Conservative Hardliner News

 

CLICK HERE for MAGAGATOR.COM

 

Author Topic: Wording of the 2nd Amendment  (Read 672 times)

Online Bronx

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6604
  • Gender: Male
  • Democrat's impossible dream is to make a lie truth
Re: Wording of the 2nd Amendment
« Reply #30 on: November 19, 2020, 05:18:53 AM »
Good question, here is a court case but it involves non-violent misdemeanors where gun rights were restored. Personally, I have always been of the opinion that if a person if too violent to be trusted with a gun, why are they free to walk in society?  https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-court-guns-trump-20170525-story.html

Exactly..............!

This is not my quote thought I agree with them 100%.........I copied and pasted this from someone who was debating convicted felons and the 2nd Amendment.

"All weapon laws are unconstitutional. You should be able to carry any weapon you want regardless of your status, UNLESS you're incarcerated. All of your rights should be restored the moment you finish your time and get released from jail. If your crime is bad enough, your sentence should be longer."



« Last Edit: November 19, 2020, 05:25:31 AM by Bronx »
People sleep peacefully at night because there are a few tough men prepared to do violence on their behalf.

Bowtech Experience  70lb, QAD HDX, HHA DS 5519, 400 gr Black Eagle Carnivores, 100gr Grim Reaper, True-Fire Hardcore 4 thumb.

Offline ModelCitizen

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 31
Re: Wording of the 2nd Amendment
« Reply #31 on: November 22, 2020, 03:40:14 PM »
I have been thinking recently about the debate regarding the wording of the 2nd Amendment. While to me, and I am sure many of you on this forum, the wording is not all the unclear especially when taken in the context of the rest of the document and history that has not prevented people from debating what it means.

The main question I am asking is that if there were a way to reword the 2nd Amendment to ensure that all those who read it would know for a certainty that it protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. I would like to know if anyone else has thought about this and if they have any suggestions about what that rewording would look like. I have put the original text below as well as what I would potentially think we be a more clear and concise version of it.

Original:
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.

My Proposal:
The individual, inalienable, and natural right of all persons to keep and bear arms for whatever purpose they shall see fit shall never be denied, restricted, or limited by the government of the United States, the Several States, or any political body therein for any reason.

I think the original language is very clear that the Federal Government was not allowed to infringe on the right to keep and bear arms.

That was a power strictly left to the States, who could, Constitutionally, create restrictions on that Right.

From my understanding, the 14th Amendment, and subsequent court cases, may have taken that ability away from the States, and even they, under current interpretation, cannot infringe on that Right.

I'm not legal expert, though. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm right.

Online Owebo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • you cannot avoid the consequences of reality
Re: Wording of the 2nd Amendment
« Reply #32 on: November 22, 2020, 03:56:22 PM »
I think the original language is very clear that the Federal Government was not allowed to infringe on the right to keep and bear arms.

That was a power strictly left to the States, who could, Constitutionally, create restrictions on that Right.

From my understanding, the 14th Amendment, and subsequent court cases, may have taken that ability away from the States, and even they, under current interpretation, cannot infringe on that Right.

I'm not legal expert, though. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm right.

There is no power to be had by the states in regards to the 2A....the constitution says so, and we even created a .gov with the specific charter to defend the right....

Online Solar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 81307
  • Gender: Male
Re: Wording of the 2nd Amendment
« Reply #33 on: November 22, 2020, 05:28:06 PM »
There is no power to be had by the states in regards to the 2A....the constitution says so, and we even created a .gov with the specific charter to defend the right....
Sheriff would agree!!! :thumbsup:

https://cspoa.org/sop/
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Online Possum

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5292
  • Gender: Male
  • Keep looking, it's there
Re: Wording of the 2nd Amendment
« Reply #34 on: November 23, 2020, 04:20:16 AM »
I think the original language is very clear that the Federal Government was not allowed to infringe on the right to keep and bear arms.

That was a power strictly left to the States, who could, Constitutionally, create restrictions on that Right.

From my understanding, the 14th Amendment, and subsequent court cases, may have taken that ability away from the States, and even they, under current interpretation, cannot infringe on that Right.

I'm not legal expert, though. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm right.
It wasn't until the 14th was passed that the S.C would take up a case involving gun rights and the States. And even then they did not handle a case until 1920's. Past courts have been reluctant to take these cases on, hopefully this will change. Here's a short article  https://www.livescience.com/26252-milestones-gun-control-history.html

 

Powered by EzPortal