In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
quote:unless you are in this class of peopleIndividualism singles out no 'groups', 'categories', 'special classes', or segments of the citizenry for differential treatment.
What is that other, opposing ethic which operates in that manner and which does that, you know, the one that is directly responsible for the erosion of our Constitution, liberties and republic.........
quote:Originally posted by sharpshooter039
quote:Actually you are wrong in your interpretation. ARMS are all inclusive thus ALL ARMS are protected. Are fireARMS not ARMS??? Thus they are included and therefore they are specifically protected my the Second Amendment
so you believe everyone in America should have their own Nuke down in the basement, they are only arms also and it has been proven high school kids can build one,,its happened already. So to keep you from having to be inconveniced the entire country has to be put at risk ? There is nothing in Federal law to keep you from owning almost any firearm you wish,,even class 3,,
quote:Secondly, you obviously know very little about the 'law'. The point Jeff was making is that is already unlawful to assault or murder people so why is there a need to infringe on our rights to try and restrict our access to weapons?? Simple put, there are MANY more good people than bad, so if we all have access to weapons and we exercise this right the bad guys do not have a chance!!!!
I bet I know more about LAW than most on here,,I mean whats on the books ,,not what you wish it to be,,but with that said,,how would a law that refuses the legal purchase of a firearm to a Felon or Mental patient restrict your access to a firearm unless you are in this class of people,
Actually I do not think the RIGHT to own anything you want is the intent of the 2nd Amendment. I have had very lengthy discussions here reference my beliefs and have been called everything but a nice person for disagreeing with the strict constructionists here[}:)].
Secondly, I doubt that you know more about the law than I. I have been in the 'system' for 35+ years in three states. I believe 95+% of the federal, state, and local laws on the books restricting the RTKABA's are unconstitutional.[:)]
quote:Originally posted by sharpshooter039
quote:categorically stated that 'gun-laws' are unconstitutional and I reject them. I coupled that with a detailed description of a 'bad-act', which is what punishment must be geared to.
But what gives you the right to demand punishment,,if they have broken no laws,,you keep going back and contradicting yourself,,We are going to punish a felon or nut case or whomever for buying a gun but there is no laws to keep him from buying it,,,You cant have it both ways,,Either there are no laws and every nut in the world can buy whatever they want and do as they please with no recourse,or you have laws to stop them from it and if they break that law they can be punished,,,your entire arguement is false and you keep talking in circles. The only way you can defend it is to attack the other person,,Most people who stoop down to that level knows their argument will not hold water and its the only recourse they have
you fail to grasp that the act is punishable regardless of the medium used to commit it. Are you advocating for control, regulation, and registration of nail guns? Rope? Knives? If not, why are you singling out firearms? Wait, I know, it's because you're ascared of them!
Some will die in hot pursuit
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by sharpshooter039
quote:Actually you are wrong in your interpretation. ARMS are all inclusive thus ALL ARMS are protected. Are fireARMS not ARMS??? Thus they are included and therefore they are specifically protected my the Second Amendment
so you believe everyone in America should have their own Nuke down in the basement, they are only arms also and it has been proven high school kids can build one,,its happened already. So to keep you from having to be inconveniced the entire country has to be put at risk ? There is nothing in Federal law to keep you from owning almost any firearm you wish,,even class 3,,
quote:Secondly, you obviously know very little about the 'law'. The point Jeff was making is that is already unlawful to assault or murder people so why is there a need to infringe on our rights to try and restrict our access to weapons?? Simple put, there are MANY more good people than bad, so if we all have access to weapons and we exercise this right the bad guys do not have a chance!!!!
I bet I know more about LAW than most on here,,I mean whats on the books ,,not what you wish it to be,,but with that said,,how would a law that refuses the legal purchase of a firearm to a Felon or Mental patient restrict your access to a firearm unless you are in this class of people,
Actually I do not think the RIGHT to own anything you want is the intent of the 2nd Amendment. I have had very lengthy discussions here reference my beliefs and have been called everything but a nice person for disagreeing with the strict constructionists here[}:)].
Secondly, I doubt that you know more about the law than I. I have been in the 'system' for 35+ years in three states. I believe 95+% of the federal, state, and local laws on the books restricting the RTKABA's are unconstitutional.[:)]
Ok, please tell me which arms are restricted by amendment 2.
Some will die in hot pursuit
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
quote:Originally posted by sharpshooter039
quote:Actually you are wrong in your interpretation. ARMS are all inclusive thus ALL ARMS are protected. Are fireARMS not ARMS??? Thus they are included and therefore they are specifically protected my the Second Amendment
so you believe everyone in America should have their own Nuke down in the basement, they are only arms also and it has been proven high school kids can build one,,its happened already. So to keep you from having to be inconveniced the entire country has to be put at risk ? There is nothing in Federal law to keep you from owning almost any firearm you wish,,even class 3,,
quote:Secondly, you obviously know very little about the 'law'. The point Jeff was making is that is already unlawful to assault or murder people so why is there a need to infringe on our rights to try and restrict our access to weapons?? Simple put, there are MANY more good people than bad, so if we all have access to weapons and we exercise this right the bad guys do not have a chance!!!!
I bet I know more about LAW than most on here,,I mean whats on the books ,,not what you wish it to be,,but with that said,,how would a law that refuses the legal purchase of a firearm to a Felon or Mental patient restrict your access to a firearm unless you are in this class of people,
wow. the depth and breadth of subjects which you have limited to no knowledge is amazing. High school kids building nuclear weapons. That's quite comical.
Some will die in hot pursuit
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by sharpshooter039
quote:Actually you are wrong in your interpretation. ARMS are all inclusive thus ALL ARMS are protected. Are fireARMS not ARMS??? Thus they are included and therefore they are specifically protected my the Second Amendment
so you believe everyone in America should have their own Nuke down in the basement, they are only arms also and it has been proven high school kids can build one,,its happened already. So to keep you from having to be inconveniced the entire country has to be put at risk ? There is nothing in Federal law to keep you from owning almost any firearm you wish,,even class 3,,
quote:Secondly, you obviously know very little about the 'law'. The point Jeff was making is that is already unlawful to assault or murder people so why is there a need to infringe on our rights to try and restrict our access to weapons?? Simple put, there are MANY more good people than bad, so if we all have access to weapons and we exercise this right the bad guys do not have a chance!!!!
I bet I know more about LAW than most on here,,I mean whats on the books ,,not what you wish it to be,,but with that said,,how would a law that refuses the legal purchase of a firearm to a Felon or Mental patient restrict your access to a firearm unless you are in this class of people,
Actually I do not think the RIGHT to own anything you want is the intent of the 2nd Amendment. I have had very lengthy discussions here reference my beliefs and have been called everything but a nice person for disagreeing with the strict constructionists here[}:)].
Secondly, I doubt that you know more about the law than I. I have been in the 'system' for 35+ years in three states. I believe 95+% of the federal, state, and local laws on the books restricting the RTKABA's are unconstitutional.[:)]
Ok, please tell me which arms are restricted by amendment 2.
The first ten amendment's are 'individual' rights. BUT they are not absolute, they must be 'managed'!
As I have stated MANY times before here (use the search app) I believe the founders would be in aw if they were alive today and would not agree with the 'citizens' having 'nukes' (as you put it).
I believe the 'individual' right should be to own and use 'individual' weapons with out any restriction. If the individual soldier is issued the weapon the citizen should have access to it as well. Crew served weapons should be restricted to 'groups' as shooting clubs and other organization who will except responsibility to maintain and secure them properly.
Large weapons 'systems', MBT's, artillery, fighter aircraft and etc. should be restricted to government only.
And this really upsets the strict constructionist here. But you ask.
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by sharpshooter039
quote:First, Amendment II is textually a prohibition on government from infringing on a citizens RKBA
you are 100% correct in the law but 100% wrong in your interpertation,,it says the right to keep and bear arms,,it does not say the right to keep and bear firearms,,I know you hate courts but this is one of those little pesky things that has already been determend in one. An arm could be a sword, A knife ,or evn black powder,,it was considered ARMS all the way back to the Knights on horses carrying long sticks,,Nothing in the 2nd gives you the right to own any FIREARM you chose
quote:Second, people can refuse to sell to anyone if they so chose, whether a vending machine owner/operator, a gun show seller or any other person wishing to make a sale.
You again are 100% right,,there will be many gun dealers with morals and control who they sell to,,but without laws there will be many many more who just dont care and will sell to anyone,,you have them no when its illegal,,they would come out of the wood works like cockroaches if it was made legal
quote:Third, if a person commits a bad-act, with a firearm or without, mental case, felon, depressed, angry, coldly-deliberate or otherwise, a specific punishment or sanction for the commission of that individual bad-act must be levied against the individual committing it.
THIS IS THE BIGGEST JOKE OF ALL BECAUSE WHAT YOU HAVE JUST DESCRIBES IS A LAW you can not punish or sanction someone for breaking a law that does not exist,,you just defeated your own arguement
Actually you are wrong in your interpretation. ARMS are all inclusive thus ALL ARMS are protected. Are fireARMS not ARMS??? Thus they are included and therefore they are specifically protected my the Second Amendment!!!
Secondly, you obviously know very little about the 'law'. The point Jeff was making is that is already unlawful to assault or murder people so why is there a need to infringe on our rights to try and restrict our access to weapons?? Simple put, there are MANY more good people than bad, so if we all have access to weapons and we exercise this right the bad guys do not have a chance!!!![;)]
wow. the depth and breadth of subjects which you have limited to no knowledge is amazing. High school kids building nuclear weapons. That's quite comical.
You lost me here! I have idea what you are talking about![?]
You lost me here! I have idea what you are talking about![?]
sorry Jim, I responded to the wrong post.
Some will die in hot pursuit
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by sharpshooter039
quote:Actually you are wrong in your interpretation. ARMS are all inclusive thus ALL ARMS are protected. Are fireARMS not ARMS??? Thus they are included and therefore they are specifically protected my the Second Amendment
so you believe everyone in America should have their own Nuke down in the basement, they are only arms also and it has been proven high school kids can build one,,its happened already. So to keep you from having to be inconveniced the entire country has to be put at risk ? There is nothing in Federal law to keep you from owning almost any firearm you wish,,even class 3,,
quote:Secondly, you obviously know very little about the 'law'. The point Jeff was making is that is already unlawful to assault or murder people so why is there a need to infringe on our rights to try and restrict our access to weapons?? Simple put, there are MANY more good people than bad, so if we all have access to weapons and we exercise this right the bad guys do not have a chance!!!!
I bet I know more about LAW than most on here,,I mean whats on the books ,,not what you wish it to be,,but with that said,,how would a law that refuses the legal purchase of a firearm to a Felon or Mental patient restrict your access to a firearm unless you are in this class of people,
Actually I do not think the RIGHT to own anything you want is the intent of the 2nd Amendment. I have had very lengthy discussions here reference my beliefs and have been called everything but a nice person for disagreeing with the strict constructionists here[}:)].
Secondly, I doubt that you know more about the law than I. I have been in the 'system' for 35+ years in three states. I believe 95+% of the federal, state, and local laws on the books restricting the RTKABA's are unconstitutional.[:)]
Ok, please tell me which arms are restricted by amendment 2.
The first ten amendment's are 'individual' rights. BUT they are not absolute, they must be 'managed'!
As I have stated MANY times before here (use the search app) I believe the founders would be in aw if they were alive today and would not agree with the 'citizens' having 'nukes' (as you put it).
I believe the 'individual' right should be to own and use 'individual' weapons with out any restriction. If the individual soldier is issued the weapon the citizen should have access to it as well. Crew served weapons should be restricted to 'groups' as shooting clubs and other organization who will except responsibility to maintain and secure them properly.
Large weapons 'systems', MBT's, artillery, fighter aircraft and etc. should be restricted to government only.
And this really upsets the strict constructionist here. But you ask.
I didn't put it as "nukes" but ok. Anyway, I see your point and would respectfully ask for you to point to where any of that can be supported by what was written in amendment 2.
Some will die in hot pursuit
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
quote:Originally posted by dongizmo
It's really not that hard, if you rape, murder, burgle, bugger or assault another person, you get punished for that "bad act".
Those laws are not in question, laws restricting firearms ownership are.
Firearms restraints have never stopped a crime, in fact the opposite is is more the case.....
I want the vending machine concession at the airport....
Don
I agree what firearms laws have stopped crimes in our big cities with the most anti gun laws? Laws have never stopped a person determined to kill and maim with a firearm. They abound in Chicago ,In NY, In Boston etc.............
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by sharpshooter039
quote:Actually you are wrong in your interpretation. ARMS are all inclusive thus ALL ARMS are protected. Are fireARMS not ARMS??? Thus they are included and therefore they are specifically protected my the Second Amendment
so you believe everyone in America should have their own Nuke down in the basement, they are only arms also and it has been proven high school kids can build one,,its happened already. So to keep you from having to be inconveniced the entire country has to be put at risk ? There is nothing in Federal law to keep you from owning almost any firearm you wish,,even class 3,,
quote:Secondly, you obviously know very little about the 'law'. The point Jeff was making is that is already unlawful to assault or murder people so why is there a need to infringe on our rights to try and restrict our access to weapons?? Simple put, there are MANY more good people than bad, so if we all have access to weapons and we exercise this right the bad guys do not have a chance!!!!
I bet I know more about LAW than most on here,,I mean whats on the books ,,not what you wish it to be,,but with that said,,how would a law that refuses the legal purchase of a firearm to a Felon or Mental patient restrict your access to a firearm unless you are in this class of people,
Actually I do not think the RIGHT to own anything you want is the intent of the 2nd Amendment. I have had very lengthy discussions here reference my beliefs and have been called everything but a nice person for disagreeing with the strict constructionists here[}:)].
Secondly, I doubt that you know more about the law than I. I have been in the 'system' for 35+ years in three states. I believe 95+% of the federal, state, and local laws on the books restricting the RTKABA's are unconstitutional.[:)]
Ok, please tell me which arms are restricted by amendment 2.
The first ten amendment's are 'individual' rights. BUT they are not absolute, they must be 'managed'!
As I have stated MANY times before here (use the search app) I believe the founders would be in aw if they were alive today and would not agree with the 'citizens' having 'nukes' (as you put it).
I believe the 'individual' right should be to own and use 'individual' weapons with out any restriction. If the individual soldier is issued the weapon the citizen should have access to it as well. Crew served weapons should be restricted to 'groups' as shooting clubs and other organization who will except responsibility to maintain and secure them properly.
Large weapons 'systems', MBT's, artillery, fighter aircraft and etc. should be restricted to government only.
And this really upsets the strict constructionist here. But you ask.
I didn't put it as "nukes" but ok. Anyway, I see your point and would respectfully ask for you to point to where any of that can be supported by what was written in amendment 2.
Correct me if I am wrong, but we are discussing the interpretation of the amendment here. This is MY interpretation of the amendment. I am a realist, there for I take into consideration more than the ideology, because 'ideal/perfect' exist only in the mind of the beholder there is no such thing in the 'real' world!!!![:)]
Secondly, the amendment refers to 'militia' which are citizens in small units and thus it would make sense to arm them as you would a small military unit, ie. squad or fire team..
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by sharpshooter039
quote:Actually you are wrong in your interpretation. ARMS are all inclusive thus ALL ARMS are protected. Are fireARMS not ARMS??? Thus they are included and therefore they are specifically protected my the Second Amendment
so you believe everyone in America should have their own Nuke down in the basement, they are only arms also and it has been proven high school kids can build one,,its happened already. So to keep you from having to be inconveniced the entire country has to be put at risk ? There is nothing in Federal law to keep you from owning almost any firearm you wish,,even class 3,,
quote:Secondly, you obviously know very little about the 'law'. The point Jeff was making is that is already unlawful to assault or murder people so why is there a need to infringe on our rights to try and restrict our access to weapons?? Simple put, there are MANY more good people than bad, so if we all have access to weapons and we exercise this right the bad guys do not have a chance!!!!
I bet I know more about LAW than most on here,,I mean whats on the books ,,not what you wish it to be,,but with that said,,how would a law that refuses the legal purchase of a firearm to a Felon or Mental patient restrict your access to a firearm unless you are in this class of people,
Actually I do not think the RIGHT to own anything you want is the intent of the 2nd Amendment. I have had very lengthy discussions here reference my beliefs and have been called everything but a nice person for disagreeing with the strict constructionists here[}:)].
Secondly, I doubt that you know more about the law than I. I have been in the 'system' for 35+ years in three states. I believe 95+% of the federal, state, and local laws on the books restricting the RTKABA's are unconstitutional.[:)]
Ok, please tell me which arms are restricted by amendment 2.
The first ten amendment's are 'individual' rights. BUT they are not absolute, they must be 'managed'!
As I have stated MANY times before here (use the search app) I believe the founders would be in aw if they were alive today and would not agree with the 'citizens' having 'nukes' (as you put it).
I believe the 'individual' right should be to own and use 'individual' weapons with out any restriction. If the individual soldier is issued the weapon the citizen should have access to it as well. Crew served weapons should be restricted to 'groups' as shooting clubs and other organization who will except responsibility to maintain and secure them properly.
Large weapons 'systems', MBT's, artillery, fighter aircraft and etc. should be restricted to government only.
And this really upsets the strict constructionist here. But you ask.
I didn't put it as "nukes" but ok. Anyway, I see your point and would respectfully ask for you to point to where any of that can be supported by what was written in amendment 2.
Correct me if I am wrong, but we are discussing the interpretation of the amendment here. This is MY interpretation of the amendment. I am a realist, there for I take into consideration more than the ideology, because 'ideal/perfect' exist only in the mind of the beholder there is no such thing in the 'real' world!!!![:)]
Secondly, the amendment refers to 'militia' which are citizens in small units and thus it would make sense to arm them as you would a small military unit, ie. squad or fire team..
I'm fully aware that it's your interpretation. My point is, that it is not based on the actual text, nor is it based at all upon the framers' intentions for the amendment. Consider this:
Some will die in hot pursuit
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
It is nice to see that George Washington agrees with me!!!![8D]
Agrees with you? There appears to be a rather wide chasm between your views and his.
Some will die in hot pursuit
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
When George wrote this he meant the civilian (individual) should be armed the same as the soldier (individual). If I am not mistaken that is what I said!!![^]
Back then it was all front suffers and edged weapons! Today it is the M-4, SAW, snipers rifle, and a lot of ammo!!![;)]
Comments
What is that other, opposing ethic which operates in that manner and which does that, you know, the one that is directly responsible for the erosion of our Constitution, liberties and republic.........
Oh yeah, it is 'Collectivism'.
Collectivism inevitably leads to totalitarianism.
quote:Actually you are wrong in your interpretation. ARMS are all inclusive thus ALL ARMS are protected. Are fireARMS not ARMS??? Thus they are included and therefore they are specifically protected my the Second Amendment
so you believe everyone in America should have their own Nuke down in the basement, they are only arms also and it has been proven high school kids can build one,,its happened already. So to keep you from having to be inconveniced the entire country has to be put at risk ? There is nothing in Federal law to keep you from owning almost any firearm you wish,,even class 3,,
quote:Secondly, you obviously know very little about the 'law'. The point Jeff was making is that is already unlawful to assault or murder people so why is there a need to infringe on our rights to try and restrict our access to weapons?? Simple put, there are MANY more good people than bad, so if we all have access to weapons and we exercise this right the bad guys do not have a chance!!!!
I bet I know more about LAW than most on here,,I mean whats on the books ,,not what you wish it to be,,but with that said,,how would a law that refuses the legal purchase of a firearm to a Felon or Mental patient restrict your access to a firearm unless you are in this class of people,
Actually I do not think the RIGHT to own anything you want is the intent of the 2nd Amendment. I have had very lengthy discussions here reference my beliefs and have been called everything but a nice person for disagreeing with the strict constructionists here[}:)].
Secondly, I doubt that you know more about the law than I. I have been in the 'system' for 35+ years in three states. I believe 95+% of the federal, state, and local laws on the books restricting the RTKABA's are unconstitutional.[:)]
quote:categorically stated that 'gun-laws' are unconstitutional and I reject them. I coupled that with a detailed description of a 'bad-act', which is what punishment must be geared to.
But what gives you the right to demand punishment,,if they have broken no laws,,you keep going back and contradicting yourself,,We are going to punish a felon or nut case or whomever for buying a gun but there is no laws to keep him from buying it,,,You cant have it both ways,,Either there are no laws and every nut in the world can buy whatever they want and do as they please with no recourse,or you have laws to stop them from it and if they break that law they can be punished,,,your entire arguement is false and you keep talking in circles. The only way you can defend it is to attack the other person,,Most people who stoop down to that level knows their argument will not hold water and its the only recourse they have
you fail to grasp that the act is punishable regardless of the medium used to commit it. Are you advocating for control, regulation, and registration of nail guns? Rope? Knives? If not, why are you singling out firearms? Wait, I know, it's because you're ascared of them!
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
quote:Originally posted by sharpshooter039
quote:Actually you are wrong in your interpretation. ARMS are all inclusive thus ALL ARMS are protected. Are fireARMS not ARMS??? Thus they are included and therefore they are specifically protected my the Second Amendment
so you believe everyone in America should have their own Nuke down in the basement, they are only arms also and it has been proven high school kids can build one,,its happened already. So to keep you from having to be inconveniced the entire country has to be put at risk ? There is nothing in Federal law to keep you from owning almost any firearm you wish,,even class 3,,
quote:Secondly, you obviously know very little about the 'law'. The point Jeff was making is that is already unlawful to assault or murder people so why is there a need to infringe on our rights to try and restrict our access to weapons?? Simple put, there are MANY more good people than bad, so if we all have access to weapons and we exercise this right the bad guys do not have a chance!!!!
I bet I know more about LAW than most on here,,I mean whats on the books ,,not what you wish it to be,,but with that said,,how would a law that refuses the legal purchase of a firearm to a Felon or Mental patient restrict your access to a firearm unless you are in this class of people,
Actually I do not think the RIGHT to own anything you want is the intent of the 2nd Amendment. I have had very lengthy discussions here reference my beliefs and have been called everything but a nice person for disagreeing with the strict constructionists here[}:)].
Secondly, I doubt that you know more about the law than I. I have been in the 'system' for 35+ years in three states. I believe 95+% of the federal, state, and local laws on the books restricting the RTKABA's are unconstitutional.[:)]
Ok, please tell me which arms are restricted by amendment 2.
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
quote:Actually you are wrong in your interpretation. ARMS are all inclusive thus ALL ARMS are protected. Are fireARMS not ARMS??? Thus they are included and therefore they are specifically protected my the Second Amendment
so you believe everyone in America should have their own Nuke down in the basement, they are only arms also and it has been proven high school kids can build one,,its happened already. So to keep you from having to be inconveniced the entire country has to be put at risk ? There is nothing in Federal law to keep you from owning almost any firearm you wish,,even class 3,,
quote:Secondly, you obviously know very little about the 'law'. The point Jeff was making is that is already unlawful to assault or murder people so why is there a need to infringe on our rights to try and restrict our access to weapons?? Simple put, there are MANY more good people than bad, so if we all have access to weapons and we exercise this right the bad guys do not have a chance!!!!
I bet I know more about LAW than most on here,,I mean whats on the books ,,not what you wish it to be,,but with that said,,how would a law that refuses the legal purchase of a firearm to a Felon or Mental patient restrict your access to a firearm unless you are in this class of people,
wow. the depth and breadth of subjects which you have limited to no knowledge is amazing. High school kids building nuclear weapons. That's quite comical.
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by sharpshooter039
quote:Actually you are wrong in your interpretation. ARMS are all inclusive thus ALL ARMS are protected. Are fireARMS not ARMS??? Thus they are included and therefore they are specifically protected my the Second Amendment
so you believe everyone in America should have their own Nuke down in the basement, they are only arms also and it has been proven high school kids can build one,,its happened already. So to keep you from having to be inconveniced the entire country has to be put at risk ? There is nothing in Federal law to keep you from owning almost any firearm you wish,,even class 3,,
quote:Secondly, you obviously know very little about the 'law'. The point Jeff was making is that is already unlawful to assault or murder people so why is there a need to infringe on our rights to try and restrict our access to weapons?? Simple put, there are MANY more good people than bad, so if we all have access to weapons and we exercise this right the bad guys do not have a chance!!!!
I bet I know more about LAW than most on here,,I mean whats on the books ,,not what you wish it to be,,but with that said,,how would a law that refuses the legal purchase of a firearm to a Felon or Mental patient restrict your access to a firearm unless you are in this class of people,
Actually I do not think the RIGHT to own anything you want is the intent of the 2nd Amendment. I have had very lengthy discussions here reference my beliefs and have been called everything but a nice person for disagreeing with the strict constructionists here[}:)].
Secondly, I doubt that you know more about the law than I. I have been in the 'system' for 35+ years in three states. I believe 95+% of the federal, state, and local laws on the books restricting the RTKABA's are unconstitutional.[:)]
Ok, please tell me which arms are restricted by amendment 2.
The first ten amendment's are 'individual' rights. BUT they are not absolute, they must be 'managed'!
As I have stated MANY times before here (use the search app) I believe the founders would be in aw if they were alive today and would not agree with the 'citizens' having 'nukes' (as you put it).
I believe the 'individual' right should be to own and use 'individual' weapons with out any restriction. If the individual soldier is issued the weapon the citizen should have access to it as well. Crew served weapons should be restricted to 'groups' as shooting clubs and other organization who will except responsibility to maintain and secure them properly.
Large weapons 'systems', MBT's, artillery, fighter aircraft and etc. should be restricted to government only.
And this really upsets the strict constructionist here. But you ask.
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by sharpshooter039
quote:First, Amendment II is textually a prohibition on government from infringing on a citizens RKBA
you are 100% correct in the law but 100% wrong in your interpertation,,it says the right to keep and bear arms,,it does not say the right to keep and bear firearms,,I know you hate courts but this is one of those little pesky things that has already been determend in one. An arm could be a sword, A knife ,or evn black powder,,it was considered ARMS all the way back to the Knights on horses carrying long sticks,,Nothing in the 2nd gives you the right to own any FIREARM you chose
quote:Second, people can refuse to sell to anyone if they so chose, whether a vending machine owner/operator, a gun show seller or any other person wishing to make a sale.
You again are 100% right,,there will be many gun dealers with morals and control who they sell to,,but without laws there will be many many more who just dont care and will sell to anyone,,you have them no when its illegal,,they would come out of the wood works like cockroaches if it was made legal
quote:Third, if a person commits a bad-act, with a firearm or without, mental case, felon, depressed, angry, coldly-deliberate or otherwise, a specific punishment or sanction for the commission of that individual bad-act must be levied against the individual committing it.
THIS IS THE BIGGEST JOKE OF ALL BECAUSE WHAT YOU HAVE JUST DESCRIBES IS A LAW you can not punish or sanction someone for breaking a law that does not exist,,you just defeated your own arguement
Actually you are wrong in your interpretation. ARMS are all inclusive thus ALL ARMS are protected. Are fireARMS not ARMS??? Thus they are included and therefore they are specifically protected my the Second Amendment!!!
Secondly, you obviously know very little about the 'law'. The point Jeff was making is that is already unlawful to assault or murder people so why is there a need to infringe on our rights to try and restrict our access to weapons?? Simple put, there are MANY more good people than bad, so if we all have access to weapons and we exercise this right the bad guys do not have a chance!!!![;)]
wow. the depth and breadth of subjects which you have limited to no knowledge is amazing. High school kids building nuclear weapons. That's quite comical.
You lost me here! I have idea what you are talking about![?]
You lost me here! I have idea what you are talking about![?]
sorry Jim, I responded to the wrong post.
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by sharpshooter039
quote:Actually you are wrong in your interpretation. ARMS are all inclusive thus ALL ARMS are protected. Are fireARMS not ARMS??? Thus they are included and therefore they are specifically protected my the Second Amendment
so you believe everyone in America should have their own Nuke down in the basement, they are only arms also and it has been proven high school kids can build one,,its happened already. So to keep you from having to be inconveniced the entire country has to be put at risk ? There is nothing in Federal law to keep you from owning almost any firearm you wish,,even class 3,,
quote:Secondly, you obviously know very little about the 'law'. The point Jeff was making is that is already unlawful to assault or murder people so why is there a need to infringe on our rights to try and restrict our access to weapons?? Simple put, there are MANY more good people than bad, so if we all have access to weapons and we exercise this right the bad guys do not have a chance!!!!
I bet I know more about LAW than most on here,,I mean whats on the books ,,not what you wish it to be,,but with that said,,how would a law that refuses the legal purchase of a firearm to a Felon or Mental patient restrict your access to a firearm unless you are in this class of people,
Actually I do not think the RIGHT to own anything you want is the intent of the 2nd Amendment. I have had very lengthy discussions here reference my beliefs and have been called everything but a nice person for disagreeing with the strict constructionists here[}:)].
Secondly, I doubt that you know more about the law than I. I have been in the 'system' for 35+ years in three states. I believe 95+% of the federal, state, and local laws on the books restricting the RTKABA's are unconstitutional.[:)]
Ok, please tell me which arms are restricted by amendment 2.
The first ten amendment's are 'individual' rights. BUT they are not absolute, they must be 'managed'!
As I have stated MANY times before here (use the search app) I believe the founders would be in aw if they were alive today and would not agree with the 'citizens' having 'nukes' (as you put it).
I believe the 'individual' right should be to own and use 'individual' weapons with out any restriction. If the individual soldier is issued the weapon the citizen should have access to it as well. Crew served weapons should be restricted to 'groups' as shooting clubs and other organization who will except responsibility to maintain and secure them properly.
Large weapons 'systems', MBT's, artillery, fighter aircraft and etc. should be restricted to government only.
And this really upsets the strict constructionist here. But you ask.
I didn't put it as "nukes" but ok. Anyway, I see your point and would respectfully ask for you to point to where any of that can be supported by what was written in amendment 2.
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
It's really not that hard, if you rape, murder, burgle, bugger or assault another person, you get punished for that "bad act".
Those laws are not in question, laws restricting firearms ownership are.
Firearms restraints have never stopped a crime, in fact the opposite is is more the case.....
I want the vending machine concession at the airport....
Don
I agree what firearms laws have stopped crimes in our big cities with the most anti gun laws? Laws have never stopped a person determined to kill and maim with a firearm. They abound in Chicago ,In NY, In Boston etc.............
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by sharpshooter039
quote:Actually you are wrong in your interpretation. ARMS are all inclusive thus ALL ARMS are protected. Are fireARMS not ARMS??? Thus they are included and therefore they are specifically protected my the Second Amendment
so you believe everyone in America should have their own Nuke down in the basement, they are only arms also and it has been proven high school kids can build one,,its happened already. So to keep you from having to be inconveniced the entire country has to be put at risk ? There is nothing in Federal law to keep you from owning almost any firearm you wish,,even class 3,,
quote:Secondly, you obviously know very little about the 'law'. The point Jeff was making is that is already unlawful to assault or murder people so why is there a need to infringe on our rights to try and restrict our access to weapons?? Simple put, there are MANY more good people than bad, so if we all have access to weapons and we exercise this right the bad guys do not have a chance!!!!
I bet I know more about LAW than most on here,,I mean whats on the books ,,not what you wish it to be,,but with that said,,how would a law that refuses the legal purchase of a firearm to a Felon or Mental patient restrict your access to a firearm unless you are in this class of people,
Actually I do not think the RIGHT to own anything you want is the intent of the 2nd Amendment. I have had very lengthy discussions here reference my beliefs and have been called everything but a nice person for disagreeing with the strict constructionists here[}:)].
Secondly, I doubt that you know more about the law than I. I have been in the 'system' for 35+ years in three states. I believe 95+% of the federal, state, and local laws on the books restricting the RTKABA's are unconstitutional.[:)]
Ok, please tell me which arms are restricted by amendment 2.
The first ten amendment's are 'individual' rights. BUT they are not absolute, they must be 'managed'!
As I have stated MANY times before here (use the search app) I believe the founders would be in aw if they were alive today and would not agree with the 'citizens' having 'nukes' (as you put it).
I believe the 'individual' right should be to own and use 'individual' weapons with out any restriction. If the individual soldier is issued the weapon the citizen should have access to it as well. Crew served weapons should be restricted to 'groups' as shooting clubs and other organization who will except responsibility to maintain and secure them properly.
Large weapons 'systems', MBT's, artillery, fighter aircraft and etc. should be restricted to government only.
And this really upsets the strict constructionist here. But you ask.
I didn't put it as "nukes" but ok. Anyway, I see your point and would respectfully ask for you to point to where any of that can be supported by what was written in amendment 2.
Correct me if I am wrong, but we are discussing the interpretation of the amendment here. This is MY interpretation of the amendment. I am a realist, there for I take into consideration more than the ideology, because 'ideal/perfect' exist only in the mind of the beholder there is no such thing in the 'real' world!!!![:)]
Secondly, the amendment refers to 'militia' which are citizens in small units and thus it would make sense to arm them as you would a small military unit, ie. squad or fire team..
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
quote:Originally posted by Jim Rau
quote:Originally posted by sharpshooter039
quote:Actually you are wrong in your interpretation. ARMS are all inclusive thus ALL ARMS are protected. Are fireARMS not ARMS??? Thus they are included and therefore they are specifically protected my the Second Amendment
so you believe everyone in America should have their own Nuke down in the basement, they are only arms also and it has been proven high school kids can build one,,its happened already. So to keep you from having to be inconveniced the entire country has to be put at risk ? There is nothing in Federal law to keep you from owning almost any firearm you wish,,even class 3,,
quote:Secondly, you obviously know very little about the 'law'. The point Jeff was making is that is already unlawful to assault or murder people so why is there a need to infringe on our rights to try and restrict our access to weapons?? Simple put, there are MANY more good people than bad, so if we all have access to weapons and we exercise this right the bad guys do not have a chance!!!!
I bet I know more about LAW than most on here,,I mean whats on the books ,,not what you wish it to be,,but with that said,,how would a law that refuses the legal purchase of a firearm to a Felon or Mental patient restrict your access to a firearm unless you are in this class of people,
Actually I do not think the RIGHT to own anything you want is the intent of the 2nd Amendment. I have had very lengthy discussions here reference my beliefs and have been called everything but a nice person for disagreeing with the strict constructionists here[}:)].
Secondly, I doubt that you know more about the law than I. I have been in the 'system' for 35+ years in three states. I believe 95+% of the federal, state, and local laws on the books restricting the RTKABA's are unconstitutional.[:)]
Ok, please tell me which arms are restricted by amendment 2.
The first ten amendment's are 'individual' rights. BUT they are not absolute, they must be 'managed'!
As I have stated MANY times before here (use the search app) I believe the founders would be in aw if they were alive today and would not agree with the 'citizens' having 'nukes' (as you put it).
I believe the 'individual' right should be to own and use 'individual' weapons with out any restriction. If the individual soldier is issued the weapon the citizen should have access to it as well. Crew served weapons should be restricted to 'groups' as shooting clubs and other organization who will except responsibility to maintain and secure them properly.
Large weapons 'systems', MBT's, artillery, fighter aircraft and etc. should be restricted to government only.
And this really upsets the strict constructionist here. But you ask.
I didn't put it as "nukes" but ok. Anyway, I see your point and would respectfully ask for you to point to where any of that can be supported by what was written in amendment 2.
Correct me if I am wrong, but we are discussing the interpretation of the amendment here. This is MY interpretation of the amendment. I am a realist, there for I take into consideration more than the ideology, because 'ideal/perfect' exist only in the mind of the beholder there is no such thing in the 'real' world!!!![:)]
Secondly, the amendment refers to 'militia' which are citizens in small units and thus it would make sense to arm them as you would a small military unit, ie. squad or fire team..
I'm fully aware that it's your interpretation. My point is, that it is not based on the actual text, nor is it based at all upon the framers' intentions for the amendment. Consider this:
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
It is nice to see that George Washington agrees with me!!!![8D]
Agrees with you? There appears to be a rather wide chasm between your views and his.
And fiery auto crashes
Some will die in hot pursuit
While sifting through my ashes
Some will fall in love with life
And drink it from a fountain
That is pouring like an avalanche
Coming down the mountain
Back then it was all front suffers and edged weapons! Today it is the M-4, SAW, snipers rifle, and a lot of ammo!!![;)]