▲
16
0
▼

2nd Amendment Discussion


 invite response                
2018 Feb 17, 11:51am   282,939 views  1,399 comments

by CajunSteve   ➕follow (1)   💰tip   ignore  

With all the talk about the school shootings, let's take a look at what the 2nd Amendment actually says:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Couple things to note in there:

1. The specific mention of a militia being the reason for the need to bear arms.
2. The 2nd Amendment never mentions the word gun at all.

So, what exactly is the definition of "arms"?

In 1755 Dr. Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language was first published. It defined “arms” as “weapons of offence, or armour of defence.”

Weapons of offence would seem to include pretty much anything and everything, from knives to nuclear weapons. The US has already seen fit to ban some weapons of offence so the 2nd Amendment clearly has not been interpreted strictly as meaning that the US cannot ban all "arms". Therefore, the 2nd Amendment does not guarantee citizens the right to own whatever weapons they choose.

So it then becomes a question of which weapons should be banned, which should be strictly regulated, and which should be lightly regulated or not at all. Like anything else, we should weigh an individual's right with society's right. When looked at in that manner, it becomes very difficult to justify why fully automatic or semi automatic rifles should be allowed. What purpose do they serve an individual? And why would that purpose outweigh the extreme damage those weapons have cased society??

Patrick thinks the Chamber of Commerce is the worst organization, and he may be correct, but the NRA is not far behind.



« First        Comments 918 - 957 of 1,399       Last »     Search these comments

918   fdhfoiehfeoi   2023 Jan 18, 9:19pm  

Found out that the stock I wanted on my gun is made by Gearhead Works. They appear to be a bit backed up on orders though...
922   Eric Holder   2023 Jan 27, 6:55pm  

HeadSet says

NuttBoxer says


ATF just made felons out of 40 million Americans with their reclassification of pistol braced guns as SBR's.

What if they made the guns smooth bore? Then the "rifle" classification part could not apply.


SBS is not much legally different from a SBR. Both are NFA items.
923   Eric Holder   2023 Jan 27, 6:59pm  

NuttBoxer says

ATF just made felons out of 40 million Americans with their reclassification of pistol braced guns as SBR's. Now I have to change my order to avoid filling out a Form 1 or 4...


It was an open secret that nobody was planning to use that brace as a brace...

PS. The whole SBR thing is stupid, because it's basically a rudiment which was left in the NFA after pistols were taken out during negotiations. The category was created to plug a loophole in pistol prohibition, but once much more concelable pistols were excluded it stopped making any sense to have SBRs as NFA items. But here we are.
924   thenuttyneutron   2023 Jan 27, 6:59pm  

PSA

The ATF's pistol brace rule is expected to be published on January 31, 2023. Many people own these currently legal firearms. That will no longer be the case once the new rule is published. There are a few options listed in the rule to cure the problem. The "least" bad option is to file the NFA paper work needed to get the tax stamp and thus regain compliance with the law.

I do have serious doubts that this rule will survive the lawsuits that are surely going to be filed against AG Garland. If the 5th Circuit gets it first, I have no doubt that they will call the new rule unconstitutional and toss it out.
925   thenuttyneutron   2023 Jan 27, 7:06pm  

Eric Holder says


It was an open secret that nobody was planning to use that brace as a brace...


That does not matter one bit. The ATF rendered an opinion about 10 years ago that a pistol brace on an AR pistol did not make it a SBR. Millions of people used this opinion to make purchasing decisions. I am one of them. I bought my AR pistol in good faith. I filled out the 4473 as required at the FFL (Scheels).

The problem here is that the definition of a SBR and what the braces were being sold as and marketed as did not line up with the law. If the manufacturer designs and intends for the brace to be wrapped around your arm and people instead shoulder it, this does not "redesign" it.

I don't understand why SBRs are still even a thing after the original regulation on pistols in draft copies of the NFA were removed. The SBR language was adopted simply to prevent people from making "pistols" out of long guns. There is also the "in common use" issue. Weapons that are in common use are protected by the 2A. This is well established case law.
926   Eric Holder   2023 Jan 27, 7:07pm  

thenuttyneutron says

Eric Holder says

It was an open secret that nobody was planning to use that brace as a brace...

That does not matter one bit


No disagreement there. But still.
927   thenuttyneutron   2023 Jan 27, 7:10pm  

Fuck Garland's plan up. I hope that the ATF gets 30 million submissions for the free tax stamp. There are currently only 8 people that process them. If the ATF can get through 220,000 comments on the proposed rule in 6 months, I am sure they would love the opportunity to show us that they can work through 30 million forms in 15 months. I have waited 15 months for all of my other NFA items.

Bury them in their own shit. Ohh and cut their funding by 90% to get their budgeted FTE down to 20 people!
928   RWSGFY   2023 Jan 28, 5:03pm  

Yes, even San Francisco has to follow the Constitution!

Under intense and unrelenting pressure from CRPA, the San Francisco County Sheriff’s Office today issued its first CCW permit in many years. Last June, Sheriff Paul Miyamoto bragged about his defiance of Second Amendment rights, stating proudly that he had “not issued a single concealed carry permit since taking office in January of 2020.” Well, Sheriff, the streak is over!


https://crpa.org/news/blogs/san-francisco-issues-first-ccw-in-years/
929   fdhfoiehfeoi   2023 Jan 30, 10:07am  

Eric Holder says

It was an open secret that nobody was planning to use that brace as a brace...


I did. I found the brace very comfortable and natural as part of my stance.
930   fdhfoiehfeoi   2023 Jan 30, 10:09am  

thenuttyneutron says

There are a few options listed in the rule to cure the problem. The "least" bad option is to file the NFA paper work needed to get the tax stamp and thus regain compliance with the law.


Or just tell anyone you have it. No one's going door-to-door to check. It's also fairly simple to order a pistol without the brace, then purchase the brace separately, but of course we shouldn't do that..
931   fdhfoiehfeoi   2023 Jan 30, 10:17am  

thenuttyneutron says

The problem here is that the definition of a SBR and what the braces were being sold as and marketed as did not line up with the law. If the manufacturer designs and intends for the brace to be wrapped around your arm and people instead shoulder it, this does not "redesign" it.


You can do both. Look at Robinson Armament XCR's.
933   Patrick   2023 Feb 7, 9:17pm  

https://www.ammoland.com/2023/02/judge-rules-ban-on-gun-possession-for-marijuana-users-unconstitutional/


The Court found the prohibition on the possession of firearms as an unlawful user of marijuana was unconstitutional because there is no historical tradition of removing the right to keep and bear arms from people who use intoxicating substances. Here is a summation of the Court order. From the order, p. 1:

Before the Court is Defendant Jared Michael Harrison’s Motion to Dismiss the Indictment (Dkt. 17), which argues that the statute he is charged with violating, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), is unconstitutionally vague, in violation of the Due Process Clause, and unconstitutionally infringes upon his fundamental right to possess a firearm, in violation of the Second Amendment. For the reasons given below, the motion is GRANTED. ...

In short, there is no historical tradition of banning the right to keep and bear arms simply because a person uses intoxicating substances. The conclusion of the court is clear. From the order:

Because the Court concludes that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3) violates Harrison’s Second Amendment right to possess a firearm, the Court declines to reach Harrison’s vagueness claim. The Motion to Dismiss the Indictment is GRANTED. Accordingly, the Indictment is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 3rd day of February 2023.

The court noted the late provenance of the ban, which did not occur until 1986. This shows how the slippery slope works in practice.
934   FortWayneAsNancyPelosiHaircut   2023 Feb 8, 8:05am  

Patrick says

https://www.ammoland.com/2023/02/judge-rules-ban-on-gun-possession-for-marijuana-users-unconstitutional/



The Court found the prohibition on the possession of firearms as an unlawful user of marijuana was unconstitutional because there is no historical tradition of removing the right to keep and bear arms from people who use intoxicating substances. Here is a summation of the Court order. From the order, p. 1:


Before the Court is Defendant Jared Michael Harrison’s Motion to Dismiss the Indictment (Dkt. 17), which argues that the statute he is charged with violating, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), is unconstitutionally vague, in violation of the Due Process Clause, and unconstitutionally infringes upon his fundamental right to possess a firearm, in violation of the Second Amendment. For...


That's good news. Fucking government always wants to find ways to take away guns. The fact that they take gun ownership right away from people who committed crimes is ridiculous IMO. Because it's fucking government, once they have a way to confiscate guns, they'll find a way to turn all of us into criminals to take our rights away. Republicans don't do shit about it either, they are just as faggy self serving cunts as Democrats when it comes to gun control.
937   Patrick   2023 Feb 13, 7:53pm  

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2023/02/13/the-new-york-times-has-an-embarrassing-epiphany-about-gun-free-zones-n1670169


We’ve all seen signs announcing a particular place is a “gun-free zone.” While these signs are supposed to reduce gun violence by informing would-be shooters that their firearms aren’t welcome on the site, the reality is that they are instead beacons alerting criminals to soft targets.

And it looks like the New York Times may have finally figured that out. After a murder took place in Times Square on Thursday night, the paper openly questioned why posted signs banning guns from the area didn’t stop the violence. “The shooting was the first since the creation of the expansive, signposted zone, the police said in a statement, and it immediately renewed questions about whether such a designation can truly protect the area,” the so-called paper of record reported.
938   fdhfoiehfeoi   2023 Feb 14, 10:37am  

That poem needs to be on the front page of something, fucking AWESOME!!
939   HeadSet   2023 Feb 14, 11:48am  

NuttBoxer says

That poem needs to be on the front page of something, fucking AWESOME!!

The government is not "scared of you" any more than the Mafia is scared of its victims. Both the government and the Mafia know they are seriously outnumbered by their victims, but both know the sheep will never rise up. As long as the sheep are not starving, there are no revolutions.

Case in point - the 2020 vote steal and the Jan 6th protests about that blatant theft. None of the judges that sentenced trespassers to long jail terms are worried about any repercussions. And the cop who shot Ashley Babbit has no fear of any retribution.
940   fdhfoiehfeoi   2023 Feb 14, 4:49pm  

HeadSet says

but both know the sheep will never rise up.


Literally proven wrong by every revolution in history.
944   RWSGFY   2023 Feb 20, 9:49am  

NuttBoxer says


HeadSet says


but both know the sheep will never rise up.


Literally proven wrong by every revolution in history.



Nah, these were all CIA-instigated colour coups. And French-instigated coups before there was CIA.
945   Patrick   2023 Feb 20, 10:35pm  

https://jpfo.org/articles-2023/99-percent-solution-stop-mass-murder.htm


Mass-murderers told us what frightens them. They are not afraid to die but they are deeply afraid to fail. We don’t have to stop every mass-murderer but we have to put every attempted mass-murder in doubt. The great news is that we’ve already done that.

It isn’t obvious yet, but we are closing the chapter on the brief history of mass-murders in the United States.

We stopped them. Ordinary people like you and I stopped mass-murderers. We learned to attack the murderer if he attacks us in a bar where we are disarmed. We learned to shoot the attacker if we are armed. We found out that shooting back works really well.

Where we are allowed to go armed, ordinary armed civilians stopped attempted mass-murderers over 104 times since 2004. An armed citizen isn’t there at every attempted mass-murder. If he is there, the armed citizen doesn’t choose to intervene every time. In the last few years we were effective at stopping mass-murderers 94-percent of the time when we tried. We stopped more than half of the attempted mass-murders where we were allowed to go armed.

This wasn’t the mass-murder they planned. Mass-murderers run away or shoot themselves when we shoot back.

Stopping half the mass-murderers is another vitally important clue and we should pay attention to it. To us it might feel like we let half of attempted mass-murders succeed. That is because you and I don’t think like a mass-murderer. Mass-murderers already feel like they are a failure.

Mass-murderers are not willing to take the chance and get shot in the back by grandma who was carrying her handgun in her purse.
947   HeadSet   2023 Feb 24, 9:44am  

PeopleUnited says

The official nation gun of the US legislation.

We do not need a "national gun," the 2nd Amendment is sufficient. My first suspicion is that the Republican who introduced this legislation id another Linsey Graham type 5th columnist. Just as Graham talking about wanting to banning abortions before the midterm was just a play to bring out the Dem abortion voters, this appears to be a play to galvanize the anti-gun Dems.
948   SunnyvaleCA   2023 Feb 24, 1:23pm  

AmericanKulak says

rocketjoe79 says


20 Gauge is almost as effective, lighter, much easier to handle the recoil, especially for females.

Agreed. 20 Ga. is the sweet spot and easier on everybody's shoulders after a while.

With a 12 gauge, you can choose "low recoil" ammunition and/or lighter loads, which will deliver similar firepower and similar recoil compared to 20 gauge.

However, there are some advantages of the 12 gauge. There is a much wider range of ammunition available and it's also sometimes cheaper. You have the option of using more powerful rounds if you want to. If you're looking for the firepower of a 2 3/4 inch 20 gauge, you'll only need a 2 inch round in your 12 gauge, which means you can fit more in the tubular magazine.
950   Patrick   2023 Feb 26, 9:28am  

https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/friday-funnies-drug-cartels


True story: When traveling through the EU, Canada and UK, I have had many people from these various countries explain to me that what allowed the extreme lockdowns and vaccine mandates to happen (more so than what happened in most states in the USA) was that their country did not have a second amendment.
954   RayAmerica   2023 Feb 27, 10:04am  

Activist David Hogg: Americans ‘Have No Right to a Gun’

https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2023/02/26/activist-david-hogg-americans-no-right-gun/

“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

Hogg argues that the 2nd. Amendment only applies to the 'militia,' which he defines as the National Guard of the individual states. He misses the clear language that grants the right TO the PEOPLE.

ALL totalitarian governments, throughout modern history, have removed guns from their people, which they went on to enslave.
955   Patrick   2023 Feb 28, 7:53pm  


Wall Street Silver
@WallStreetSilv
The M134 Mini Gun ...
There’s 5 rounds in between tracers.🔥🔥🔥

A little duct tape and WD-40 will have her running good as new.




More:

https://notthebee.com/article/this-video-of-a-mini-gun-absolutely-trashing-an-suv-is-going-viral-so-i-rounded-up-a-bunch-of-other-mini-gun-videos-because-i-love-you
956   ForcedTQ   2023 Feb 28, 8:30pm  

RayAmerica says


Activist David Hogg: Americans ‘Have No Right to a Gun’

https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2023/02/26/activist-david-hogg-americans-no-right-gun/

“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

Hogg argues that the 2nd. Amendment only applies to the 'militia,' which he defines as the National Guard of the individual states. He misses the clear language that grants the right TO the PEOPLE.

ALL totalitarian governments, throughout modern history, have removed guns from their people, which they went on to enslave.

More important that Hogg completely misses is that these rights are Natural rights, they are not given by the constitution and the amendments. The amendment texts are purely instructional as to what the government must not do or what it must abide by. The conduct of the government is up to the States and ultimately the People to police….

« First        Comments 918 - 957 of 1,399       Last »     Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions   gaiste