does the 2nd amendment leave room for any rules?

This is a discussion on does the 2nd amendment leave room for any rules? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by AceRider You still have your "god given" right to carry, you just have to prove that you are not a criminal and ...

View Poll Results: Are the limits to the 2nd Amendment Constitutional?

Voters
156. You may not vote on this poll
  • I agree that a person under 18 should not own a long gun!

    32 20.51%
  • I disagree that a person under 18 can't own a long gun!

    79 50.64%
  • I agree that a person under 21 should not own a handgun!

    27 17.31%
  • I disagree that a person under 21 can't own a handgun!

    89 57.05%
  • I agree some weapons should be restricted from American citizens!

    36 23.08%
  • I disagree some weapons should be restricted from American citizens!

    84 53.85%
  • I agree that a felon should not be able to own a gun!

    108 69.23%
  • I think this is a stupid poll

    27 17.31%
  • I think this is a good poll

    54 34.62%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 79
Like Tree13Likes

Thread: does the 2nd amendment leave room for any rules?

  1. #31
    Senior Member Array cmidkiff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Kansas City, Missouri
    Posts
    835
    Quote Originally Posted by AceRider View Post
    You still have your "god given" right to carry, you just have to prove that you are not a criminal and that you have a bare minimum of training first and in order to prove that you've accomplished that, you need to have your license with you. What's wrong with that?
    I want to make (gun ownership) as hard as possible. Gun owners would have to be evaluated by how they scored on written and firing tests, and have to pass the tests in order to own a gun. And I would tax the guns, bullets and the license itself very heavily.
    -Joycelyn Elders

    The current state of federal law does not recognize that the Second Amendment protects the right of private citizens to possess firearms of any type. Instead, the Second Amendment is deemed to be a collective right belonging to the state and not to an individual.
    -Ronnie Edleman

    Our ultimate goal- total control of handguns in the United States- is going to take time... The first problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns being produced... The second problem is to get handguns registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of handguns and all handgun ammunition- except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors - totally illegal.
    -Sara Brady

    Your statement seems to fit in with these others quite well, doesn't it?
    Liberty is an inherently offensive lifestyle. Living in a free society guarantees that each one of us will see our most cherished principles and beliefs questioned and in some cases mocked. It's worth it.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    Member Array AceRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    95
    Is anything open to interpretation and context?

    These quotes were written in a time of monarchies in which the people had little to know say in how governments functioned. They were trying to ensure that this situation would not arise in the newly forming country.

    They did not contemplate the rise of gangs, a high crime rate, etc.

    Quotes don't hold true through changing times; the concept does, but the specific wording does not. There is nothing stopping you from carrying (in most states these days, at least), you just have to prove that you are qualified. That's not guilty until proven otherwise, that's just common sense. Our founding fathers were full of common sense, but they weren't omniscient, either. They were addressing a specific set of conditions that existed hundreds of years ago, not setting absolutes for 200 years in the future and modern society.

    That's why amendments are permitted to the constitution, to address deficiencies and society's evolving desires. I see no problem with rules/regulations; as long as that rule isn't "you will not be permitted to be armed," the original intent is intact.

  4. #33
    Member Array AceRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by cmidkiff View Post
    Your statement seems to fit in with these others quite well, doesn't it?

    I don't think so. Creating onerous conditions is different from accepting reasonable conditions. Again, there is a lot of grey. Those quotes you provided are pretty black and white, very little grey.

  5. #34
    Member Array AceRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    95
    Brady isn't right advocating "total control" and you're not right advocating a "god given right."

    There is a middle ground to this discussion.

  6. #35
    Senior Member Array cmidkiff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Kansas City, Missouri
    Posts
    835
    AceRider... You are describing a privilege bestowed upon us by a benevolent government, not a right. The intention of our founding fathers was to ensure that our RIGHT to keep and bear arms would never be infringed upon. The terms 'reasonable' and 'common sense' have been used to defend every bill debated in congress that would further restrict our rights. Rights are absolute, or they arent rights.

    What we have here, is a fundamental difference of opinion.
    Liberty is an inherently offensive lifestyle. Living in a free society guarantees that each one of us will see our most cherished principles and beliefs questioned and in some cases mocked. It's worth it.

  7. #36
    Member Array AceRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    95
    I guess we do have a different opinion.

    No I'm not describing a "benevolent government's bestowing of a privelege," I'm suggesting that within a right, reasonable conditions can be established.
    Last edited by AceRider; August 25th, 2006 at 11:44 AM.

  8. #37
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,273
    Today under Federal law the militia consists of all able bodied men between 15 and (IIRC) 45.

    Yes, it is 45 years of age.

    So...if you want to follow that to the letter...then when we all hit 46 years of age...we give up our guns since we are no longer legally in the militia???

    You can't have it both ways.
    Liberty Over Tyranny Μολὼν λαβέ

  9. #38
    Member Array TC-TX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Denton Co.
    Posts
    325
    How do you figure the wording in the second amendment leaves room for the states to make gun laws?
    Simple.

    U.S.C Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

    And LIMITED By:

    U.S.C. Amendment XIV No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States
    Semper Fi ~

    Eagle Scout 1975
    U.S.M.C. 1978-84
    Commercial Pilot
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Certified Flight Instructor
    NRA Certified Instructor
    NRA Life Member
    TSRA Member

    www.TexasArmament.com

  10. #39
    Member Array JimmyHat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    D.C. Metro area
    Posts
    47
    That was a great Poll, in my opinion. It allowed room for independent thinking and reflection.

    As I prepare for the looming elections in my A/O, one that will affect the safety of my family, I am incensed by the party-lines drawn in the sand and the protest against those who are willing to think for themselves, outside the party lines.

    "Yes" I agree with this, "No" I don't agree with that: Simple statements that should not make an outcast of those who stick to their beliefs while those who conform without conviction move forward.

    Freedom isn't free!
    Virginia Citizen's Defense League
    The Soldiers Creed
    This here JimmyHat is for your protection, and mine.

  11. #40
    VIP Member Array ExSoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Coral Gables, FL
    Posts
    5,802
    WOW this is a GREAT thread! I just posted a related thread on Arguments Surrounding the Second Amendment.

    As to the questions posted here:

    1. The Bill of Rights does NOT grant any rights. That is not it's purpose. It's assumed by the Founding Fathers that ALL men have these rights and that they are granted by GOD and only GOD can take them away. Anything given by government can be taken by government. Read The Federalist Papers written by Alexander Hamilton and James Madison. Those essays speak to this very effectively.

    The Second Amendment refers first of all to arms not muzzle loading flintlocks. That's because the Founding Fathers knew that firearms technology had been around over three hundred years and was constantly evolving. In fact another evolution was reached during the prosecution of the American Revolution in the advancement concerning rifled barrels. They knew! It's something that the Brady Bunch has been blind to and it's the reason that my semiauto assault rifle or my Hand Phaser is covered by the 2nd Amendment. The Federalist Papers are clear the American People are never to be barred the use of arms should they ever need to replace a government of oppression. This means the arms used by the INFANTRY must be allowed the people. Stingers fall into the realm of Air Defense Artillery. Mortars are crew served weapons....and are thusly not covered by the 2nd. Same for tanks, etc. Full auto is just another evolution of personal weapons. Even an M60 can be handled and fed by one guy. But not a ma deuce .50 cal. So regretably the M2HB is not covered, although a Barrett 50 IS. If the infantryman carries it the PEOPLE MUST HAVE IT TOO, but in greater numbers!

    This concept began to show flaws in the 1935 case Miller v United States. The argument was specifically that a sawed off shotgun was not a suitable weapon for use by the militia. One problem: The pro side was never argued before the High Court. That side never showed up, so only the con side was raised and the court made it's decision based on THAT. So if a sawed off shottie isn't a suitable weapon for the militia why then all our M1A's, M4's, yada yada yada are no brainers...right? Well, there they go again. The CLAMs (Congressional Left, Academics & Media) have gone and yet pulled another redefinition of terms. That's how they conduct business: If they don't like an outcome, they simply change the parameters of the argument and start over.
    Last edited by ExSoldier; August 30th, 2006 at 02:23 PM. Reason: spelling
    Former Army Infantry Captain; 25 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.

  12. #41
    Distinguished Member Array Dakotaranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    1,858
    My plug nickle following ExSoldiers last post. The arguement that no one would have contemplated multiple rounds fired conveniently forget about Da Vinci's Machine Gun. Used it on an Anti once, they didn't have much of a comeback.
    "[T]he people are not to be disarmed of their weapons.
    They are left in full possession of them."

    Zacharia Johnson (speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention,25 June 1778)"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." ~Alexander Hamilton

  13. #42
    VIP Member Array Tubby45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Making ammo.
    Posts
    3,048
    "God" didn't give me anything. The Founding Fathers gave us those rights. The only way to ensure we keep those rights is to exercise them.

    Cite where in your Holy Bible it says that "God" grants us the rights we have today as Americans.
    07/02 FFL/SOT since 2006

  14. #43
    VIP Member Array ExSoldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Coral Gables, FL
    Posts
    5,802

    Read the Writings of those who wrote the Constitution

    Quote Originally Posted by freakshow10mm View Post
    "God" didn't give me anything. The Founding Fathers gave us those rights. The only way to ensure we keep those rights is to exercise them.

    Cite where in your Holy Bible it says that "God" grants us the rights we have today as Americans.
    Well there is a poster here on the forum who gives a quote from Luke that gives the quote from Jesus to sell his cloak to buy a sword. There is the quote from the new testament that a Godly man will act to keep burglars from his home.

    But more to the point, the Founding Fathers intrepreted the new Constitution to be grounded in the laws of God. They knew that anything given by government can be taken by government. The Bill of Rights is not a grantor of rights. It is a RESTRAINT on government!

    Look at the Declaration of Independence: We are endowed by our Creator with certain rights....among them being the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Notice it says the pursuit of happiness! Nobody guarantees anybody government provided "happiness!" Notice the sequence. God exists. God creates man and endows him with certain rights. Man creates Government to protect those rights....not the reverse.
    Former Army Infantry Captain; 25 yrs as an NRA Certified Instructor; Avid practitioner of the martial art: KLIK-PAO.

  15. #44
    Senior Member Array hsuCowboy98's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,022
    +1 ExSoldier, keep fighting the good fight, youre right on this one.
    Fear No Evil.

  16. #45
    Senior Member Array cmidkiff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Kansas City, Missouri
    Posts
    835
    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
    The founders simply recognized that all people have rights, and listed a few of the more important ones that government would not be allowed to encroach upon. At least not until it became corrupt. They even demonstrated that it's _our_ responsibility to fix things when it does become corrupt.
    Liberty is an inherently offensive lifestyle. Living in a free society guarantees that each one of us will see our most cherished principles and beliefs questioned and in some cases mocked. It's worth it.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

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. What room for a safe room? Kids bedroom or mine?
    By skunkworks in forum Home (And Away From Home) Defense Discussion
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: March 8th, 2012, 09:02 PM
  2. vault / gun room / safe room questions
    By friesepferd in forum Home (And Away From Home) Defense Discussion
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: April 13th, 2010, 04:13 PM
  3. WA Supreme Court: 2nd Amendment applies to the states via 14th Amendment due process
    By ExSoldier in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: April 11th, 2010, 04:35 PM
  4. 1st Amendment vs. 2nd Amendment in private forums
    By ShawnMoncali in forum Forum News, Feedback, Problems & Comments
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: March 15th, 2010, 11:54 AM
  5. Do you leave windows open when you are not in the room?
    By ExactlyMyPoint in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: June 25th, 2008, 05:38 PM

Search tags for this page

6 days left until the 2nd amendment fate is decided.
,
can a felon own a cannon in wisconsin
,
can a felon use a gun in self defense
,

does the second amendment leave room for interpretation

,
federal cartridge 5.56mmx45mm
,
how do i restore my right to bear arms
,
private of matoss definition
,
views regarding the second amendment
,
what are the laws regarding felons and guns in the house
,
where in the constitution does it speak on felons and loss of gun rights
,
why shouldnt 2nd amendment written
,
why we should leave the second amendment along
Click on a term to search for related topics.