to admit that I went too far, and say i'm sorry for doing so.

    Ain't no easy anwer on this one Bro.