What are "Reasonable Restrictions"?

[Cavedweller]

I'm not trying to make a literal comparison. Only suggesting that limits do apply to other rights.

The first amendment protects political speech, not all forms of speech. The prohibition on yelling fire in a crowded theater is not a limit on the first amendment, as yelling "fire" is not political speech.

 

[Juany]

Your comments are all over the place.
You favor little to no restrictions while
I support no limits except that felons, non-citizens and the mentally ill shouldn't have them.

The conversation we should really be having is...What are unreasonable restrictions

The first amendment protects political speech, not all forms of speech. The prohibition on yelling fire in a crowded theater is not a limit on the first amendment, as yelling "fire" is not political speech.

It's been expanded a bit since first written. For example pornography is protected under free speech.

 

[Cavedweller]

Our society is pushing back on the 2a.

This is a gross generalization. A vocal, well-funded and influential segment of society disfavors gun rights. This doesn't mean the whole of society is against the second amendment. If the whole of society wishes to change or repeal the 2nd amendement, there is a mechanism for doing so provided by the Constitution itself.

 

[Cavedweller]

It's been expanded a bit since first written. For example pornography is protected under free speech.

A regrettable bit of judicial activism.

 

[Slobray]

If we cannot be reasonable and thoughtful someone else will make that decision for us.

It's not the "shall not be infringed" crowd that will cause this, it's the people call themselves gun owners and support "reasonable restrictions" that are causing this. Some say the only way to be a "responsible gun owner" is to embrace every burden and infringement on gun ownership that the anti's put in our way, as "it's only sensible". Others let the anti's know that they are more than happy to jump through every hoop that anti's can think of. A bunch of those same so called gun owners will never take a stand on any legislation and by doing so, will help the anti's pass every gun control item on their list. Another group don't care what laws are enacted, as long as Joe Biden can have his double barrel shotgun and because the 2A is about hunting. The very same people above (together or at separate times) will partner with and/or give credence to the anti's fallacy that most gun owners want more gun control laws. You know the same laws that only affect lawful citizens and does nothing to curb the criminals and or violence.

A couple examples of those people and how the anti's use it against us:

Gun Owners for Responsible Ownership -supported (OR) SB-941, supported (OR) SB 719, supports an assault weapons ban and (OR) I-43 though he won't come out and say it, yet.
@LowPriceGuns -He wants a gun prohibition on 18-21 year olds (not even a 10-22). It looks like he supported (WA) I-594 (he wants BGC's for all sales), (WA) I-1491 and now (WA) I-1639. He won't answer any questions on his support of BGC's or his involvement with I-1639, which has items he voiced support for.
(Despite backlash, Bellevue gun shop owner decides not to sell long guns to most people under 21)
Do Gun Owners Want Gun Control? Yes, Some Say, Post-Parkland
Most Gun Owners Support Stricter Laws—Even NRA Members
Gun owners support a wide range of gun control measures, Johns Hopkins study finds

We could stop most, if not all of this nonsense, if we all stuck together, as a block of law abiding gun owners and said "not one more inch". So, I'll say it again, it's those gun owners that support "reasonable restrictions" that are selling us down the river and will be the death of the 2A.

Which one are you?



Ray

 

[Juany]

This is a gross generalization. A vocal, well-funded and influential segment of society disfavors gun rights. This doesn't mean the whole of society is against the second amendment. If the whole of society wishes to change or repeal the 2nd amendement, there is a mechanism for doing so provided by the Constitution itself.

Ok agreed. But we are certainly having some debate about it. There are strong opinions on both sides. I still feel like most Americans support the 2a. (In general) I have also read "most" Americans support some restrictions. I'm curious about the details. What do people really want restricted and what do they want left alone.

 

[Juany]

It's not the "shall not be infringed" crowd that will cause this, it's the people call themselves gun owners and support "reasonable restrictions" that are causing this. Some say the only way to be a "responsible gun owner" is to embrace every burden and infringement on gun ownership that the anti's put in our way, as "it's only sensible". Others let the anti's know that they are more than happy to jump through every hoop that anti's can think of. A bunch of those same so called gun owners will never take a stand on any legislation and by doing so, will help the anti's pass every gun control item on their list. Another group don't care what laws are enacted, as long as Joe Biden can have his double barrel shotgun and because the 2A is about hunting. The very same people above (together or at separate times) will partner with and/or give credence to the anti's fallacy that most gun owners want more gun control laws. You know the same laws that only affect lawful citizens and does nothing to curb the criminals and or violence.

A couple examples of those people and how the anti's use it against us:

Gun Owners for Responsible Ownership -supported (OR) SB-941, supported (OR) SB 719, supports an assault weapons ban and (OR) I-43 though he won't come out and say it, yet.
@LowPriceGuns -He wants a gun prohibition on 18-21 year olds (not even a 10-22). It looks like he supported (WA) I-594 (he wants BGC's for all sales), (WA) I-1491 and now (WA) I-1639. He won't answer any questions on his support of BGC's or his involvement with I-1639, which has items he voiced support for.
(Despite backlash, Bellevue gun shop owner decides not to sell long guns to most people under 21)
Do Gun Owners Want Gun Control? Yes, Some Say, Post-Parkland
Most Gun Owners Support Stricter Laws—Even NRA Members
Gun owners support a wide range of gun control measures, Johns Hopkins study finds

We could stop most, if not all of this nonsense, if we all stuck together, as a block of law abiding gun owners and said "not one more inch". So, I'll say it again, it's those gun owners that support "reasonable restrictions" that are selling us down the river and will be the death of the 2A.

Which one are you?



Ray

I'm one that believes in reasonable restrictions.

 

[titsonritz]

I think that the 2nd Amendment refers to (fire)arms and not to weapons of every kind possible...!

I think your dead wrong, point out where it says "firearms".

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.

 

[Juany]

A regrettable bit of judicial activism.

Maybe so. But back to my original point. 1A, 2A, etc..have limits. What are reasonable limits for the 2a? Some on here say none. Citizens should have access to any and all military weapons. I think that's too broad.

 

[Slobray]

I'm one that believes in reasonable restrictions.

So, let's hear* your infringements "reasonable restrictions"..............



Ray
*Edit: Accidentally left this word out.

 

[LuckySG]

Why draw the line at nukes? I want my death star.

That is not unreasonable.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Restrictions on who can own a firearm sounds okay to me...
Certain classes of criminals , felons for instance...
The mentally unstable...
Those who were given a dishonorable discharge from the military....
Those who have renounced their US citizenship...
Folks who aren't US citizens....

Wait...we have those already....

We don't need any more restrictions on firearms.
We do need to know why the system we have already in place is not working or nor longer working....
Andy

 

[titsonritz]

That is not unreasonable.

If you can afford it, I say rock on.

 

[titsonritz]

Restrictions on who can own a firearm sounds okay to me...
Certain classes of criminals , felons for instance... And they should be made dead or never see the light of day.
The mentally unstable...
Those who were given a dishonorable discharge from the military....
Those who have renounced their US citizenship...
Folks who aren't US citizens....

Wait...we have those already....

We don't need any more restrictions on firearms.
We do need to know why the system we have already in place is not or nor longer working....
Andy

I'm all for most felons having their rights restored after they have paid for their crime. The way I look at is if they are incapable of owning a gun they probably shouldn't be allowed in society to begin with.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

If you have your rights re-stored...then that is different matter.
You are then "re-admitted" into "polite society".
Andy

 

[Juany]

So, let's your infringements "reasonable restrictions"..............



Ray

Do you want to know what my reasonable restrictions or infringements would be?

 

[titsonritz]

The framers of the Consitution and Bill of Rights were highly intelligent and extremely well educated I believe they knew precisely what they wrote and meant it just as it reads.

 

[titsonritz]

If you have your rights re-stored...then that is different matter.
You are then "re-admitted" into "polite society".
Andy

Agree 100%

 

[titsonritz]

Do you want to know what my reasonable restrictions or infringements would be?

I'm sure it would be different than mine. Hence the issue, who is reasonable?

 

[Andy54Hawken]

One thing to keep in mind :
One man's reasonable is another man's extreme...
And one man's extreme is another man's starting point...
Andy