You have to get rid of one of the amendments to the Constitution - which one? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 11:11:04 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Individual Politics (Moderator: The Dowager Mod)
  You have to get rid of one of the amendments to the Constitution - which one? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Which amendment would you get rid of if forced to pick one for elimination?
#1
1
 
#2
2
 
#3
3
 
#4
4
 
#5
5
 
#6
6
 
#7
7
 
#8
8
 
#9
9
 
#10
10
 
#11
11
 
#12
12
 
#13
13
 
#14
14
 
#15
15
 
#16
16
 
#17
17
 
#18
19
 
#19
20
 
#20
22
 
#21
23
 
#22
24
 
#23
25
 
#24
26
 
#25
27
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 87

Author Topic: You have to get rid of one of the amendments to the Constitution - which one?  (Read 4939 times)
bedstuy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,526


Political Matrix
E: -1.16, S: -4.35

« on: August 30, 2014, 09:15:52 AM »

I'm not an anti gun nut but the vague wording of the 2nd is quite problematic. Has to be that.

That's basically how I feel.  If the Supreme Court correctly interpreted the Second Amendment, it would be perfectly fine.  If the Second Amendment means that we can't enact reasonable gun regulation, it's crazy.
Logged
bedstuy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,526


Political Matrix
E: -1.16, S: -4.35

« Reply #1 on: August 30, 2014, 09:31:52 AM »

I'm not an anti gun nut but the vague wording of the 2nd is quite problematic. Has to be that.

That's basically how I feel.  If the Supreme Court correctly interpreted the Second Amendment, it would be perfectly fine.  If the Second Amendment means that we can't enact reasonable gun regulation, it's crazy.

What reasonable gun regulation that wasn't a de facto gun ban has the Court ever struck down?

Heller is the obvious example.  That was a laughable decision on so many levels.
Logged
bedstuy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,526


Political Matrix
E: -1.16, S: -4.35

« Reply #2 on: August 30, 2014, 10:25:44 AM »

I'm not an anti gun nut but the vague wording of the 2nd is quite problematic. Has to be that.

That's basically how I feel.  If the Supreme Court correctly interpreted the Second Amendment, it would be perfectly fine.  If the Second Amendment means that we can't enact reasonable gun regulation, it's crazy.

What reasonable gun regulation that wasn't a de facto gun ban has the Court ever struck down?

Heller is the obvious example.  That was a laughable decision on so many levels.

You're kidding right?  I can just barely see someone who believes that there should be no private gun ownership thinking that striking the portion of DC's Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 that guns had to be kept in an unusable state within one's home was an overreach, but the portion that banned any guns not already registered in 1975 absolutely was a ban.

The Second Amendment is about state militias.  DC is not a US state so the Second Amendment doesn't apply to DC.  That's the clear legal answer to me.  But, on a more practical level, there's no Second Amendment reason that a particular type of firearm needs to be legal for anyone to own. 
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.038 seconds with 14 queries.