National The 2nd Amendment Is Clear.

[Geardo]

Actually, my diatribe reads as: This "You're not a 2A supporter because you don't have the same high ideals and virtuous motivations that I do" nonsense is getting us nowhere, fast. Pretending that nothing should (or will) change is simply: fiddling while Rome burns, rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, or just insert your favorite platitude here.

 

[ma96782]

Then you haven't been paying attention.

I was waiting to see your numerous examples.
BUT.......apparently they aren't forth coming.

+++++
+++++

BUT that being.......
YES.......
Some attacks and/or proposals have been floated, about changing some of the RIGHTS that we hold dear. Thinking : Freedom of Speech and Hate Speech

Though, as for the serious work of proposing legislation? It's been mostly.....

Crickets.

Note : I never said it didn't or hasn't happened.

Aloha, Mark

 

[Geardo]

I was waiting to see your numerous examples.
BUT.......apparently they aren't forth coming.

+++++
+++++

BUT that being.......
YES.......
Some attacks and/or proposals have been floated, about changing some of the RIGHTS that we hold dear. Thinking : Freedom of Speech and Hate Speech

Though, as for the serious work of proposing legislation? It's been mostly.....

Crickets.

Note : I never said it didn't or hasn't happened.

Aloha, Mark

Lol are you serious? Patriot act? Snowden? You are being intentionally dense. These things are common knowledge at this point, asking for specific examples is like requesting sources that say the sky is blue.

 

[ma96782]

RE : Post #105



In that, in another THREAD (and a post link in the Red Flags thread). You chose to dig deeper and read the Supreme Court's ruling and surmise that it wasn't REALLY about Red Flags.

But....NOW, you apparently/appear to follow the headline and go along with that? Not to mention, that you've strayed from the ORIGINAL subject.

As we all do sometimes.
But Yeah....me too.
I'm GUILTY of it.

And, don't get me wrong. Because I see the value in your post.

Aloha, Mark

 

[ma96782]

Lol are you serious? Patriot act? Snowden? You are being intentionally dense. These things are common knowledge at this point, asking for specific examples is like requesting sources that say the sky is blue.

Are you intentionally trying to disparage another person?

Really.....grow up.

OK, Ok, ok.......I'll stop here. As this is not the place to get into personal attacks.

Aloha, Mark

 

[ma96782]

Since some people might believe (well, I doubt that I'll find any/many here) that the 2A has to go.

Consider this........

Aloha, Mark

 

[ma96782]

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?

The response was.

Its not.

I was waiting to see examples.......of the numerous actual/hard/written Legislative Proposals to CHANGE the existing Law(s) and affecting the Constitutional givens.

That part where the 2nd says.......

".....shall not be infringed."

Hummmm.....IT'S CLEAR TO ME.

Not the results of poorly written laws........that have already been enacted and resulted in law suits. YES.....there are plenty of those examples.

But yeah......
Communication.
Getting/conveying the correct/intended.....ideas/words/vision across is important.
Of course the receiver also has something to do with it.

So then.....
I FAILED and will probably continue to do so throughout my lifetime.
Whatever.

Aloha, Mark

PS....I'd be willing to GUESS.....that there are more ACTUAL/HARD/WRITTEN PROPOSALS (Federal, State, and on the local level) to change Gun Laws vs proposals to change say the 1st A.

Yeah.......*many TALK about having "Anti-Hate Speech Legislation" but when will there be an actual/hard/written example to dissect?

As for Gun Laws? Yeah......plenty of proposal there.

*Note : I never said it didn't or hasn't happened. I recognize that, it COULD have happened.

 

[arakboss]

I am rethinking my belief about 2A supporters. I guess a person could support the 2A as it is interpreted by JoeB or as it is interpreted by Beto or as it is interpreted by some robes, Congress, etc.

Being the simple person I am, I choose to believe they kept it short and sweet so we wouldn't be arguing over different interpretations. I guess the next time somebody tells you they support the 2A but want to restrict your firearm freedoms, you can ask them which interpretation of the 2A do they support. There are nearly as many different interpretations as there are people in this country. The number of people who support the zero infringement version is likely a very very small number.

 

[CamoDeafie]

In my opinion; the only barriers to firearm ownership by Americans, according to the simplest reading of the 2A is basically...

An unsound mind/body. Things like mental illness, dependency, addiction, mental disability; not necessarilyphysical disability.

Lack of funds.

Maybe age? (Age of majority/maturity)


As for the criminals and felons and such... well. This is where I am of the opinion that the 2A doesn't differentiate between law abiding citizens and criminal citizens. My understanding is that were the British the victors, the Founders would all have been found guilty of treason, sedition, rebellion, and so forth in British court of law and hanged. In other words, under the law at that time until United States was recognized as a legitimate country, they were indeed criminals.

 

[ma96782]

That's not entirely fair either. All of the fundamental rights enumerated in the Constitution CAN be regulated by government, but with pretty tight limits. For example, this is how it's constitutional to ban firearms during air travel. Whether you agree or not, this is what the folks in charge of deciding what the law is have said over and over again. I think folks read the definition of "infringe" too broadly in concluding that any regulation of firearms violates the 2A.

Hummm......I could choose to not fly (commercial airlines). Rrrrright..... Or maybe, take an alternative form of transportation (vs a Govt regulated Air Carrier Service).

BUT, But, but.....YES, I get your broader point.

Aloha, Mark

 

[ma96782]

It might be illuminating to hear what the supposedly 2A supporting gun grabbers do think constitutes infringment. All I ever hear is this restriction or that restriction doesn't violate our 2A rights.

In 1934.....I believe that some in Govt, might have been/were also trying to figure it out. BUT, But, but.......YEAH.......

Today.......a proposal for a 1000% TAX?

Yeah.......some of us could have/might have/would have foreseen it.

Aloha, Mark

 

[GWS]

This is a modern day 2A supporter. Somebody check this feminine rinse product for CTE. I think he's taken one too many hits the head.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1536775236867219456

I guess his girlfriend threatened to cut off if he didn't say " Guns bad". Say! Isn't he the guy who LOST the Superbowl?

 

[arakboss]

Maybe I was wrong about her.

"You can support the Second Amendment," she added. "I support the Second Amendment, but we should agree we should not have weapons of war on the streets of America."

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/vp-harris-calls-assault-weapons-ban-guns-designed-kill-people

 

[Ura-Ki]

Maybe I was wrong about her.

"You can support the Second Amendment," she added. "I support the Second Amendment, but we should agree we should not have weapons of war on the streets of America."

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/vp-harris-calls-assault-weapons-ban-guns-designed-kill-people

Weapons of war! LOL
The Pen is mightier then the Sword!
Words have Meaning!
Morality is Owned by the Richous and Just!


We the People, acting through Text, as informed by History and Tradition should not only be able to purchase and own weapons of war, it should be promoted and supported by the very gov intent to suppress it!

 

[NeoBlackdog]

Maybe I was wrong about her.

"You can support the Second Amendment," she added. "I support the Second Amendment, but we should agree we should not have weapons of war on the streets of America."

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/vp-harris-calls-assault-weapons-ban-guns-designed-kill-people

By her definition my old Model 70 is a weapon of war. I believe it was Mr. Hathcock that used one quite successfully against the North Vietnamese.

 

[tkdguy]

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.

"Common sense" is generally stupid when hypotheses are tested against science. "Common sense" was designed politically to elicit a conditioned compliance response. Most uninformed will follow "common sense" through the "popular media".

 

[ma96782]

RE : Post #136
Common sense.

Hummm.......like needing to be a biologist in order to tell someone else, what is a woman?

Aloha, Mark

 

[arakboss]

Filmmaker Michael Moore pens his own 28th Amendment to ‘repeal and replace’ Second Amendment

Liberal filmmaker Michael Moore wrote a congressional proposal to repeal the Second Amendment with a "28th Amendment" on his Substack account on Sunday.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Ura-Ki]

Filmmaker Michael Moore pens his own 28th Amendment to ‘repeal and replace’ Second Amendment

Liberal filmmaker Michael Moore wrote a congressional proposal to repeal the Second Amendment with a "28th Amendment" on his Substack account on Sunday.

www.foxnews.com

Mikey Moore can go suck a bag of rotting dicks! That bloated wind bag is about the worst kind of hypocrite there is, he gets fat off the very things he espouses to hate! Just another Gunz bad for you, but i'm protected by gunz, so phuck off kinda leftist!

The sooner he leaves this country, the better, and we should lock the god damn door behind him once he is gone!

 

[NeoBlackdog]

Ura-ki, I just hate to see you hold back the way you do. If you have strong feelings about something just go ahead and let it out. Keeping it bottled up like you do will eventually cause you to blow a gasket...