Will 2nd Amendment Stand Forever?

[moonbogg]

The 2nd doesn't say shit about your AR15, so stop using it in gun debates ffs.

I'm not debating whether guns should be a banned or not. It's too late to ban guns in the U.S. now, the genie is out of the bottle. We're talking about the 2nd and how it says absolutely nothing about what are considered arms and what aren't.

Thats not in any way true at all. The genie was out of the bottle in Australia and the UK as well. Where did their genie go? Where did the genie go in mexico where gun control is now very strict when it used to be more open? Your genie will take her guns and get the fuck out of here right after the next diptard goes on another shooting rampage.
The 2nd amendment won't survive intact after another Newtown or Aurora. You can bet on that. The NRA can only do so much before the pressure from the public steamrolls right over them and rips the 2nd right out of their hands.

 

[Juror No. 8]

The sole purpose of cars isn't to kill people! They're designed to move people around!

How is that a concept that you can't understand!?

The sole purpose of guns isn't to kill people, either, though they can be used for that purpose, just as cars can be. Again, many people use their guns for sport shooting and target practice. An even larger number keep guns around the house for self-defense and have no intention of ever killing anyone with them.

Can you explain why the government should have these types of arms, but not the people?

 

[OverVolt]

Nothing lasts forever :awe:

 

[nextJin]

Can you even read?

Where does it define arms in the constitution?

Every single scholar and constitutional historian look at context and its meaning at the time. Exactly like SCOTUS and most every other sane person, I didn't even know people still argued this.

Now can they repeal the 2nd? Can they abolish certain aspects or regulate the hell out of it? Yep, with a large enough majority they can basically do anything but that is why we have separate but equal checks and balances in how our government works.

When your argument is effectively "What are arms defined by the constitution? Nukes? Tanks?" You will be laughed out of the room, because those are ordinance.

Timothy Cunningham’s New and Complete Law Dictionary (1771), where arms is defined as “any thing that a man wears for his defence, or takes into his hands, or useth in wrath to cast at or strike another” (variations on this definition occur in English legal texts going back to the 16th century).

Both Samuel Johnson’s definition of arms as “weapons of offence, or armour of defence” (1755) and John Trusler’s “by arms, we understand those instruments of offence generally made use of in war; such as firearms, swords, &c.” (1794).

The basic issue for our military today are variations of the AR15's.

www.scotusblog.com read 07-290 for a recent example on how they view the 2nd with the DC gun laws.

 

[Steeplerot]

So does that mean that high school kids can go back to having guns in a rack and parking in school parking lots so they can hunt after?

They doing some well regulated after school slave roundups in 2013? If not then this has no bearing on the 2nd or responsible civvie gun ownership.

 

[RocksteadyDotNet]

Every single scholar and constitutional historian look at context and its meaning at the time. Exactly like SCOTUS and most every other sane person, I didn't even know people still argued this.

Now can they repeal the 2nd? Can they abolish certain aspects or regulate the hell out of it? Yep, with a large enough majority they can basically do anything but that is why we have separate but equal checks and balances in how our government works.

When your argument is effectively "What are arms defined by the constitution? Nukes? Tanks?" You will be laughed out of the room, because those are ordinance.

The basic issue for our military today are variations of the AR15's.

www.scotusblog.com read 07-290 for a recent example on how they view the 2nd with the DC gun laws.

Rocket launchers and full auto rifles could quite easily fit under the two definitions you gave.

 

[irishScott]

Of course, it just will just be interpreted in a more intelligent way.

Nowhere in the 2nd does it say you can have an AR15. Why not just let everyone have rocket launchers, tanks and nukes?

And before some idiots says 'Nukes are arms' or some stupid shit, where does it say in the 2nd what are arms and what aren't?

There were no automatic weapons in 1776. The founding fathers did NOT intend average citizens to have the kind of weapons they have today.

Queue the moron guns nuts blowing a gasket.

Que the Australian preaching to Americans about their own culture and history.

 

[nextJin]

Rocket launchers and full auto rifles could quite easily fit under the two definitions you gave.

Fully automatic rifles are legal to own for those who can afford it, get approved and jump through the hoops required to get one legally.

As for rocket launchers cmon now. There is a difference between a rocket launcher and the warhead. The rocket warhead is classified as “ordnance” and is not “arms” under the Second Amendment. A rocket launcher is basically a tube with a sight and trigger mechanism.

Not to mention the actual rocket is probably labeled as a WMD.

 

[RocksteadyDotNet]

Que the Australian preaching to Americans about their own culture and history.

Oh shit, I forgot that people aren't allowed to have knowledge about anything outside there own country.

And this coming from America, the biggest meddler in foreign affairs there is. You guys have an opinion on everything, even though you usually know shit about the subject.

This computer wasn't made here, am I allowed to use it?

How about you just fuck off? Haven't you got some brown people to bomb the shit out of?

 

[irishScott]

Oh shit, I forgot that people aren't allowed to have knowledge about anything outside there own country.

And this coming from America, the biggest meddler in foreign affairs there is. You guys have an opinion on everything, even though you usually know shit about the subject.

This computer wasn't made here, am I allowed to use it?

How about you just fuck off? Haven't you got some brown people to bomb the shit out of?

Lol you have knowledge of us? Could have fooled me. Sounds like you read a elementary school primer on the Bill of Rights and decided you know everything.

Let me know when you're willing to stop arguing like a spoiled know-it-all 14 year old.

In the meantime, kindly go chase a Kangaroo around in a circle. Would be a lot more dignified than what you're doing here.

 

[irishScott]

Thats not in any way true at all. The genie was out of the bottle in Australia and the UK as well. Where did their genie go? Where did the genie go in mexico where gun control is now very strict when it used to be more open? Your genie will take her guns and get the fuck out of here right after the next diptard goes on another shooting rampage.
The 2nd amendment won't survive intact after another Newtown or Aurora. You can bet on that. The NRA can only do so much before the pressure from the public steamrolls right over them and rips the 2nd right out of their hands.

To be fair, they never had anything resembling the sheer amount of guns per capita that we have. Banning guns in the US likely is impossible. Not that that will stop the politicians from trying (see California).

I disagree that the 2nd amendment can't survive another tragedy. The furthest Newtown got the gun grabbers was proposed universal background checks. I agree with the perspective that says things wouldn't have stopped there, but if a tragedy on the scale of Newtown can only get them that far, I think we're pretty secure for the time being.

Hell when the next mass shooting happens (and it will eventually happen), I hope it's in a state with strict gun control. Of course the governors of said states will just blame neighboring states, but they'll make themselves look pretty pathetic doing so.

The real danger is a liberal-dominated supreme court that might overturn Heller.

 

[OverVolt]

To be fair, they never had anything resembling the sheer amount of guns per capita that we have. Banning guns in the US likely is impossible. Not that that will stop the politicians from trying (see California).

I disagree that the 2nd amendment can't survive another tragedy. The furthest Newtown got the gun grabbers was proposed universal background checks. I agree with the perspective that says things wouldn't have stopped there, but if a tragedy on the scale of Newtown can only get them that far, I think we're pretty secure for the time being.

Hell when the next mass shooting happens (and it will eventually happen), I hope it's in a state with strict gun control. Of course the governors of said states will just blame neighboring states, but they'll make themselves look pretty pathetic doing so.

The real danger is a liberal-dominated supreme court that might overturn Heller.

Yea one day it could happen I just don't think it'll ever be while I'm alive.

 

[nextJin]

Oh shit, I forgot that people aren't allowed to have knowledge about anything outside there own country.

And this coming from America, the biggest meddler in foreign affairs there is. You guys have an opinion on everything, even though you usually know shit about the subject.

This computer wasn't made here, am I allowed to use it?

How about you just fuck off? Haven't you got some brown people to bomb the shit out of?

This is what my 3 yr old sounds like throwing a tantrum from being told no.

 

[boomerang]

Oh shit, I forgot that people aren't allowed to have knowledge about anything outside there own country.

And this coming from America, the biggest meddler in foreign affairs there is. You guys have an opinion on everything, even though you usually know shit about the subject.

This computer wasn't made here, am I allowed to use it?

How about you just fuck off? Haven't you got some brown people to bomb the shit out of?

The drones over Australia program is scheduled to start in October of this year. You brown?

 

[DrPizza]

Of course, it just will just be interpreted in a more intelligent way.

Nowhere in the 2nd does it say you can have an AR15. Why not just let everyone have rocket launchers, tanks and nukes?

And before some idiots says 'Nukes are arms' or some stupid shit, where does it say in the 2nd what are arms and what aren't?

There were no automatic weapons in 1776. The founding fathers did NOT intend average citizens to have the kind of weapons they have today.

Queue the moron guns nuts blowing a gasket.

First of all, before you call others morons, perhaps you might want to educate yourself about what types of weapons ARE actually available. Automatic weapons are incredibly rare in the public's hands. They haven't been available for the public to buy in 45 years.

Can you even read?

Where does it define arms in the constitution?

You're whining about people not wanting to debate with you - perhaps that's because they're far more educated on the issue than you are & debating you isn't worth their time. There is plenty of other written material from the founding fathers that makes it quite clear what they meant. The Constitution wasn't written in a vacuum.

 

[DrPizza]

Oh shit, I forgot that people aren't allowed to have knowledge about anything outside there own country.

And this coming from America, the biggest meddler in foreign affairs there is. You guys have an opinion on everything, even though you usually know shit about the subject.

This computer wasn't made here, am I allowed to use it?

How ironic - YOU apparently don't know shit about the subject.

 

[Thebobo]

I support the 2nd amendment in its true spirit and we should follow the second amendment to the letter and as such only arms that were available at the time of the amendment writing are consider protected.

So have all the single loading muskets and riffles you want, of and if you want you can have a cannon as well.

 

[FerrelGeek]

All it will take is a couple more Obama-esque SCOTUS appointments and the 2nd amendment could be effectively nullified.

All it takes is what we're already starting to see happen - any excuse by the .gov to call you mentally ill and you lose your guns.

Freedom is a fragile thing.

Every single scholar and constitutional historian look at context and its meaning at the time. Exactly like SCOTUS and most every other sane person, I didn't even know people still argued this.

Now can they repeal the 2nd? Can they abolish certain aspects or regulate the hell out of it? Yep, with a large enough majority they can basically do anything but that is why we have separate but equal checks and balances in how our government works.

When your argument is effectively "What are arms defined by the constitution? Nukes? Tanks?" You will be laughed out of the room, because those are ordinance.

The basic issue for our military today are variations of the AR15's.

www.scotusblog.com read 07-290 for a recent example on how they view the 2nd with the DC gun laws.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

I support the 2nd amendment in its true spirit and we should follow the second amendment to the letter and as such only arms that were available at the time of the amendment writing are consider protected.

So have all the single loading muskets and riffles you want, of and if you want you can have a cannon as well.

lol

 

[SaurusX]

I support the 2nd amendment in its true spirit and we should follow the second amendment to the letter and as such only arms that were available at the time of the amendment writing are consider protected.

So have all the single loading muskets and riffles you want, of and if you want you can have a cannon as well.

I guess that also means no gay marriage or abortion. They're not in the Constitution either.

 

[nextJin]

All it will take is a couple more Obama-esque SCOTUS appointments and the 2nd amendment could be effectively nullified.

All it takes is what we're already starting to see happen - any excuse by the .gov to call you mentally ill and you lose your guns.

Freedom is a fragile thing.

Oh I agree, but in order for that to happen congress has to get it through (the bans). I've said it before along with you and many others. The worst possible thing that could happen is having Obama get 2 more Justices.

If he appointed 2 more and we got another Democrat in the WH and they got the majority in the House a hell of a lot of shit would change.

 

[TerryMathews]

I support the 2nd amendment in its true spirit and we should follow the second amendment to the letter and as such only arms that were available at the time of the amendment writing are consider protected.

So have all the single loading muskets and riffles you want, of and if you want you can have a cannon as well.

So by this logic, the first doesn't apply to TV, telephone, or the Internet correct?

 

[Muse]

Will 2nd Amendment Stand Forever?

Hardly, it barely has a leg to stand on as it is.

 

[mect]

No, it won't last forever, as the US as a nation won't last forever. That being said, I think it will last a long time.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Can you even read?

Where does it define arms in the constitution?

It doesn't define anything IN the constitution, nor is supposed to, nor does it have to. The denotations are available in dictionaries and legal documents of the day, and the connotations available in the bulk of other writings.