Restrictions for the Second Amendment

[Kingpoleon]

As it relates to the first amendment, we generally accept the restrictions of “clear and present danger.” However, for the second amendment, I think the consensus is quite a bit less clear. Should and individual’s right of property, esp. in this case the limits of property of weapons, “probable future danger considering person’s past”? Where should the limits of “too deadly to own” be placed - semi-automatics, old full automatics, or assault rifles? I don’t typically see people approach ideas for these limits on a constitutional and legal scale.

[Mr. Reactionary]

*"Imminent Lawless Action"

[Not a Partisan Hack ( ͡~ ͜ʖ ͡°)]

I don't think the Constitution clearly predicted the future, and now we have rapid-firing military weapons.

I wouldn't blame the Founding Fathers for thinking that we would have guns that didn't require you to not reload after one shot.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

It's overdue to get rid of the amendment completely and I guarantee you that day will come.

[NewYorkExpress]

It's overdue to get rid of the amendment completely and I guarantee you that day will come.

Yeah, we need a full-scale gun ban. The military and police are the only people who need guns...and you could probably remove the police from that list if you really wanted too.

[Dr. MB]

It's overdue to get rid of the amendment completely and I guarantee you that day will come.

Yeah, we need a full-scale gun ban. The military and police are the only people who need guns...and you could probably remove the police from that list if you really wanted too.

Taking away hundreds of millions of firearms is no small feat and could easily spark a civil war.

[Del Tachi]

It's overdue to get rid of the amendment completely and I guarantee you that day will come.

Yeah, we need a full-scale gun ban. The military and police are the only people who need guns...and you could probably remove the police from that list if you really wanted too.

Taking away hundreds of millions of firearms is no small feat and could easily spark a civil war.

And I don't understand why a self-described "liberal" would want to give the military and police an unchecked monopoly on physical force. 

[NewYorkExpress]

It's overdue to get rid of the amendment completely and I guarantee you that day will come.

Yeah, we need a full-scale gun ban. The military and police are the only people who need guns...and you could probably remove the police from that list if you really wanted too.

Taking away hundreds of millions of firearms is no small feat and could easily spark a civil war.

And I don't understand why a self-described "liberal" would want to give the military and police an unchecked monopoly on physical force. 

It could be paired with a constitutional amendment requiring the military to only carry weapons to defend the country from invasion.

[MarkD]

It's overdue to get rid of the amendment completely and I guarantee you that day will come.

Remember that you have to have a wide consensus to adopt a constitutional amendment and you have to be prepared to compromise.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

It's overdue to get rid of the amendment completely and I guarantee you that day will come.

Remember that you have to have a wide consensus to adopt a constitutional amendment and you have to be prepared to compromise.

I don't see anything that could get ratified at present, much less approved by either Congress or a Convention to be sent to the States.

[Kingpoleon]

It's overdue to get rid of the amendment completely and I guarantee you that day will come.

Yeah, we need a full-scale gun ban. The military and police are the only people who need guns...and you could probably remove the police from that list if you really wanted too.

Taking away hundreds of millions of firearms is no small feat and could easily spark a civil war.

And I don't understand why a self-described "liberal" would want to give the military and police an unchecked monopoly on physical force. 

Many self-described liberals want government monopolies on things like healthcare, education, and other things.