We should consider a new amendment to clarify the 2A

We should consider a new amendment to clarify the 2A

This is a discussion on We should consider a new amendment to clarify the 2A within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I would like to present a thought for folks to chew over, revolving around the perceived difference between Open and Concealed carry when it comes ...

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 54
Like Tree30Likes

Thread: We should consider a new amendment to clarify the 2A

  1. #1
    Member Array LkWd_Don's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Lakewood JBLM vicinity
    Posts
    191

    We should consider a new amendment to clarify the 2A

    I would like to present a thought for folks to chew over, revolving around the perceived difference between Open and Concealed carry when it comes to our defending ourselves.

    Let's look at the 2A in a different light then we normally do.. we all know that the founders felt that the right to keep and bear arms was necessary for us to remain free. But our Government over the years has convinced us for whatever reasons that we still need permission to carry in some ways.

    I would ask that you get a picture in your mind of how folks in the era of the writing of our Constitution dressed. Knowing that they felt strongly about the right to carry, I can imagine them with a firearm either strapped at their side or a rifle in their arms. Do you get that picture too?

    Generally, if it was cold enough to need it, they would wear long jackets, would they not? So do you think that our framers/founders had any reason to believe that to Keep And Bear Arms did not mean to carry them how ever you felt was appropriate? They had no concept of Concealed carry as to them Open or Covered was Keeping and Bearing Arms.. as simple as that.

    In light of this understanding, hopefully more of my fellow Firearm Bearers will be willing to write to their Congress People and demand that our Federal Government repeal all of the laws that restrict lawful carry by United States Citizens anywhere within the United States of America. Knowing that this will be a monumental task if Congress had to address each and every bill individually, and after I have seen people drooling over bills such as the H.R.822/S.2213 in hopes that our Government will stop its infringements of our gun rights.

    I personally feel that only way to quickly repeal all of those anti-constitutional laws that have been enacted by our federal government or by the several states is through another proposed amendment to our US Constitution which would clarify the 2A (not to repeal it) to reading something to the effect of:
    To clarify the second amendment of the United States once and for all, All lawful and law-abiding Citizens of the United States of America have an inherent Right to Keep and Bear Arms in a manner consistent with their personal desires and that their ability to exercise that right shall extend to the United States in whole and shall not be impaired, infringed, abridged, denied or disparaged and upon ratification of this amendment all laws contained in our Federal Codes or of the several states which are now contradictory to this amendment shall be immediately considered repealed.
    Lets Unite and REMIND our Government that WE are the source of their authority and that WE demand our Rights be returned, Unabridged, Non-infringed, without denial or disparagement.


  2. #2
    Ex Member Array Nick62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    154
    I don't think we should let those chuckleheaded idiots in Congress do ANY tinkering with the Bill of Rights.

  3. #3
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,969
    Nobody seems to get the original Contitution correct. What makes you think these bozos would make a better one?
    PatAz, Dadsnugun, FTG-05 and 2 others like this.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Array foxytwo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    519
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick62 View Post
    I don't think we should let those chuckleheaded idiots in Congress do ANY tinkering with the Bill of Rights.
    I agree with Nick62 as they can hide a lot with their legalese and it could destroy the second amendment.

  5. #5
    Ex Member Array Yankeejib's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    1,003
    1) I support your idea fully.
    2) Good luck. We have already subordinated too many responsibilities to the government to "protect" us from ourselves. As a result, we have conditioned a whole subset of our population that government does a better job of protecting/serving/employing/dictating/funding/and securing our liberties than the average JQP can do all by themselves. As a result:
    3) There's a whole subset of our population totally dependent upon government to exist, and anyone that screws with that status quo must be a selfish evil capitalist war-monger who hates children, the elderly, the poor, and all minorities in favor of their own economic advancement. As a result:
    4) Anybody who suggests people be responsible for themselves and their rights and liberties is an uncaring xenophobe racist. Gun owners are even more vile because they are unstable, maladjusted, sexually deficient, blood-thirsty, and unable to settle minor issues without resorting to firearms.

    Did I miss anything?

  6. #6
    Member Array LkWd_Don's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Lakewood JBLM vicinity
    Posts
    191
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    Nobody seems to get the original Contitution correct. What makes you think these bozos would make a better one?
    As you and Nick above elude to. Our Congress is our biggest problem.. If we leave anything in their hands, they will simply screw it up..

    However, if all of WE the 2A supporters, Gun-Rights supporters, Open Carry supporters, Self defense supporters, etc.. draft a letter with a singular verbiage to be delivered to all of our Congress Persons, House and Senate alike.. to propose and nearly every Congress member is bringing the same petition to the chambers.. Do you think they will be able to get it wrong?

    The alternative is bills such a H.R.822/S.2213 which is presently stalled in the Committee of the Judiciary which is comprised of 10 Democrats and 8 Republicans.. Do you think it will really go anywhere or die? Even if it does happen to survive and gets back to the floor of the Senate.. with the present make up in the Senate.. do you really expect it will pass?

    Then you have to look at how it does little more than to LEGITIMIZE the anti-constitutional laws that presently exist in our Federal Codes and in the Several States.
    FTG-05 likes this.
    Lets Unite and REMIND our Government that WE are the source of their authority and that WE demand our Rights be returned, Unabridged, Non-infringed, without denial or disparagement.

  7. #7
    MJK
    MJK is offline
    Senior Member Array MJK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    St. Louis
    Posts
    840
    Here is my suggestion for wording: "the right of the people, to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.". I think this is pretty clear!
    W9HDG, Adameeski, DMan and 3 others like this.
    [T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people. ---Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

  8. #8
    Member Array LkWd_Don's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Lakewood JBLM vicinity
    Posts
    191
    Quote Originally Posted by MJK View Post
    Here is my suggestion for wording: "the right of the people, to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.". I think this is pretty clear!
    LOL Our framers/founders thought that too.. and look at all the restrictions and infringements that we now have to endure.

    Adding here:
    Besides that would not really address the repealing or voiding of all the laws that currently exist that do infringe, deny or disparage our rights.
    Look at how Illinois can only bear arms inside their home and from what I last heard, can not even carry that firearm into their attached garage.
    Last edited by LkWd_Don; April 6th, 2012 at 10:34 PM. Reason: include a second thought.
    Lets Unite and REMIND our Government that WE are the source of their authority and that WE demand our Rights be returned, Unabridged, Non-infringed, without denial or disparagement.

  9. #9
    VIP Member Array tokerblue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    2,369
    The current SCOTUS already had a chance to clarify the 2nd during Heller. They chose to allow "reasonable" restrictions since they do not believe the 2nd to be an unlimited right. So states like IL and NY are free to have "reasonable" restrictions.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the outcome of the vote." ~ Benjamin Franklin

  10. #10
    Member Array LkWd_Don's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Lakewood JBLM vicinity
    Posts
    191
    Quote Originally Posted by tokerblue View Post
    The current SCOTUS already had a chance to clarify the 2nd during Heller. They chose to allow "reasonable" restrictions since they do not believe the 2nd to be an unlimited right. So states like IL and NY are free to have "reasonable" restrictions.
    Exactly my point! And the SCOTUS can only rule on Laws that are passed in which as they see it.. someone has been Harmed or Injured and fights it through the courts to get it there.. even then it is not a sure thing that they will hear the case.. but if an Amendment to our Constitution exists, declaring all the non-conforming laws to be repealed.. then the SCOTUS can only rule in favor of the Amendment as it has become a part of the Constitution.
    Lets Unite and REMIND our Government that WE are the source of their authority and that WE demand our Rights be returned, Unabridged, Non-infringed, without denial or disparagement.

  11. #11
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,072
    SCOTUS is already doing the job for us.
    Heller and McDonald are actually a lot more pro us than they first appear. When SCOTUS hears a case they are dealing with one specific question. In Heller the question was whether 2A guaranteed us the right to possess a handgun in our homes. Heller had nothing to do with carry in public places. Yet if you read the majority opinion when they spoke of the reasonable restrictions that can be placed on or right they specifically said a permit could be required for concealed carry. They said nothing of a permit for open carry.
    That will probably be the next aspect of 2A that gets clarified.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  12. #12
    VIP Member Array Crowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    West Allis WI
    Posts
    2,761
    An amendment to the United States Constitution must be ratified by 75% of the state legislatures (or of constitutional conventions specially elected in each of the states), before it can come into effect. Not and easy task nor should it be.

    I would think we would have more success getting congress and state legislators to repeal some of the anti gun laws on the books. In achieving this we would end up with exactly what the founding fathers stated in the 2nd amendment and the suggestion MJK stated:
    Quote Originally Posted by MJK View Post
    Here is my suggestion for wording: "the right of the people, to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.". I think this is pretty clear!
    "One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation."
    --Thomas B. Reed, American Attorney

    Second Amendment -- Established December 15, 1791 and slowly eroded ever since What happened to "..... shall not be infringed."

  13. #13
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    35,764
    The Pennsylvania Constitution spells it out very well.

    The right of the people to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves and the state shall not be questioned.
    PatAz likes this.

  14. #14
    VIP Member Array Spirit51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    2,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick62 View Post
    I don't think we should let those chuckleheaded idiots in Congress do ANY tinkering with the Bill of Rights.
    A BIG 10-4 on that one. When you open that "can of worms" to change it...it gives the antis the opening they are looking for. DON'T mess with it. Have you really noticed these politicians doing anything "right" lately?
    A woman must not depend on protection by men. A woman must learn to protect herself.
    Susan B. Anthony
    A armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one has to back it up with his life.
    Robert Heinlein

  15. #15
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    11,486
    What makes anybody believe that the Second Amendment would not be abolished completely if presented for consensus?
    "If I had my choice I would kill every reporter in the world, but I am sure we would be getting reports from Hell before breakfast."
    William T. Sherman

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Sponsored 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
  •  

Search tags for this page

a new amendment we should have

,

how mcdonalds changed the second amendment

,

s2213 will become an amendment to a larger bill

,

woollard v. sheridan

Click on a term to search for related topics.