What is the 2nd Amendment really for?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 05:23:00 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  Constitution and Law (Moderator: World politics is up Schmitt creek)
  What is the 2nd Amendment really for?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3
Author Topic: What is the 2nd Amendment really for?  (Read 4709 times)
Thomas
Jabe Shepherd
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 339
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 24, 2017, 09:25:59 AM »

Discuss
Logged
Kingpoleon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 24, 2017, 03:11:21 PM »

It was a conspiracy by the corporate duck hunting business at the time. The Founding Fathers and our Bill of Rights was bought and paid for by special interests.
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,784
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 24, 2017, 03:21:04 PM »

To incorporate in writing the English Right to Keep and Bear Arms, albeit with no restrictions on Catholics owning arms.
Logged
Kingpoleon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: August 24, 2017, 03:24:32 PM »

To incorporate in writing the English Right to Keep and Bear Arms, albeit with no restrictions on Catholics owning arms.
That was an unfortunate oversight.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,079
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: August 24, 2017, 04:35:06 PM »

indeed, Protestants, Agnostics, Sikhs and Jews are the only people that should be allowed to own firearms.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: August 25, 2017, 01:27:22 AM »

indeed, Protestants, Agnostics, Sikhs and Jews are the only people that should be allowed to own firearms.
That's the problem with originalist interpretations of the Constitution, absolutely no way of dealing with things not around  at the time it was written.  What about the Bahais? What about Scientologists?  Can you imagine how much different Pulp Fiction would have been if John Travolta hadn't been able to star in it?
Logged
Dr Oz Lost Party!
PittsburghSteel
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,931
United States


P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: August 28, 2017, 05:35:58 PM »

Maintaining a well regulated militia. That is all.
Logged
Dr. MB
MB
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,813
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 30, 2017, 11:55:43 PM »

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.

In effect, to secure the state and to secure yourself.
Logged
TPIG
ThatConservativeGuy
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,997
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 1.91


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 31, 2017, 12:40:18 PM »
« Edited: October 31, 2017, 01:15:28 PM by ThatConservativeGuy »

Maintaining a well regulated militia. That is all.

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."

— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution (one of the co-authors of the Bill of Rights)
Logged
SamTilden2020
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 407


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 31, 2017, 01:05:29 PM »

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.

In effect, to secure the state and to secure yourself.
This
Logged
White Trash
Southern Gothic
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,910


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: November 01, 2017, 10:45:34 AM »

To ensure that the state doesn't have a monopoly on force.
Logged
Alabama_Indy10
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,319
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: November 01, 2017, 09:43:38 PM »

Maintaining a well regulated militia. That is all.

lol
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: November 03, 2017, 01:49:41 AM »

Maintaining a well regulated militia. That is all.

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."

— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution (one of the co-authors of the Bill of Rights)

     Discounting original intent is a little silly when one considers that lexicon and syntax have changed appreciably since 1787. Understanding of words might change, such that one has to actually look at contemporaneous writings to understand what the law is supposed to say. Otherwise the meanings of the Constitution can sway with changes in language, which is not at all desirable.
Logged
Karpatsky
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,545
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: November 16, 2017, 11:22:27 AM »

The government was too poor to equip regulars, so it had to make sure there were enough skilled irregulars floating around to draft up when wars came. Spanish war was first American war in which regular forces engaged was greater than the quantity of militiamen.
Logged
brucejoel99
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,447
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: November 20, 2017, 11:42:36 PM »

To prevent the new fed. gov't. established in 1789 from disarming the state militias & replacing them w/ a fed. standing army, since that was a concern that was relevant (perhaps for a few years) around the birth of the country. It's irrelevant today. Americans don't rely on state militias in 2017 for our freedom from the fed. gov't.
Logged
libertpaulian
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,610
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: November 21, 2017, 10:30:53 AM »

If the 2nd Amendment is really as limited as progressives claim it is, then why the hell did the Founders put it in the Bill of RIGHTS?  Why didn't they just put an eighth article in the Constitution spelling out the powers and privileges of state militias?
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,784
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: November 22, 2017, 12:26:22 AM »

If the 2nd Amendment is really as limited as progressives claim it is, then why the hell did the Founders put it in the Bill of RIGHTS?  Why didn't they just put an eighth article in the Constitution spelling out the powers and privileges of state militias?


Plus as worded,  it is impossible to make a good-faith argument that right of the people means right of the State governments.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,079
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: November 24, 2017, 10:08:00 AM »

It's weird that on this left leaning political message board, gun rights peoples destroy gun control peoples every time.  Sure, it helps a lot that we have the facts and logic on our side and all they have is emotion and gut, but these things are much more evenly divided most of the time on the internet.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: November 24, 2017, 12:36:43 PM »

It's weird that on this left leaning political message board, gun rights peoples destroy gun control peoples every time.  Sure, it helps a lot that we have the facts and logic on our side and all they have is emotion and gut, but these things are much more evenly divided most of the time on the internet.

I'd be tempted to infract that for excessive hyperbole except that's really mod speak for trolling by exaggeration and I don't think you're trolling. I will agree that gun control doesn't appear to be a primary issue for leftists here, probably because our extreme left wing is mostly anarchist-left rather than statist-left. Also, the people who post here generally acknowledge the Second Amendment exists and isn't going to disappear any time soon, so that's not going to be up for debate, just the parameters of what regulations of guns are both desirable and constitutional.

However, considering all the statistics that show that people who don't have guns in the house are less likely to die from guns, that people who live in states with lax concealed carry laws are more likely to die from guns, etc. I'd say the facts and logic generally aren't on the side of the gun cultists.
Logged
Keep cool-idge
Benjamin Harrison he is w
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,770
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: November 24, 2017, 03:57:26 PM »

It's weird that on this left leaning political message board, gun rights peoples destroy gun control peoples every time.  Sure, it helps a lot that we have the facts and logic on our side and all they have is emotion and gut, but these things are much more evenly divided most of the time on the internet.

I'd be tempted to infract that for excessive hyperbole except that's really mod speak for trolling by exaggeration and I don't think you're trolling. I will agree that gun control doesn't appear to be a primary issue for leftists here, probably because our extreme left wing is mostly anarchist-left rather than statist-left. Also, the people who post here generally acknowledge the Second Amendment exists and isn't going to disappear any time soon, so that's not going to be up for debate, just the parameters of what regulations of guns are both desirable and constitutional.

However, considering all the statistics that show that people who don't have guns in the house are less likely to die from guns, that people who live in states with lax concealed carry laws are more likely to die from guns, etc. I'd say the facts and logic generally aren't on the side of the gun cultists.
Cough Chicago cough
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: November 25, 2017, 02:24:43 PM »


You really ought to do something about that cough before you choke from trying to draw conclusions from isolated situations rather than overall statistics.  The very fact that Chicago stands out from other communities with similar gun regulations ought to be a clear clue that it ain't the gun laws there that have led to the spike in crime there.
Logged
Keep cool-idge
Benjamin Harrison he is w
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,770
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: November 25, 2017, 04:38:01 PM »


You really ought to do something about that cough before you choke from trying to draw conclusions from isolated situations rather than overall statistics.  The very fact that Chicago stands out from other communities with similar gun regulations ought to be a clear clue that it ain't the gun laws there that have led to the spike in crime there.
All I’m saying is Chicago has the worst gun laws anywhere and they have more shootings then anywhere in America.

Also it’s not just Chicago there is New York,Connecticut,Massachusetts,rhode island. They have tough gun laws and they still have mass shootings but Vermont which is super pro gun never has any shootings.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: November 25, 2017, 05:59:48 PM »

It's weird that on this left leaning political message board, gun rights peoples destroy gun control peoples every time.  Sure, it helps a lot that we have the facts and logic on our side and all they have is emotion and gut, but these things are much more evenly divided most of the time on the internet.

I'd be tempted to infract that for excessive hyperbole except that's really mod speak for trolling by exaggeration and I don't think you're trolling. I will agree that gun control doesn't appear to be a primary issue for leftists here, probably because our extreme left wing is mostly anarchist-left rather than statist-left. Also, the people who post here generally acknowledge the Second Amendment exists and isn't going to disappear any time soon, so that's not going to be up for debate, just the parameters of what regulations of guns are both desirable and constitutional.

However, considering all the statistics that show that people who don't have guns in the house are less likely to die from guns, that people who live in states with lax concealed carry laws are more likely to die from guns, etc. I'd say the facts and logic generally aren't on the side of the gun cultists.

     Considering that this is the Constitution and Law board, I surmise that dead0man is referring concretely to constitutional arguments over the Second Amendment as opposed to more utilitarian arguments over guns in general. Sadly, this thread hasn't delved much into the more esoteric arguments against the orthodox interpretation of the Second Amendment that have emerged in recent years, such as claiming that it only protects ownership of models that existed in 1790.
Logged
Pennsylvania Deplorable
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 532


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: November 25, 2017, 09:35:50 PM »

To incorporate in writing the English Right to Keep and Bear Arms, albeit with no restrictions on Catholics owning arms.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: November 26, 2017, 12:03:38 AM »


You really ought to do something about that cough before you choke from trying to draw conclusions from isolated situations rather than overall statistics.  The very fact that Chicago stands out from other communities with similar gun regulations ought to be a clear clue that it ain't the gun laws there that have led to the spike in crime there.
All I’m saying is Chicago has the worst gun laws anywhere and they have more shootings then anywhere in America.

Also it’s not just Chicago there is New York,Connecticut,Massachusetts,rhode island. They have tough gun laws and they still have mass shootings but Vermont which is super pro gun never has any shootings.

Mass Shootings?  Those amount to but a tiny fraction of the deaths from guns.  If that's where your focus is, then it is sadly misplaced if your goal to reduce gun deaths.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  
« previous next »
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 0.059 seconds with 11 queries.