To bear arms in 1789-1971 meant to use weapons in service to his self and country. In the modern day this means any form of defense, as the law must be specific and the constitution enumerates only specific powers to the government. Hypothetically speaking this could cover nuclear weapons. Additionally, there's nothing stopping individual states enacting laws banning weapons (even if there is in the Supreme Court's fictional interpretation). Personally I've never seen anything wrong with people being able to own nuclear weapons. They're going to become legal for criminals eventually anyway once technology develops - why not take the liberal position now? Ultimately, I don't necessarily think people should be able to own them, but rather that there shouldn't be the mechanism for deciding what should be allowed.
Yep but in Keller vs. DC that right was extended to the individual for rights of self protection. I can't believe there are so many people that are still arguing about what the second amendment allows.... Come on people if you dont want to own a gun then don't and stop trying to keep others from doing so, if you do want to own a gun then be responsible and treat it with the utmost respect. WOW! Its rocket science....
Why do you hate that our country holds true to what is thought to be one of the most intelligently written documents of all time? One that allows its people the right to govern themselves and think for themselves? Oh wait... I just answered my own question. That document might be old, but I dare you to find one from anywhere else that offers as much insight into what is to come....
I am on your side. Guns may be used for self defense which requires that they be available. I don't think the amendment is perfect, but I do think it provides for protection from gun seizures/prohibitions. Additionally, they have no power to restrict gun ownership in the first place, and any power not delegated expressly is reserved to the states and the people. I feel this provides for the absence of constitutional authority to regulate/prohibit gun ownership.
Sorry, didn't mean to quote you on that.... I actually meant to quote the one talking about how guns were only meant for people that were part of a militia.... My bad on the quote.
it is the socialist mindset, they love to be slave just enough that it is believed that all shold be reduced to their level of being a subject AND love it. It works for me, tho
You guys need to get rid of the stupid bits. Thousands of dead every year with absolutely no gain (unless you happen to be an arms dealer).
Thousands of people die every DAY, NOT YEAR BUT DAY because of cars, but we are not closing up the car dealers... You may call it no gain, but thats because you don't live in the USA.... We like our guns, we want our guns, and we have fought and died to keep our guns unlike so many people across the world that have just laid down and let thier governments and extremeist groups run over them and take the guns and rights away... You say there is not gain, but I beg the difference. I gain freedom to keep my guns, I like not having a government that has to watch over me every waking hour to make sure I shook my peter after I went to the bathroom so as to not get a wet spot on my pants. The price of freedom is not free. In a free society the cost of freedom is giving your citizens the ability to make mistakes, but trusting them to not do so because it is the RIGHT thing to do. Is there a cost? Yes, but again freedom is NEVER FREE.
What are you trying to prove by saying the same thing over and over? Do you understand the meaning of the statement that you are posting?
The Bill is Dead, as it should be, and in part thanks to the Dems that did stand by the 2 nd Ammendment.
Yep... I'm glad to see that the dems and rep. can finally see eye to eye on something for a change. With that being said, I hate to say it but I feel it will still raise its ugly head again in another way.... Most likely hidden deep within some other legislation that they feel will HAVE to pass.
Another reason to kill the practice of Riders on any Bill, let each Bill stand on it's own merits or fail. And while we are at it reform or get rid of the Lobby system, enough of politicians doing someones business other than those that elected them.
Only gun lovers seem to have a problem becoming necessary to the security of a free State; yet, don't mind reducing social spending for the least wealthy in our republic.
There are several thousand 'mistakes' every year. Tell me, if your family got wiped out by some moron with a gun, would you be happy at it just being a mistake? By the way, who pays for the funerals?
NRA Poised to Scuttle Gun Legislation Most Americans Want Legislation to expand background checks for U.S. gun purchases, which has overwhelming public support and bipartisan backing in Congress, is at risk of being derailed by a paperwork requirement. The National Rifle Association and some Republicans in Congress are arguing that background-check data could be used to build a secret national registry of U.S. gun owners. And that, they contend, may be used by the federal government to confiscate guns. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...gislation-most-americans-want.html?cmpid=yhoo ....Strike three..........................yer out!!!!! Indofred, your side just lost.............go back to bed
Well regulated militias of the United States have recourse to a literal interpretation of our Second Amendment while persons specifically unconnected with militia service do not.
I'm not real sure what exactly you are trying to ask here.... If its would I be mad if someone killed my family then heck yea.... If your asking would I wanna ban guns heck no. It wouldn't do a bit of good and wouldn't stop an idiot.....
Colorado Sheriffs To Ignore New Gun Laws March 20, 2013 by Bob Livingston http://personalliberty.com/2013/03/20/colorado-sheriffs-to-ignore-new-gun-laws/ Two Colorado sheriffs have joined the growing ranks of sheriffs across the country who say they wont enforce any new gun control measures whether State or Federal that infringe on the 2nd Amendment. Weld County Sheriff John Cook says the laws just passed by the Colorado Legislature and waiting on Governor John Hickenloopers signature are unenforceable and would provide a false sense of security. Theyre feel-good, knee-jerk reactions that are unenforceable, he told The Tribune. One bill would expand requirements to have background checks for firearm purchases and charge a fee of $10 to legally transfer a gun. The other put a 15-round limit on magazine capacity. Like other county sheriffs, Cook said he wont bother enforcing the laws because it will be impossible for them to keep track of how the requirements are being met by gun owners. He said he and other sheriffs are considering a lawsuit against the State to block the measures if they are signed into law. El Paso County Sheriff Terry Maketa also opposes the bills. He told an angry packed crowd at a meeting on Thursday in Colorado Springs he would stand firm against the measures. Fifteen sheriffs associations, 340 sheriffs, one police chief and one deputy sheriff have stated they will not enforce any new gun laws, according to the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association. Hat tip: cnsnews.com You're still applying your own personal belief about how our country should work. Again, I'll state it for the record, there can be no laws passed, Constitutionally, that prohibit ownership of firearms. Let's us take a peek at your house....... http://irwansukmawan.hubpages.com/hub/the-crimes-tend-to-rise-in-Indonesia http://www.nationmaster.com/red/country/id-indonesia/cri-crime&all=1 According to these, your country is hardly free of crime. Especially ID theft and corruption. Hard to find gun rates since ya'll still operate with the bow and spear. Your culture is vastly different than ours. But I can see where your attitude comes from. Islam is by far the main religion in Indonesia, with 80.3 % of the population being affiliated with it. Source - Operation World. Indonesian government acknowledge 6 religions. The 6 religions are Moslem, Catholic, Protestant, Hindu, Buddhist, and KongHuCu. All of Islam extremists would like to see this country disarmed. I can see where this would be quite a blow to extremist factions. They cannot survive in the US if we had firearms. Your's is one of many exterior ideologies that would love to see this country open for the taking.
I only quote the facts as seen by Americans on an American subject; not fairy tales made up by a crappy journalist who has never visited the country he's writing about. I look at US government figures regarding the numbers of dead people caused by gun "Mistakes", not pull some utter crap from the gutter press. Big difference.
Why can we afford a War on Crime when our Founding Fathers told us what is necessary to the security of a free State.
Only our federal Congress can prescribe wellness of regulation for the militia of the United States; there is no such thing as a militia of one.
