Jump to content

2nd Amendment - Interpretation


August1991

Recommended Posts

With this current Supreme Court, I hope for a clear interpretation:

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 Framers wrote those words carefully:

"... well regulated Militia.. "

=====

If not, the US needs a Constitutional amendment to clarify.

No civilised person wants to live in a society where any whacko can have a nuclear weapon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/22/2022 at 2:02 AM, August1991 said:

With this current Supreme Court, I hope for a clear interpretation:

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 Framers wrote those words carefully:

"... well regulated Militia.. "

=====

If not, the US needs a Constitutional amendment to clarify.

No civilised person wants to live in a society where any whacko can have a nuclear weapon. 

Point by point:

1. The Militias at the time the Founding Fathers wrote the Second Amendment were not regular army. They were private citizens who owned firearms.

2. The US does NOT need a Constitutional amendment to clarify anything. It needs dumbasses to learn how to read.

3. As far as a civilized  person living in a society where any whacko can have a nuclear weapon, talk to the Kenyan Fool (Obama) who signed a deal giving IRAN the means to own a nuclear weapon.

Gee! I bet you're okay with Iran aiming those nukes at Israel and vaporizing all those Jews, eh, Adolf?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, reason10 said:

I favour the repeal of the First Amendment, so you can by the government for putting out such a stupid post.

How's that, Adolf?

The freedom to say what you want is not the same as an individual's right to have a nuclear weapon.

The Second Amendment has a proviso.

The First Amendment does not 

IMHO. this current Supreme Court has guts.

====

Let's see what happens.

 

Edited by August1991
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, August1991 said:

The freedom to say what you want is not the same as an individual's right to have a nuclear weapon.

The Second Amendment has a proviso.

The First Amendment does not 

IMHO. this current Supreme Court has guts.

====

Let's see what happens.

 

Show us in the Second Amendment where it mentions a nuclear weapon.

It says the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, August1991 said:

The freedom to say what you want is not the same as an individual's right to have a nuclear weapon.

The Second Amendment has a proviso.

The First Amendment does not 

IMHO. this current Supreme Court has guts.

====

Let's see what happens.

 

Mentioning a militia is not a proviso. That's just plain ignorant. And it DOESN'T say "only militias, police, military and Democrat  politicians' bodyguards are permitted to own a firearm."

Each time a Canadian wags his/her/its finger at me about American freedoms only makes me glad my father moved to America from Quebec before starting a family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/25/2022 at 7:02 AM, reason10 said:

Point by point:

1. The Militias at the time the Founding Fathers wrote the Second Amendment were not regular army. They were private citizens who owned firearms.

2. The US does NOT need a Constitutional amendment to clarify anything. It needs dumbasses to learn how to read.

3. As far as a civilized  person living in a society where any whacko can have a nuclear weapon, talk to the Kenyan Fool (Obama) who signed a deal giving IRAN the means to own a nuclear weapon.

Gee! I bet you're okay with Iran aiming those nukes at Israel and vaporizing all those Jews, eh, Adolf?

All militias are composed of private citizens. That is the very definition of a militia whether government provides the arms or they use their own.

Edited by Aristides
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/27/2022 at 8:44 PM, herbie said:

What the Hell have guns got to do in a thread about morality?

Perhaps you should ask Democrat politicians that. They had no problem incinerating the women and children of the Branch Davidians in Waco, Texas.

When a Democrat goon kills an innocent woman or child, it's not such a big deal.

When a Republican defends his home with deadly force, WokeNazis go ballistic.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/4/2022 at 6:24 PM, reason10 said:

Perhaps you should ask Democrat politicians that. They had no problem incinerating the women and children of the Branch Davidians in Waco, Texas.

When a Democrat goon kills an innocent woman or child, it's not such a big deal.

When a Republican defends his home with deadly force, WokeNazis go ballistic.

This is true.

I think the "stickler" here is the word "militia". Is a militia an organized group? Or is it just every Tom, Dick and Harry?

I'll tell y'all one thing though...were I to have to live in a place like Chicago, I'd have several guns available.

Edited by Nationalist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/9/2022 at 10:14 AM, Nationalist said:

This is true.

I think the "stickler" here is the word "militia". Is a militia an organized group? Or is it just every Tom, Dick and Harry?

I'll tell y'all one thing though...were I to have to live in a place like Chicago, I'd have several guns available.

In history, (at least that segment of history from which the Second Amendment was forged) militias were highly unorganized. They were just groups of armed citizens who helped support Washington's army. And they were the original inventors of what is known today as guerilla warfare. (Firing from cover)

The attitude during the creation of the United States government was one where the people did not want a large standing army.  That also figured into the creation of the 2nd.

If you're rich enough to live in a hell hole like Chicago, do like liberal politicians do. Get armed bodyguards and make taxpayers fund them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/9/2022 at 4:05 PM, herbie said:

If you lived somewhere you thought you needed a gun, most sane people would move.

This is your suggestion? 

"Well we made a mess of this one. So let's pack up and move to the next one."

Is that "woke progress" in action?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, herbie said:

Oh so brave. Let your town descend into Mogadishu, Just buy bigger guns.

Retarded John Wayne wannabees

The safest town in America is Kennesaw, Georgia.

Gee. I wonder why.

https://concealednation.org/2018/04/kennesaw-georgia-violent-crime-rate-tiny-thanks-to-this-gun-law/

Kennesaw, Georgia Violent Crime Rate Tiny Thanks to This Gun Law

Quote

 

Now, the entire city has had one single murder in the past six years, and the violent crime rate is less than two percent, according to the Independent Journal Review.

According to the Neighborhood Scout, the national average for the violent crime is four percent.

That’s a massive difference. Do you think that’s coincidence? I sure don’t.

The connection is obvious — who on this earth wants to break into a home knowing that the homeowner is ready to employ deadly force in defense of life, liberty, and family? It’s suicidal, and no quick buck is worth that.

 

There's something to be said about minding your own eff ucking business. If you don't like guns, don't buy one. Only in Kennesaw would you be required to own one. If you don't want a gun, don't buy one. You can still call the police for help.

I don't like guns. I won't allow one in my house. But I have NO  problem with a neighbor exercising his/her Constitutional right to own a firearm.

It's called live and let live, lib.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup a tiny town with few crimes was because of guns.

We hear that a lot from people stupid enough to believe A happens because of B because they happened around the same time.

If my neighbours have guns because they think they need one to feel safe, there's a problem with the neighbourhood and that is my problem.
Fix it, don't stick your head up your ass pretending you're solving dick shit.

Edited by herbie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/14/2022 at 5:03 PM, herbie said:

Yup a tiny town with few crimes was because of guns.

We hear that a lot from people stupid enough to believe A happens because of B because they happened around the same time.

If my neighbours have guns because they think they need one to feel safe, there's a problem with the neighbourhood and that is my problem.
Fix it, don't stick your head up your ass pretending you're solving dick shit.

A lot of small towns aren't so lucky.

https://www.therichest.com/shocking/15-most-dangerous-small-towns-in-america/
 

Quote

 

While urban cities have more people, they also get the advantage of having more resources. They have the workforce and money to positively change communities proactively. They look at the reasons why crimes are committed and work to help citizens go down the correct path before it’s too late. Small towns have the same problems, but on a different population scale. The same things that drive people to lives of crime in large cities, drive them in small ones. Unfortunately, there are far fewer financial and human resources to combat the problem in these communities. It should be noted that no town wants to have problems with crime and they aren’t taking the problem lightly. But with a lack of resources, it’s a lot more difficult.

Thanks to the folks at Safewise for their research, these are 15 of the most dangerous small towns to live in the United States at the moment. This information looks at the per capita crime and property crime rates (crimes committed for every 1,000 people) and provides some background about the community itself. This isn’t to say that there aren’t some great things happening in these communities, but there are obviously some issues with crime that must be addressed.

 

Actually, your neighbor's decision regarding their Second Amendment rights is NONE OF YOUR FCKING BUSINESS. If there is a problem in your neighborhood, chances are the first time your neighbors blow away a few of those animals who are committing break-ins, the animals might choose to go somewhere else. A dead scumbag has a ZERO recidivism rate.

And again, I'm a lot more American and liberty minded. I don't want guns in my house, but I RESPECT the decisions of my neighbors,  one way or another. Then again,  I'm not a Nazi, like the left wingers here.

Edited by reason10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...