State Legislator States the Constitution Doesn't Guarantee a Right to Own a Glock

This is a discussion on State Legislator States the Constitution Doesn't Guarantee a Right to Own a Glock within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; A retired member of the Iowa State Legislature has written an editorial arguing that the founding fathers never intended for weapons like the Glock handgun ...

Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: State Legislator States the Constitution Doesn't Guarantee a Right to Own a Glock

  1. #1
    Distinguished Member Array LanceORYGUN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ORYGUN
    Posts
    1,517

    State Legislator States the Constitution Doesn't Guarantee a Right to Own a Glock

    A retired member of the Iowa State Legislature has written an editorial arguing that the founding fathers never intended for weapons like the Glock handgun to be protected by the 2nd Amendment.

    What do you think of the logic that he uses to back his argument up? Are any of his points really valid?

    Here is a link to his editorial:

    http://www.desmoinesregister.com/art...o-bear-a-Glock


    .

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member
    Array WHEC724's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    6,484
    I find it interesting when an anti refers to themself as a hunter, or mentions prior military service, as though it gives them credibility as an authority on firearms.
    __________________________________
    'Clinging to my guns and religion

  4. #3
    Member Array Jet Doc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    110
    +1 WHEC...Maybe the sharp shooter qualification was with a musket.....The best part of this article is that it qualifies as an "opinion" as opposed to official doctrine. I wish all 2A supporters had the opportunity to publish and "opinion" to be read by all Americans!
    Better to have and to hold, than to leave in the nightstand.....

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array Hiram25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Wyoming, DE
    Posts
    11,014
    I think our Military should carry flintlock rifles as they did during the age when the Constitution was written. I think this State Legislator should join up.
    Hiram25
    You can educate ignorance, you can't fix stupid
    Retired DE Trooper, SA XD40 SC, S&W 2" Airweight
    dukalmighty & Pure Kustom Black Ops Pro "Trooper" Holsters, DE CCDW and LEOSA Permits, Vietnam Vet 68-69 Pleiku

  6. #5
    Member Array Varmiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Full Time Rv'er
    Posts
    153
    Well, he is both right AND wrong.

    Wrong. The US Constitution does not prohibit ownership.

    Right. The States laws can legally prohibit ownership.

    Ref: Heller and McDonald.

    Chris

  7. #6
    VIP Member Array tokerblue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    2,344
    Let us look at what our founding fathers might have had in mind when the Second Amendment was adopted in 1791.

    The most advanced weapon at that time was a muzzle-loaded flint-lock musket. No one in 1791, not even the eminent and perspicacious authors of the Second Amendment, had in mind the weapons available today. Had they thought of such weapons, they would have been invented.


    - The same goes for the First Amendment. The founding fathers never would have thought that you could communicate with someone anywhere across the country (or world) over copper wires using a device with plastic letters. If they thought of such a possibility, they would have invented the internet earlier.

    My suggestion would be to post as much as you can before you're limited to 10 posts a day.

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array SIGguy229's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Kommie-fornia-stan
    Posts
    7,067
    I think the founding fathers could not have foreseen the Internet...therefore, there should be restrictions on the 1A, like posting online [/sarcasm]

    Idiot politician. Flawed logic.
    Magazine <> clip - know the difference

    martyr is a fancy name for crappy fighter
    You have never lived until you have almost died. For those that have fought for it, life has a special flavor the protected will never know

  9. #8
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,632
    Here's the thing. The interpretations coming from the conservative Supreme Court are not pro-gun owner. Heller was a barely favorable ruling, which is why you still can't get concealed permits in DC for the most part, and today I read that they rejected the appeal of the fellow from NJ who got arrested after mistakenly picking up his bags at Newark airport.

    Had any 4 of The Supremes wanted to hear the appeal it would have been heard. Let's see who those 4 might have been.
    Scalia, Thomas, Alito, Roberts..... well, they aren't as pro-gun owner as many here had thought they would be. Are they?

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. The Constitution Of The United States
    By QKShooter in forum Reference & "How To" Forum
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: April 1st, 2013, 12:34 PM
  2. Article Four of the United States Constitution
    By coolfrmn in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: January 4th, 2011, 08:26 PM
  3. Seventh Circuit: 2nd Doesn't Apply to States!
    By Rock and Glock in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: June 5th, 2009, 09:00 AM
  4. The Intent of The Second Amendment to The Constitution of The United States of America
    By Bumper in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: June 19th, 2004, 02:01 AM

Search tags for this page

the constitution doesn't guarantee rights

Click on a term to search for related topics.