When is it right to avail oneself of the 2nd amendment?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

So, no sensible arguments to support it just blind faith that if it's in the constitution (whetever the interpretation one decides to use) it must serve a purpose? Brilliant

Once again, can someone please point to one post I have made in all the years I have posted on VJ where I have advocated disarming US citizens and why there is this constant argument against doing something I have never advocated?

Why would I argue a right? It is a right. I do not care if you advocated disarming me, it doesn;t matter. I aheva right to be armed, it has been settled in the highest court and there is no argument about it. I will not argue over that which is mine whether you like it or not. You do not have to like it. If you choose to disarm yourself, do so.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

English is her primary langauge. That is enough to discourage me.

Gross, no matter what you think about Palin. Peddle your hate elsewhere and keep this about your need to have lotsandlots of guns.

[Captain Oates 911]

2nd amendment to constitution in the Bill of Rights. The good news is that you do not have to agree or think it is rational, that is WHY it was included in the bill of rights.

Included because it's not rational ? It was only a few years before that that people were burning witches. The Constitution is of it's time. The ten commandments are of their time - when did you last covet an ox ? Eye for an eye as state punishment ?

If people don't move on they decay - same with constitutions. The British have a constitution and a right to bear arms. It isnt binding forever like the US one so it has been amended so that the place is pretty safe and certainly compared with the US and its tens of thousands of gun deaths.

The sameness of the US will be its downfall. Standardisation used to be its strength but now it's all just mantra to hold it in chains of its own thinking while the world moves on. When the binding together process turns into binding to a rock, it has outlived its usefulness. Same with the amendments on returning runaway slaves to their rightful owner etc

ARTICLE FOUR

Amendment to the US Constitution:

Clause 3: Fugitive Slave Clause No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.

Anyone want to say stuff like that is not outmoded ?

Edited January 14, 2011 by Alan the Red

[Captain Oates 911]

Why would I argue a right? It is a right. I do not care if you advocated disarming me, it doesn;t matter. I aheva right to be armed, it has been settled in the highest court and there is no argument about it. I will not argue over that which is mine whether you like it or not. You do not have to like it. If you choose to disarm yourself, do so.

You are wrong - your 'right' is already severely restricted - you can't travel round the states carrying your gun or get on a plane with it or a courthouse or a school etc etc and if you are involved in domestic violence or a felony or go nuts for a while etc etc etc you will lose your precious gun. Its already beset by regulations which are held contstitional and it will be subject to more. The English constitution gives the right to bear arms and is similarly eroded by regulations Yours will be too just as it is right now.

Machine guns - aren't they guns ? etc etc

The 2nd is worth NOTHING when it comes right down to it and there is nothing to stop regulations eroding it down to the UK situation while it still stands in theory ! Why does the NRA have to fight so hard if it always stands ? Why fight if all you have to do is sit back and smile and say 'we have the 2nd you cant touch my gun'

Because its not true

The NRA fights and the gun nuts fight because they are scared it wont stand in all states at all times and for all guns - you know it because its here now.

Edited January 14, 2011 by Alan the Red

[one...two...tree 2,762]

You are wrong - your 'right' is already severely restricted - you can't travel round the states carrying your gun or get on a plane with it or a courthouse or a school etc etc and if you are involved in domestic violence or a felony or go nuts for a while etc etc etc you will lose your precious gun. Its already beset by regulations which are held contstitional and it will be subject to more. The English constitution gives the right to bear arms and is similarly eroded by regulations Yours will be too just as it is right now.

Machine guns - aren't they guns ? etc etc

The 2nd is worth NOTHING when it comes right down to it and there is nothing to stop regulations eroding it down to the UK situation while it still stands in theory ! Why does the NRA have to fight so hard if it always stands ? Why fight if all you have to do is sit back and smile and say 'we have the 2nd you cant touch my gun'

Because its not true

The NRA fights and the gun nuts fight because they are scared it wont stand in all states at all times and for all guns - you know it because its here now.

Exactly. In the Heller case, Justice Scalia noted that individual states can decide when you can carry, etc. These 2nd Amendment zealots pretend that the 2nd amendment right is absolute and they have the NRA to pump that fantasy into them.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Included because it's not rational ? It was only a few years before that that people were burning witches. The Constitution is of it's time. The ten commandments are of their time - when did you last covet an ox ? Eye for an eye as state punishment ?

If people don't move on they decay - same with constitutions. The British have a constitution and a right to bear arms. It isnt binding forever like the US one so it has been amended so that the place is pretty safe and certainly compared with the US and its tens of thousands of gun deaths.

The sameness of the US will be its downfall. Standardisation used to be its strength but now it's all just mantra to hold it in chains of its own thinking while the world moves on. When the binding together process turns into binding to a rock, it has outlived its usefulness. Same with the amendments on returning runaway slaves to their rightful owner etc

ARTICLE FOUR

Amendment to the US Constitution:

Clause 3: Fugitive Slave Clause“ No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.

Anyone want to say stuff like that is not outmoded ?

Then change the constituion and stop mincing around with magazine capacity. Anyone proposing that yet?

Give me a break.

Here is the news Alan. There will be no more fed3eral gun laws passed because of this incident or any other. Those days are over. Heller and McDonald slammed the door on that. Don't like it? Too bad. There will be no more liability lawsuits against firearms manufacturers, that door was slammed also. Too bad. No more magazine capacity nonsense, flash hider nonsense, pistol nonsense. It is over and done.

I will not argue my rights. They are mine and the government can't take them. There is no procedure to repeal one of the bill of rights. Slavery was subject to being ended by an amendment, the right to bear arms is not.

You are wrong - your 'right' is already severely restricted - you can't travel round the states carrying your gun or get on a plane with it or a courthouse or a school etc etc and if you are involved in domestic violence or a felony or go nuts for a while etc etc etc you will lose your precious gun. Its already beset by regulations which are held contstitional and it will be subject to more. The English constitution gives the right to bear arms and is similarly eroded by regulations Yours will be too just as it is right now.

Machine guns - aren't they guns ? etc etc

The 2nd is worth NOTHING when it comes right down to it and there is nothing to stop regulations eroding it down to the UK situation while it still stands in theory ! Why does the NRA have to fight so hard if it always stands ? Why fight if all you have to do is sit back and smile and say 'we have the 2nd you cant touch my gun'

Because its not true

The NRA fights and the gun nuts fight because they are scared it wont stand in all states at all times and for all guns - you know it because its here now.

Deal with it.

Exactly. In the Heller case, Justice Scalia noted that individual states can decide when you can carry, etc. These 2nd Amendment zealots pretend that the 2nd amendment right is absolute and they have the NRA to pump that fantasy into them.

I can deal with it, can you? Heller was followed by McDonald. More are coming. There will be no new restrictions.

Gross, no matter what you think about Palin. Peddle your hate elsewhere and keep this about your need to have lotsandlots of guns.

It's OK to hate Palin for other reasons but not for that?

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

It's OK to hate Palin for other reasons but not for that?

This isn't about Palin. Stop being disingenuous. Believe me, I have ample cause to dislike Englishmen, but you'll never find me on here slandering them as a class.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

This isn't about Palin. Stop being disingenuous. Believe me, I have ample cause to dislike Englishmen, but you'll never find me on here slandering them as a class.

I am pro-choice.

This isn't about Palin. Stop being disingenuous. Believe me, I have ample cause to dislike Englishmen, but you'll never find me on here slandering them as a class.

It was the Englishman that started about Palin and why he hates her. I guess you missed that. Who cares?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I can deal with it, can you? Heller was followed by McDonald. More are coming. There will be no new restrictions.

You can deal the fact that your constitutional right to bear arms is not absolute? Great. We're making progress here.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

It was the Englishman that started about Palin and why he hates her. I guess you missed that. Who cares?

I did not miss that, but that is not germane to the issue that yet again you choose to slag off Anglophone women. Keep that dirt in RUB, where the rest of us are unlikely to see it. And I care because there are a whole lot of Anglophone women on here who ARE offended when time and again you choose to write such things. It's just disgusting and as vile as me saying I only want to date white men because golly, you can't trust men from other races. None of us gives a rat's ####### what you're attracted to, so keep it to yourself, especially if the way you choose to express it offends a large group of people on here.

/rant

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Believed?

Oh, I had forgotten about this nonsense.

Slim - yes believed.

My husband grew up in the Troubles. He lived all his life in Londonderry, the second largest city in the North and an IRA stronghold. When I was writing to you the other night (looking for the source you poo-poo'd) I turned around and asked my husband if he knew the name/names of the automatic weapon of choice for dissidents. Without even skipping a beat or looking up from what he was doing, he answered me "AK-47 or Armalite".

I'll also enlighten you to the fact that "ancient" dates of weapon procurement (which you also poo-poo'd) does not mean the weapons are gone. Unlike here in the US where you boys get tired of your toys and buy new ones, Irish terrorists tend to stick with (and stockpile) what they know works well.

Now, I'm just terribly sorry (not) that I can't give you a better source than the one sitting in my living room.

[Captain Oates 911]

This isn't about Palin. Stop being disingenuous. Believe me, I have ample cause to dislike Englishmen, but you'll never find me on here slandering them as a class.

Watch it - we are everywhere !

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

You can deal the fact that your constitutional right to bear arms is not absolute? Great. We're making progress here.

Yes we are. Heller, McDonald. Now the lawsuits have been filed to challenge the requirement for a citizen/resident to be 21 to buy and handgun. Three more states added concealed carry in 2010. No new Federal gun laws since 1994...yes, indeed, wonderful progress,

The NRA has a planned strategy to dismatle the existing unconstitutional laws in a very orderly manner. One decision will lead into another decision. Heller provides the basis for McDonald. I am patient and confident. 38 states have "shall issue" concealed carry. They will soon be required to extend that to 18-20 year olds. 3 states have concealed carry without a license, That is 3 times more than had it two years ago. 6 states have unconstitutional discretionary carry laws. Those are being challenged. two state do not allow concealed carry, it will be one before the end of the year...Illinois. The only of 50 states that needed the National Guard called in this year to control out-of-control crime in Chicago. I am very pleased with the progress. Compared to what it was after 1968? After Brady?

The NRA has dismantled the GCA of 1968, it was eliminated by 1986 with the Firearms Owners Protection Act. The Brady Bill is gone, the AWB is gone. State AWB bans are being challenged. Liability lawsuits against firearm manufacturers for the acts of criminals are gone. The HUD department can no longer forbid firearms ownership in HUD properties. Shall issue or unlicensed concealed carry has gone from 5 states in 1986 to 41 states now. 42 if you count Alabama that has "may issue" but issues to anyone that asks. Wisconsin will make 43 this year. I am very pleased. You? And the good news is ...crime is down!

the newest proposed magazine bans will never see the light of day in committee. You know that, right?

Edited January 14, 2011 by Gary and Alla

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

+1 for using word bunghole in an argument.

[Captain Oates 911]

Oh, I had forgotten about this nonsense.

Slim - yes believed.

My husband grew up in the Troubles. He lived all his life in Londonderry, the second largest city in the North and an IRA stronghold. When I was writing to you the other night (looking for the source you poo-poo'd) I turned around and asked my husband if he knew the name/names of the automatic weapon of choice for dissidents. Without even skipping a beat or looking up from what he was doing, he answered me "AK-47 or Armalite".

I'll also enlighten you to the fact that "ancient" dates of weapon procurement (which you also poo-poo'd) does not mean the weapons are gone. Unlike here in the US where you boys get tired of your toys and buy new ones, Irish terrorists tend to stick with (and stockpile) what they know works well.

Now, I'm just terribly sorry (not) that I can't give you a better source than the one sitting in my living room.

I used to go to Belfast twice a month and I had a British Army rifle pointed at my head from 3 feet away more than once. It can ruin ones concentration when trying to drive off on a roundabout (a circular 4 way stop ?)- but I got used to it. We had two factories - a Catholic one and a Protestant one - everyone was scared of guns at both factories. I think it's just like a big video game here and most of these guns nuts would change their mind if they got involved with a REAL killing. I bet most of em are weedy little buggers who stack shelves at Walmart on night shift and need to boost their fragile egos and stroke their powerless existence. Just like this brave shooter in Arizona who gave up as soon as someone clipped his lug hole and brought him to reality.

Most American workers have little vacation and bad conditions and can be fired easily and few rights - they must be needing to compensate for their low status by buying a BIG GUN and stroking it every night while they watch 'how to blow up a groundhog' videos. Groundhogs are about their match. Little ones anyway.