2nd amendment in trouble

[Cavedweller]

Does it look like the Posterity of the framers of the Constitution are surviving?

Is posterity plural? As for the future generations of the framers, I don't know whether or how many of them had kids, and whether or not any of their descendants might still be alive. I'm so confused.

 

[The Resister]

So, with all that hullabaloo you keep spouting, exactly what the hell are you expecting to do, and what do you expect will happen?

It's not like we already have a Constitution which isn't followed, what makes you so certain any of what your trying to do will be followed to the letter like you hope?

I sincerely doubt that the government will ever go back to the Constitution. In a letter to his wife, John Adams (second President of the United States) wrote:

"Liberty once lost is lost forever. When the People once surrender their share in the Legislature, and their Right of defending the Limitations upon the Government, and of resisting every Encroachment upon them, they can never regain it."

When we allowed the legislature to illegally ratify the Fourteenth Amendment, it reduced your unalienable Right to keep and bear Arms down to the category of "certain privileges and immunities." In reality, the courts may dance around the subject, but you have NO Rights in the de facto government.

"The Supreme Court reversed the Seventh Circuit, holding that the Fourteenth Amendment makes the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense applicable to the states." MacDonald v Chicago

{{meta.fullTitle}}

The hullabaloo (sic) that you ask about is simple: You have the Right and the obligation to exhaust all of your legal and political avenues of redress before resorting to extraordinary actions. To point that out is hullabaloo to you? What do you think is going to happen if you spend the rest of your life sitting on your bubblegum, pecking a keyboard, and denigrating those who are IN the fight to preserve your Right to keep and bear Arms? I'll explain it to you. You will forfeit the Right to keep and bear Arms and there won't be a damn thing you can do, legally or morally, if you don't take the requisite steps to protect your Rights.

The Charter is a demand. Those who sign and support it will be in agreement as to what it is we want and it commits the signatories to stand by their word. If you fail to comply with an unconstitutional gun law and you need back up, you would have the support of all the signatories of that document. The document means exactly what it says. We don't have 150 different interpretations about the Second Amendment; we will have ONE. Of course, Uncle Scam will ignore it. King George initially ignored the Declaration of Independence. But, unlike the Capitol marchers back in January, we will be united in ONE cause; it will be orderly and constitutional; when the government does react to organized resistance, you have both legal and moral foundations upon which to resist. AND, you have a better chance to win if you are agreed as to what constitutes an infringement on your Rights.

 

[The Resister]

The Constitution/Bill of Rights isn't like an old house you can just slap some new paint on & it doesn't need replacing

It's the people who keep crapping on our freedom that need replacing

You have hundreds, if not thousands, of attacks by the United States Supreme Court that negate most of the Constitution. Both the 14th and 16th Amendments were illegally ratified and even those affect your Right to keep and bear Arms. When you are this far separated from the original intent of the Second Amendment, to merely fight ignorant legislators is an exercise in futility. So, continue on and lose this fight on an incremental basis OR take action. And there is only ONE course of action that has proven successful if you study history.

 

[The Resister]

Is posterity plural? As for the future generations of the framers, I don't know whether or how many of them had kids, and whether or not any of their descendants might still be alive. I'm so confused.

I don't know what you're confused about. The Constitution is a contract between we, the people, and that entity called government. We cannot enforce our laws on foreigners as the United States would lack jurisdiction. If you are a Citizen of the United States then, constitutionally, speaking the government is obligated to acknowledge your Rights and act accordingly.

 

[The Resister]

It was.

No as a matter of fact, it wasn't. And you can arrange to meet some of the primary contributors simply by sending me a pm. OR, in the alternative if there is something you'd rather discuss at a personal level, pm works for me.

 

[billdeserthills]

You have hundreds, if not thousands, of attacks by the United States Supreme Court that negate most of the Constitution. Both the 14th and 16th Amendments were illegally ratified and even those affect your Right to keep and bear Arms. When you are this far separated from the original intent of the Second Amendment, to merely fight ignorant legislators is an exercise in futility. So, continue on and lose this fight on an incremental basis OR take action. And there is only ONE course of action that has proven successful if you study history.

Maybe your claims of being separated from the 2nd Amendment are at fault. Here in Arizona I don't feel separated from the 2nd Amendment in any way-- As a former felon with priors I am licensed to carry as many concealed weapons as I like, at anytime & my 1919A4 isn't feeling the least bit neglected

 

[The Resister]

Maybe your claims of being separated from the 2nd Amendment are at fault. Here in Arizona I don't feel separated from the 2nd Amendment in any way-- As a former felon with priors I am licensed to carry as many concealed weapons as I like, at anytime & my 1919A4 isn't feeling the least bit neglected

You own weapons only because the government allows it - you've said it yourself.

LICENSE "In the law of contracts. A permission, accorded by a competent authority, conferring the right to do some act which without such authorization would be illegal, or would be a trespass or a tort. State v. Hipp, 38 Ohio St. 220; Youngblood v. Sexton, 32 Mich. 406, 20 Am. Rep. 054; Hubman v. State, 61 Ark. 4S2. 33 S. W. 843; Chicago v. Collins, 175 111. 445. 51 N. E. 907, 49 L. R. A. 40S, 67 L. R. A. 224. Also the written evidence of such permission."

LICENSE Definition & Meaning - Black's Law Dictionary

Find the legal definition of LICENSE from Black's Law Dictionary, 2nd Edition. In the law of contracts. A permission, accorded by a competent authority, conferring the right to do some act which without such authorization would be...

thelawdictionary.org

What part of shall not be infringed went over your head?

 

[billdeserthills]

I've bought & carried weapons since I was 18 & it only took that long cause the gov't allowed me to-- I'm not seeing anything wrong with that

The times I spent on probation my parents took custody of my weapons as I wasn't allowed to have weapons due to having been convicted of breaking the law-- I'm not seeing anything wrong with that

Your claims that the gov't restricts your right to be armed are falling on deaf ears because the only gov't restricting any 2nd rights lately is the State & perhaps your state in particular

 

[made in china]

Born and raised AZ. Love AZ, a great state to exercise 2A in, for now (getting purple).

Moved to WA about 20 years ago. It used to be very similar to AZ, however they have been eroding our rights, and we are now looking at what has occurred in other states as to what is coming next to WA state. WA, at this time, is still not too bad, yet. But, they are always trying.

Someday it'll happen to AZ too.

 

[CRBMoA]

Why not, I've been carrying pockets full of weapons for exactly that reason for many years--my only plan has been to survive

Quoted for Truth.

It would seem many have focused so much on The TOOL that one of the primary reason(s) for self defense has been forgotten.



My politics have zero to do with it. I am just trying to get home.

 

[billdeserthills]

Born and raised AZ. Love AZ, a great state to exercise 2A in, for now (getting purple).

Moved to WA about 20 years ago. It used to be very similar to AZ, however they have been eroding our rights, and we are now looking at what has occurred in other states as to what is coming next to WA state. WA, at this time, is still not too bad, yet. But, they are always trying.

Someday it'll happen to AZ too.

For now AZ has a 2nd Amendment Sanctuary law to defend against Federal overreach

 

[The Resister]

I've bought & carried weapons since I was 18 & it only took that long cause the gov't allowed me to-- I'm not seeing anything wrong with that

The times I spent on probation my parents took custody of my weapons as I wasn't allowed to have weapons due to having been convicted of breaking the law-- I'm not seeing anything wrong with that

You claim that the gov't restricts your right to be armed are falling on deaf ears because the gov't restricting any 2nd rights is the State & perhaps your state in particular

There are over 40,000 + federal, state, county, and city statutes, ordinances, rules, regulations, edicts, court rulings, etc. governing the Right to keep and bear Arms. The BATFE alone is incrementally outlawing most weapons. If you're satisfied with the status quo, then feel free to ignore me. If there are those who are still mad after the government outlawed the weapons that the United States Supreme Court protected in the Miller ruling, then they might be willing to give the subject a second thought.

If you're happy and you know it, clank your chains. The title of this thread was 2nd Amendment in trouble. If you think it isn't, you shouldn't be posting on this thread in the first place.

 

[billdeserthills]

It's true that more than ever before, our elected officials are trying to steal our rights but I'm not seeing how your charter is going to stop that.

 

[The Resister]

For now AZ has a 2nd Amendment Sanctuary law to defend against Federal overreach

And yet you ask for permission to own a firearm.

 

[The Resister]

It's true that more than ever before, our elected officials are trying to steal our rights but I'm not seeing how your charter is going to stop that.

The Charter is only a first step. This was just explained a couple of posts back. You want to read the thread or shall I repeat the answer?

 

[billdeserthills]

And yet you ask for permission to own a firearm.

You have exactly zero idea of how many guns I have built & my Freedom allows me to keep it that way

 

[billdeserthills]

The Charter is only a first step. This was just explained a couple of posts back. You want to read the thread or shall I repeat the answer?

Your charter reminds me of 18 usc 2385 & as a guy with priors, it's just not worth the potential jail sentence to me

18 U.S. Code § 2385 - Advocating overthrow of Government

www.law.cornell.edu

 

[Skier]

Was thinking the same thing LOL.
View attachment 1023702

Well, it's maybe a little hard to distinguish the colors here, but my best guess is Orange, Brown, Black, and Gold, which would indicate 31 Ohms with a 5% tolerance. :-D

 

[The Resister]

You have exactly zero idea of how many guns I have built & my Freedom allows me to keep it that way

Tell that to the BATFE

 

[The Resister]

Your charter reminds me of 18 usc 2385 & as a guy with priors, it's just not worth the potential jail sentence to me

18 U.S. Code § 2385 - Advocating overthrow of Government

www.law.cornell.edu

What idiocy! What abject idiocy! Do you work for the BATFE? I do not advocate nor condone any illegal act including, but not limited to the overthrow of the government. The Declaration of Independence does not advocate the overthrow of a government. Neither does the Charter and Proclamation of the Rights of Man. I suppose that if you can't prevail in an honest discourse, you start making making baseless, dishonest, and cowardly allegations. You and I are done.