• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Should we repeal the 2nd Amendment?

Repeal the 2nd Amendment?

  • Yes

    Votes: 22 31.0%

  • No

    Votes: 20 28.2%

  • No, amend it to make possession of a gun VERY difficult with tons of background checks and psych eva

    Votes: 25 35.2%

  • I can be agent M

    Votes: 4 5.6%
  • Total voters
    71
Trausti said:
It does not say the right of Congress, the State, or the Milita shall not be infringed. It say the right of the People shall not be infringed. The whole purpose of the Bill of Rights was to limit the power of the new national government. Any reading of the Bill of Rights that expands the power of the government at the expense of the People is just wrong.
Click to expand...

Okay. So when was your last muster? Who is your commanding officer? Do you have the required amount of powder and ball on hand at all times?

Lack of answers means you're not in the militia and the 2nd doesn't apply to you.
 
Trausti said:
It does not say the right of Congress, the State, or the Milita shall not be infringed. It say the right of the People shall not be infringed. The whole purpose of the Bill of Rights was to limit the power of the new national government. Any reading of the Bill of Rights that expands the power of the government at the expense of the People is just wrong.
Click to expand...

Yes, "the People", not the individual or the person. Contrast that with the Fifth Amendment which specifically states "No person". Is it a distinction without a difference? Perhaps. But it does seem kind of weird how they switch between terms when you consider how precise their language is usually (well, if you are an Originalist you think it is precise)
 
Donal said:
Yes, "the People", not the individual or the person. Contrast that with the Fifth Amendment which specifically states "No person". Is it a distinction without a difference? Perhaps. But it does seem kind of weird how they switch between terms when you consider how precise their language is usually (well, if you are an Originalist you think it is precise)
Click to expand...

The People, is also mentioned in the 1st Amendment.

Are you suggesting individual Americans have no right to Assembly?

The People, is also mentioned in the 4th Amendment.

Are you suggesting individual Americans have no right against unreasonable searches and seizures? We have no rights requiring Probable Cause and Warrants?

Your logic just died a painful death.
 
3point14 said:
I've often wondered why it says 'keep' and doesn't say 'own'.
Click to expand...

Perhaps like a car, where the keeper is the person responsible for it while the owner is often a finance company. The matter is who has the gun, not whose property it is.
 
Hercules56 said:
The People, is also mentioned in the 1st Amendment.

Are you suggesting individual Americans have no right to Assembly?

The People, is also mentioned in the 4th Amendment.

Are you suggesting individual Americans have no right against unreasonable searches and seizures? We have no rights requiring Probable Cause and Warrants?

Your logic just died a painful death.
Click to expand...

It's not a strange notion.
It's how I always read it as well.

People as in all the people as a whole, not the individual.

As for that right to assembly. Isn't that what congress is?
(all as opposed to letting nobles in service to a king do these kinds of things).
 
Hercules56 said:
The People, is also mentioned in the 1st Amendment.

Are you suggesting individual Americans have no right to Assembly?
Click to expand...

Well duh. An individual can't assemble by definition. Did Captain America himself stand in the middle of that empty field yelling "AVENGER! Assemble...no wait I'm already here" over and over? The defense rests.
 
Hercules56 said:
The People, is also mentioned in the 1st Amendment.

Are you suggesting individual Americans have no right to Assembly?
Click to expand...

Not sure how one person assembles.

The People, is also mentioned in the 4th Amendment.

Are you suggesting individual Americans have no right against unreasonable searches and seizures? We have no rights requiring Probable Cause and Warrants?

Your logic just died a painful death.
Click to expand...

I'm just "thinking" like an Originalist. And using the English language. Ya, I'm sure the Founders were all like "let's be super precise about the words we use all over this document except in these 3 spots. People can figure out what we meant, right?"
 
Thermal said:
Well duh. An individual can't assemble by definition. Did Captain America himself stand in the middle of that empty field yelling "AVENGER! Assemble...no wait I'm already here" over and over? The defense rests.
Click to expand...

And the 4th Amendment?

Individuals have no right against unreasonable searches and seizures, and no right that requires a warrant and probable cause?

The defense rests.
 
Last edited:
Hercules56 said:
And the 4th Amendment?

Individuals have no right against unreasonable searches and seizures, and no right that requires a warrant and probable cause?

The defense rests.
Click to expand...

Of course an individual doesn't have rights. An individual is a victim or a slave. Only if he is part of a larger collective that can overthrow his oppressor does he have rights.

Does a cop cherish your rights? No. If he thinks he will get away with it, he searches you, steals your wallet, shoots you and leave you for dead if he thinks you have no members of a collective to overpower him. So unless your ass is Dr Manhattan, you have no individual rights.
 
Thermal said:
Of course an individual doesn't have rights. An individual is a victim or a slave. Only if he is part of a larger collective that can overthrow his oppressor does he have rights.

Does a cop cherish your rights? No. If he thinks he will get away with it, he searches you, steals your wallet, shoots you and leave you for dead if he thinks you have no members of a collective to overpower him. So unless your ass is Dr Manhattan, you have no individual rights.
Click to expand...

Our Founding Fathers, disagree. We have individual rights.
 
15th Amendment guarantees the right to vote regardless of race, collectively.

According to the false logic being spewed here, individual black people can be denied the right to vote due to their race.

19th Amendment guarantees the right to vote regardless of sex, collectively.


According to the false logic being spewed here, individual women can be denied the right to vote due to their sex.
 
Last edited:
Hercules56 said:
Our Founding Fathers, disagree. We have individual rights.
Click to expand...

What the dead people might/not have thought, regarding a Constitution that they thought would be tossed out within a generation, is not tremendously interesting.

Hercules56 said:
Spare us the Woke nonsense. All persons in the USA have various inalienable rights, according to the US Constitution.
Click to expand...

There are no inalienable rights. From Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness itself and right on down the list, you can lose any one for reasons great or small. Belief in inalienable rights is right up there with belief that Life is fair.
 
Thermal said:
...There are no inalienable rights. From Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness itself and right on down the list, you can lose any one for reasons great or small. Belief in inalienable rights is right up there with belief that Life is fair.
Click to expand...

OK you might feel that our Constitution and Constitutional rights are garbage but most Americans do not agree.
 
Thermal said:
If you interpreted that as meaning "garbage", you need to run for an Honesty Defibrillator.
Click to expand...

You argue that the Constitutional guarantees of inalienable rights, such as the right to speech, religion, to vote, to require a warrant and probable cause, are all fake. Nonsense.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom