WE THE PEOPLE

[njhoneybadger]

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, INSURE DOMESTIC TRANQUILITY,PROVIDE for the COMMON DEFENCE, PROMOTE the GENERAL WELFARE and SECURE the BLESSINGS OF LIBERTY TO OURSELVES AND OUR POSTERITY,do ordain and establish this this Constitution for the United States of America


The intellectually dishonest interpretation of the second amendment has become a major threat to the rights of we the people as laid out in the preamble of the Constitution!

[Marengo]

1. Which interpretation is dishonest?

[Hoyt]

2. Yours and other gunners. You guys fail to acknowledge the first 13 words in the Amendment.

Yet you go berserk if someone calls an AK-47 an AR-15.

[Marengo]

3. What was the original intent?

[hack89]

7. Hilliary, Bernie and Obama agree with us, however.

Last edited Mon Feb 19, 2018, 05:50 PM - Edit history (1)

they have all explicitly said that the 2A protects an individual right. I am comfortable standing with them on the issue.

[Hoyt]

13. More gunner BS. Read Stevens' dissent in Heller. I get, when it comes to guns, you guys support

right wing Justices, but that is not the intent or proper interpretation of the 2nd Amendment.

JUSTICE STEVENS, with whom
JUSTICE SOUTER,
JUSTICE
GINSBURG, and
JUSTICE BREYER join, dissenting.

The question presented by this case is not whether the
Second Amendment protects a “collective right” or an
“individual right.” Surely it protects a right that can be
enforced by individuals. But a conclusion that the Second
Amendment protects an individual right does not tell us
anything about the scope of that right. . . . . .

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/07-290P.ZD

[hack89]

14. Losing arguments are still losing arguments

Looks like Obama, Hillary and Bernie knew what they were talking about.

[hack89]

15. We all know that Heller permits strict gun control.

Your problem is lack of deep public support, not legal minutiae about militias.

[Hoyt]

18. Supporting right wing Justices is still supporting right wing politicians and supporters.

[hack89]

19. Scalia supported strict gun control.

There is nothing you want short of a handgun ban that is unconstitutional according to him. Do you support Scalia's view on the 2A.

[Hoyt]

20. I support limiting your "right" to carry lethal weapons, Yes.

Glad a few gunners can recognize that even Scalia's view of Heller was pretty much the heck with gun-strokers. To make them happy, they have an "individual right" but it doesn't mean what they think it means.

[hack89]

21. Good luck with that.

I will be shooting AR-15s with my family and friends for a very long time. That it frustrates you makes it that much more satisfying.

Cheers.

[LanternWaste]

27. The argumentum ad verecundiam is a damned popular fallacy.

The argumentum ad verecundiam is a damned popular fallacy. That may be why I see it so damned consistently from particular narratives.

I can certainly understand your comfort of using the fallacy.

[hack89]

28. So there are no legal scholars that support the militia interpretation?

No voices of authority on the issue that you trust and turn to?

In case, their opinions are valid in that they demonstrate that your views are not within the political mainstream of the Democratic party. Since gun control is a purely political act, their views are extremely important.

[njhoneybadger]

4. The "Individual Right" interpretation

The Second Amendment only protects the right to bear arms within the context of well regulated militias.

[hack89]

5. Yet both Hilliary and Bernie say otherwise.

as did Obama. So it is not as straightforward as you would like to believe.

[njhoneybadger]

8. Well, they had to say that or they they would have been accused of wanting to take away

Everyone's guns.

[hack89]

9. It has been in the Democratic Party platform several times

the platform that communicates what we, as Democrats, stand for.

[njhoneybadger]

10. I don't think rewriting the 2nd Amendment is unreasonable.

[hack89]

12. Just unrealistic. Nt

[njhoneybadger]

16. Maybe someday we will have 2/3 of congress

[hack89]

17. You need 3/4 of the states

Last edited Mon Feb 19, 2018, 08:40 PM - Edit history (1)

Constutional admendments are ratified at the state level. 38 states is a lot.

[Captain Stern]

24. 38 states is even more than 33 states.

38 would be needed, not 33. 3/4 of the states would need to ratify a new amendment...not 2/3.

[hack89]

25. My bad. Nt

[Marengo]

6. Where and when has that been enforced, as on militia membership as a prerequisite for the...

Possession of firearms?

[leftstreet]

11. Most people are sick, tired and bored with the 2A debate

ugh

These are modern times.

People are ready to talk about controlling access, classifying certain weapons as military-grade, limiting the number of guns a person can own, background checks, or any number of ideas

[GulfCoast66]

22. With the exception of limiting the number owned...

Everything you list is not only constitutional but might be possible if we will control of all branches in 2020.

What gets old here on DU is members who deny current law and political reality by insisting the we should push bans. And then if someone disagree either because they support the position of the Democratic Party that gun ownership is constitutionally protected or they know supporting a gun ban is political suicide, the insults start flying.

[smirkymonkey]

23. Thank YOU!

For injecting a bit of sense into the debate.

[hunter]

26. Arguing the second amendment with gun fetishists is pointless.

They're much the same as people who fought to smoke in public -- on airplanes, in restaurants, in hospitals, in classrooms.

They're much the same as people who condoned drunk driving. Nobody brags about their prowess as a drunk driver anymore, not in mixed company anyways. I'm old enough to remember people who did. I'm old enough to remember cops gave warnings for DUI... if you were white.

Somehow the gun fetishists believe their right to pursue their disturbing hobby supersedes the rights of others who have no use for guns and don't want to live in a society where any asshole can buy as many guns as they like, including weapons that have no utilitarian purpose other than killing and maiming people.

Gun love is disgusting. The U.S.A. gun culture is disgusting.

The U.S.A. will become a much better place when gun love is socially unacceptable. That doesn't have to happen from the top down, it can begin within families and communities.

The government may not be able to separate fools from their guns yet, but family and friends can apply the pressure that will make it so, and eventually our law will reflect that.

Guns are a serious health issue in the U.S.A. because any fool can buy or steal them.