Where in the 2nd Amendment does it say you can bear arms for personnel protection? - Page 4

Where in the 2nd Amendment does it say you can bear arms for personnel protection?

This is a discussion on Where in the 2nd Amendment does it say you can bear arms for personnel protection? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Let us ask Thomas Jefferson, one of the primary framers of the Constitution, what his intent was. .”The Constitution of most of our states (and ...

Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 123
Like Tree84Likes

Thread: Where in the 2nd Amendment does it say you can bear arms for personnel protection?

  1. #46
    Member Array garwha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Lindale, Texas
    Posts
    100
    Let us ask Thomas Jefferson, one of the primary framers of the Constitution, what his intent was. .”The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.”
    ~Thomas Jefferson


  2. #47
    Senior Member Array CanuckQue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Maritimes Canada
    Posts
    1,141
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1956 View Post
    The firearms I carry all day every day in compliance with federal and state laws here aren't even legal to own in Canada. Thanks, but I'll keep the system we currently have in place here, and will continue to avoid travel to places like Canada where my right to possess firearms is non-existent.
    Yes, I get that. You prefer the current system to a potentially worse one. My point is that the current federal and state laws are absolutely 'infringing' upon the 2A, in a way that's been nickle-and-dimed and certainly not in the text. If you prefer the current system, then you're not really supporting the 2A (imo). If you'd prefer less infringement, but some, then it's still not what the 2A says. If you'd prefer the 2A say something different than it currently does, then the only way to do that is to actually amend it.

    I didn't know Americans had unrestricted access to grenades. Lol. Learn something new everyday.

    I think you're arguing against something I didn't say. And, for some reason, think that my current living location matters to my argument.

    My point is that the current system is not what the Constitution says, if we're okay with that, then wouldn't it be better to change what it says?

    Quote Originally Posted by peckman28
    If society has deemed your debt to have been paid and you've been lawfully released from prison, all your constitutional protections should apply.
    I completely agree. Honestly, my hackles get a bit raised when people don't agree.
    Our current plan for Universal Iron Lung coverage, just sayin'.
    Wisest. Retirement. Plan. Ever.
    Good thing the March of Dimes worked. How, why?

    Alternately, for those with a tool shed, ideas, or creative loved ones to tell..


  3. #48
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    10,738
    Quote Originally Posted by CanuckQue View Post
    Yes, I get that. You prefer the current system to a potentially worse one. My point is that the current federal and state laws are absolutely 'infringing' upon the 2A, in a way that's been nickle-and-dimed and certainly not in the text. If you prefer the current system, then you're not really supporting the 2A (imo). If you'd prefer less infringement, but some, then it's still not what the 2A says. If you'd prefer the 2A say something different than it currently does, then the only way to do that is to actually amend it.

    I didn't know Americans had unrestricted access to grenades. Lol. Learn something new everyday.

    I think you're arguing against something I didn't say. And, for some reason, think that my current living location matters to my argument.

    My point is that the current system is not what the Constitution says, if we're okay with that, then wouldn't it be better to change what it says?
    I have, with relatively few restrictions, the right to bear arms exactly as detailed in the Second Amendment of the Constitution. What is to change, or to argue?
    "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

  4. #49
    OD*
    OD* is offline
    Moderator
    Array OD*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Coopersville
    Posts
    11,272
    Quote Originally Posted by CanuckQue View Post
    I didn't know Americans had unrestricted access to grenades. Lol. Learn something new everyday.
    I never said unrestricted, and neither did you.
    I honestly don't think the 'majority' your neighbors would be okay with normal people being able to own grenades.
    "The pistol, learn it well, carry it always ..." ~ Jeff Cooper

    "Terrorists: They hated you yesterday, they hate you today, and they will hate you tomorrow. End the cycle of hatred, don’t give them a tomorrow."

  5. #50
    VIP Member
    Array oneshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    +42.893612,-082.710236 , Mi.
    Posts
    8,198
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1956 View Post
    The firearms I carry all day every day in compliance with federal and state laws here aren't even legal to own in Canada. Thanks, but I'll keep the system we currently have in place here, and will continue to avoid travel to places like Canada where my right to possess firearms is non-existent.


    ^^^^^^^YEP^^^^^^^^^^^^


    Unfortunately, a vast majority of people in Canada still have the thought process of their former Motherland, when it comes to a socialist attitude toward how they wish to be governed, hence so many restrictive laws and the lack of certain freedoms in Canada.
    The people are nice, the country beautiful, but the government sucks.
    OD* and tcox4freedom like this.
    If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.

    Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!

    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn

  6. #51
    Senior Member Array CanuckQue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Maritimes Canada
    Posts
    1,141
    re: grenades, True, and I really think that people are okay with some infringement (i.e., restriction) on that front!

    oneshot: yeah, there some things about Canadian law I prefer, some things about the US law that I prefer. No argument there. If I was living in the US, there're certainly things that I'd like to become more 'Canada-like' (and vis versa)
    Our current plan for Universal Iron Lung coverage, just sayin'.
    Wisest. Retirement. Plan. Ever.
    Good thing the March of Dimes worked. How, why?

    Alternately, for those with a tool shed, ideas, or creative loved ones to tell..


  7. #52
    OD*
    OD* is offline
    Moderator
    Array OD*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Coopersville
    Posts
    11,272
    Quote Originally Posted by CanuckQue View Post
    re: grenades, True, and I really think that people are okay with some infringement (i.e., restriction) on that front!
    Yes, I don't doubt most Americans have no problem restricting access to hand grenades, but they don't feel the 2nd Amendment is too unreasonably permissive, as you feel.
    "The pistol, learn it well, carry it always ..." ~ Jeff Cooper

    "Terrorists: They hated you yesterday, they hate you today, and they will hate you tomorrow. End the cycle of hatred, don’t give them a tomorrow."

  8. #53
    Senior Member Array CanuckQue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Maritimes Canada
    Posts
    1,141
    Quote Originally Posted by OD* View Post
    Yes, I don't doubt most Americans have no problem restricting access to hand grenades, but they don't feel the 2nd Amendment is too unreasonably permissive, as you feel.
    I think I'm missing something, it's probably cultural. Your two statements seem (to me) to be directly conflicting. It appears (to me) that unrestricting grenades is more within what the spirit of what the 2A says than restricting them, and that restricting access is the same as 'infringing' upon access.

    (it's not so much unreasonably permissive, it's more than it doesn't do what it says it's supposed to do)
    Our current plan for Universal Iron Lung coverage, just sayin'.
    Wisest. Retirement. Plan. Ever.
    Good thing the March of Dimes worked. How, why?

    Alternately, for those with a tool shed, ideas, or creative loved ones to tell..


  9. #54
    Distinguished Member Array tcox4freedom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina USA
    Posts
    1,586
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    It doesn't
    The second amendment is not about self defense. Just as the first amendment does not say we can publish a newspaper.
    The reason we keep or bear arms is irrelevant to the amendment. The amendment simply states that the government shall not infringe on that right.
    Quote Originally Posted by azretired View Post
    +1. One of the best explanations I have heard!

    Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2
    The big SCAM that has been perpetuated on the American people is the belief that our constitution was written to control the citizenry.

    The Constitution and the BoR was written to control & restrict the power of government; NOT it's citizenry. (The liberal progressives in our government would have you believe just the opposite.)

    -

  10. #55
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    27,081
    M60 tanks for everyone! Except criminals.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  11. #56
    OD*
    OD* is offline
    Moderator
    Array OD*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Coopersville
    Posts
    11,272
    Quote Originally Posted by CanuckQue View Post
    I think I'm missing something, it's probably cultural.
    You are, I don't know if it's cultural. I never commented on the 2nd being too restrictive, or not being restrictive enough. Your comment I mentioned was, once again, you believing our 2ND Amendment was too unreasonably permissive, I said most Americans don't feel the way you do. I NEVER said anything about anybody not wanting any kind limitations. Your arguments seem to be directly conflicting to me, "It appears (to me) that restricting grenades is more within what the spirit of what the 2A says than restricting them, and that restricting access is the same as 'infringing' upon access." So, "infringing' upon access" is or isn't too "unreasonably permissive"?
    "The pistol, learn it well, carry it always ..." ~ Jeff Cooper

    "Terrorists: They hated you yesterday, they hate you today, and they will hate you tomorrow. End the cycle of hatred, don’t give them a tomorrow."

  12. #57
    Member Array woodsong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    Where in the 2nd Amendment does it say you can bear arms for personnel protection?
    The first 10 Amendments are a list of unalienable rights -- rights that you are born with and may not be taken from you. The right to bear arms is one of them. The reason you choose to bear arms is irrelevant and immaterial; the 2nd Amendment recognizes your God-given right to do so regardless of your purpose.

  13. #58
    Senior Member Array stanislaskasava's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    1,121
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    Of course a person has the right to tell someone no guns on their property or their business. And they always should. That is not denying them a right. The person has a choice to come to my house or work. Only the government can deny you a right.
    Property rights are limited by society. In my state, there is no 'right to ban guns on private property' (or business). There is, however, a right to carry guns -- even while on private property (or a business). This is the way we like it in my state, and in many other states.

    Once again, you miss the mark: Rights do not magically disappear when you cross a private property line. Also, you repeat your odd, contradictory way of thinking. On the one hand, you think that property owners have the right to tell others 'no guns on my property', and on the other hand you state "Only the government can deny you a right."

  14. #59
    VIP Member Array peckman28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,085
    Quote Originally Posted by stanislaskasava View Post
    Property rights are limited by society. In my state, there is no 'right to ban guns on private property' (or business). There is, however, a right to carry guns -- even while on private property (or a business). This is the way we like it in my state, and in many other states.

    Once again, you miss the mark: Rights do not magically disappear when you cross a private property line. Also, you repeat your odd, contradictory way of thinking. On the one hand, you think that property owners have the right to tell others 'no guns on my property', and on the other hand you state "Only the government can deny you a right."
    Property rights are not legitimately limited at all. The right of someone who PAID FOR THEIR OWN PROPERTY to do with it whatever they want, and dictate its terms of use however they want, trumps whatever you think you should be able to do on SOMEONE ELSE'S PROPERTY. If you don't like it you can legitimately choose to avoid their terms and stay off their property. Any laws passed to the contrary are a violation of natural law and are just as immoral and unjust as idiotic permit requirements or the EPA showing up to tell you that you have to destroy all your structures yesterday because they've arbitrarily deemed YOUR property to be protected wetlands. All of the former examples follow the same sorry line of thought, and violating someone's property rights just because it's promoting your pet cause is completely unjust.

  15. #60
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,885
    Quote Originally Posted by stanislaskasava View Post
    Property rights are limited by society. In my state, there is no 'right to ban guns on private property' (or business). There is, however, a right to carry guns -- even while on private property (or a business). This is the way we like it in my state, and in many other states.

    Once again, you miss the mark: Rights do not magically disappear when you cross a private property line. Also, you repeat your odd, contradictory way of thinking. On the one hand, you think that property owners have the right to tell others 'no guns on my property', and on the other hand you state "Only the government can deny you a right."
    I of course have the right to deny you access to my property and/or putting a condition on you entering my house/property/business. If that means I say no guns, then you have a choice, stay and abide by my rules or don;t stay. If you don't understand that too bad. If you don't understand my choice of words too bad.
    When I talk about the government denying you rights it is is by force or legislation. Like NO ONE can have a gun. Or the government decides it can invade your house and take your arms by force.

Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... 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
  •  

Search tags for this page

2 amendment don't say guns

,

2nd amendment grenades

,

2nd amendment quot>:..;lllllll/...........................[-'-=p;;[ 8i/

,

does 2 amendment say anything about protecting yourself

,

photo quotes about my rights to bare arms

,

second amendment biological weapon

,

second amendment comma placement

,

the second amendment allows me to bare arms,how about a hand grenade

,

was miller first person to fight for right to bare arms

,
were does it say that the right to bear arms it to protect oneself from the government
,
where dies it say private citizens can have same weapons as military
,

which amendment allows a person to bear arms

Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors