Gun Control Part 2
That’s where most people misunderstand second amendment law.
That is not what it means. Infringed means taken away completely. No one can ever say “no guns, ever.”
But courts and conservative commentators have recognized that reasonable limits can be imposed to make sure guns only end up in the hands of responsible owners.
False. In 1776, “infringe" meant “to encroach upon", not “to completely and utterly destroy".
Oh, you're probably confused as to what “encroach" meant back then too. It meant “to enter especially gradually or stealthily into the possessions or rights of another”.
Seems pretty straightforward. Sorry about your luck.
I’m going by the courts. Read Heller. The whole point is that it’s not all or none.
Oooooh. “The government said it can infringe on the 2A, therefore it can.”
Nice “logic".
The Constitution also said slaves were to be counted as 3/5 of a person and didn't allow women the right to vote. Your personal view on the 2nd Amendment doesn't make it any more exempt from change than the views held by supporters of those to former parts of the Constitution.
Now, if you actually want to preserve your 2nd Amendment right, just resisting all regulations or restrictions is probably not the best way to go about it. Slave owners fought a war to resist changes to what they believed in, and men killed plenty of women who demanded the right to vote, and that still didn't stop the changes from happening. When it comes to your cherished 2A right, do you think your objection will stop it from maybe even disappearing completely? Or do you think maybe working on a solution to thousand upon thousands of Americans dying because of gun violence might make people less inclined to take that right away?
Can't handle the truth!
What Trump has done on immigration is what you would do if you had a leaky bucket. You stop the leak before adding anymore water.
He has said from day one that he wants qualified immigrants, those who can help the US. Not those that need assistance.
“1. The [Second] Amendment was written vaguely specifically so legislatures could build their own restrictions into it”
There is absolutely nothing even remotely vague in the Second Amendment. It clearly and unambiguously states, “… the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
It couldn’t get any clearer “shall not be infringed.”
Infringed equals violated, not regulated. There’s a difference.
Regulation of a “shall not be infringed” scenario is violation.
Not accurate. Read D.C. v. Heller. The whole point is that it’s not all or none.
And read the constitution…. I don’t care what some court case says.
Then you don’t know how the Constitution works. It was written to be interpreted and expanded upon by the legislative and judicial branches.
“Shall not be infringed” is one hundred percent absolute. That’s really all there is to it, america was founded by private gun ownership, they included that to the constitution to make sure we could do it again.
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State…” Everyone keeps forgetting those words: well regulated Militia.
You also seem to forget the part about “the right of the people, to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Of THE PEOPLE. The second amendment covers two things, your right to form a militia and your right to bear arms.
Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to James Madison: The question Whether one generation of men has a right to bind another, seems never to have been started either on this or our side of the water… (But) between society and society, or generation and generation there is no municipal obligation, no umpire but the law of nature. We seem not to have perceived that, by the law of nature, one generation is to another as one independant nation to another… On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation… Every constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19. years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force and not of right.
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." - Thomas Jefferson on the right to bear arms. I sure as hell don’t see an expiration date.
Comments
Post a Comment