National The 2nd Amendment Is Clear.

[esbshaw]

I'm not comfortable with you driving, given your age. Have you turned in your drivers license?

Not to worry, Camel. 67 is the new 25!

 

[Camelfilter]

Not to worry, Camel. 67 is the new 25!

Well, lets compromise then. How's about you can only say, drive a golf cart.

Seems perfectly reasonable, given your age.

 

[Ura-Ki]

All laws put in place governing, restricting, or otherwise removing firearms rights ARE infringements and abhorrent to the 2nd!
Say what you want, but no law carries the full weight above the BOR!

 

[titsonritz]

Is a background check infringing on my right to buy a firearm? Nope.

Hell if it isn't. I should be able to swap and/or loan guns with best friend legally. Think I going to do BGC every time I want to borrow his 12ga mag to go goose hunting and another one to return it? It is complete bulls***.

 

[Xaevian]

Hell if it isn't. I should be able to swap and/or loan guns with best friend legally. Think I going to do BGC every time I want to borrow his 12ga mag to go goose hunting and another one to return it? It is complete bulls***.

His key word was "my".

 

[titsonritz]

I am 67 years old, a lifelong avid gun owner, shooter, reloader, former C&R license holder, CPL holder, had a table at the WAC show a couple of weekends ago, and I don't have a problem in the world with the minimum age to purchase ANY kind of semiauto ANYTHING being 21 years old. In view of the events of the past few weeks, I actually think it's a damn good idea. Does that basically make me a non-supporter of the 2nd in your view? If so, maybe I should just take up knitting.

OK fine then, 21 it is then... across the entire board with everything including smoking, drinking, weed, voting, marriage, selective service registration and people are financially and legally liable for their minor children until they are 21 years. Sounds great, where do I sign up?

 

[titsonritz]

His key word was "my".

Of course, because the world revolves around the individual.

 

[titsonritz]

The destruction of our society will be at the hands of people who compromised rights away, not the people who stood firm and followed the constitution as written and intended.

Hey man I'm all for compromise...here it is...ready?

Don't try and take my guns and I won't shoot you. If that ain't compromise, I don't know what is.

 

[RedRover]

I don't have a problem in the world with the minimum age to purchase ANY kind of semiauto ANYTHING being 21 years old. In view of the events of the past few weeks, I actually think it's a damn good idea. Does that basically make me a non-supporter of the 2nd in your view? If so, maybe I should just take up knitting.

Once rights are taken away, it takes much strife to get them back.

The legal 'age of majority'(AKA -- Legal Adult) in almost every state in the union is 18 years of age.

 

[Yarome]

Speaking about the May 24th Uvalde school shooting: Is there anyone here that thinks this will just be swept under the rug? That it'll just blow over in a month or two?

Not at all, but the blame and failure to prevent that tragedy is being focused in the wrong direction, IMHO.

The single greatest failure, in that particular case, was not having the school in lockdown and denying entry from the get go. Done!

911 was informed of an active shooter within close proximately of the school a full 10min+ prior to the shooter actually entering the school. My take away from that is there is a fundamental flaw in the system when that type of ample warning of an imminent threat does not prompt, either, LE to instruct the school to implement a lockdown or the school for not acting in a timely manner.

Talk "gun control" all you want, but using that particular case as a banner child for stricter gun control while completely ignoring the single greatest failure in procedure that would have saved all those lives that day is CRIMINAL!!!

In the digital age we live in, it should be SOP for 911 to "push button" a school into immediate lockdown. Remote activated door locks, loudspeaker announcement... BAM!

Why isn't that being addressed?? It's disheartening that the public chooses to focus on gun law changes and infringing on citizen rights that would have the smallest, if any, impact to deter someone with evil intent. Meanwhile, making changes in procedural processes and utilizing cost effective and readily available technologies would have saved at least 19 innocents in this case. Those issue don't even rate a sound bite.

 

[American123]

Hey man I'm all for compromise...here it is...ready?

Don't try and take my guns and I won't shoot you. If that ain't compromise, I don't know what is.

"CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN!"

 

[DunRanull]

I disagree with the idea that you can support the 2nd Amendment and simultaneously support infringment of firearm freedoms. Here is another quote from Washington AG Bobby Furgeson:

""I support the second amendment, you can support the second amendment and still support common sense gun reform,"

This is false. You can not support both. The 2nd Amendment is clear when it says "shall not infringe". It does not say that you can infringe when it is politically convenient, when public opinion leans that direction or when kids are getting shot up in schools. If you don't like how absolute the 2nd Amendment is then there is path for Congress to change it. They can add all the exceptions they want if a large majority wishes to do so.

There is a very very long list of people from Biden to Scalia who claim to support the 2nd Amendment in one breath and with the next breath list exceptions where our firearm freedoms can be infringed upon.

Call yourself whatever you want but the 2A is absolute regardless of what tortured interpretations the robes use to limit it. We are forced to live with their interpretations or risk the potential of being locked up. A true 2A supporter won't be fooled by those who support infringment of our freedoms while also professing themselves as 2A supporters. You can be one or the other but not both.

..."The Right of the PEOPLE to KEEP and BEAR arms shall NOT BE INFRINGED"... It's the "infringed" part that the Congress and Courts apparently can't read. I grew up with adults and teachers telling me that the Second was about the National Guard, not an individual right. Now that the Guard has been federalised, that won't hunt.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

 

[Paolung]

If you think the people who want to ban guns and strip the 2nd amendment out of the constitution, or neuter it into oblivion can EVER be satiated by any level of "common sense" gun safety measures then you are sorely mistaken. The goal post is always moved.

The destruction of our society will be at the hands of people who compromised rights away, not the people who stood firm and followed the constitution as written and intended.

 

[bkroger86]

10 Republican Senators at minimum don't agree with the OP, and believe in more restrictions.

 

[CamoDeafie]

10 Republican Senators at minimum don't agree with the OP, and believe in more restrictions.

View attachment 1220185

10-20 Senators that are gonna lose their seats one way or other. if voters decide its too far.

 

[gmerkt]

It was for the Greater Good

Greater Good is an elastic term. In that long laundry list of Greater Good citations, some were not intended for the Greater Good of society, rather for the Greater Good of commerce. Slavery, for example. Which was always about cheap labor, and not widely embraced in New England.

There may be a function of perceived Greater Good with respect to the Second Amendment in future. For decades, something less than 50% of American households have guns. Which implies a minority position. We have seen examples of this in Wash. state where anti-gun initiatives have garnered clear majorities. There is suddenly some noise in the air about repeal of the Second Amendment. From the likes of a retired US Supreme Court justice, John Paul Stevens. It has also suddenly become the topic of discussion in a great many op eds. I guess it isn't impossible. The 18th Amendment was repealed. But it wasn't foundational like the 2A.

 

[American123]

Greater Good is an elastic term. In that long laundry list of Greater Good citations, some were not intended for the Greater Good of society, rather for the Greater Good of commerce. Slavery, for example. Which was always about cheap labor, and not widely embraced in New England.

There may be a function of perceived Greater Good with respect to the Second Amendment in future. For decades, something less than 50% of American households have guns. Which implies a minority position. We have seen examples of this in Wash. state where anti-gun initiatives have garnered clear majorities. There is suddenly some noise in the air about repeal of the Second Amendment. From the likes of a retired US Supreme Court justice, John Paul Stevens. It has also suddenly become the topic of discussion in a great many op eds. I guess it isn't impossible. The 18th Amendment was repealed. But it wasn't foundational like the 2A.

The irony of the situation where people who don't own guns will one day vote for people who do own guns to have them taken away by government people who do have guns.

 

[AnimalOne]

Why is the 2A the only amendment that under constant attack from the government? Elected US officials are sworn in to protect the Constitution and The Bill of Rights.
Isn't it a treasonous act to do otherwise?

 

[arakboss]

At least this gun grabber is honest with his intention. The 2A has to go. This joker is not alone.

Opinion: There's no way to fix the Second Amendment. Let's just get rid of it | CNN

Bill Press, the liberal pundit, is willing to say what has long been unsayable in US politics: The time has come to repeal Second Amendment protections of the right to have a gun, which have caused countless deaths and untold blood shed in the United States.

www.cnn.com