instead of repealing the 19th lets repeal the 2nd

[rdking647]

since a nate silver poll came out showing that trump would win if only men voted, #repeal the 19th has started trending on facebook among the deplorables.... lets repeal the 2nd instead......

[democrattotheend]

1. What about the 22nd?

If we repeal the 22nd Obama could run again.

[Kennah]

15. Should we release the news that it's happened and Obama is staying in? (n/t)

[RBInMaine]

2. Don't go there please. MILLIONS of Dems hunt and target shoot. Thanks.

[RAFisher]

7. Millions of people drive cars but we don't have a constitutional amendment for it

Just pointing out that repealing the second amendment would not automatically ban all guns.

[stone space]

11. Exactly! (nt)

[stone space]

3. YES! Repeal the 2nd Amendment!

[meow2u3]

8. Let's just reinterpret the 2nd Amendment as it should have been

John Paul Stephens had it right: the 2nd Amendment needs to be reworded to read "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms while serving in the militia shall not be infringed.

[stone space]

10. Scriptural reinterpretation could be a side-effect of a repeal movement.

We certainly need to move away from the current gundamentalist interpretation, that's for sure!

[hack89]

4. Let's just leave the Bill of Rights alone.

Ok?

[stone space]

9. The second amendment is about a privilege, not a right.

A repeal would make that fact clear.

[hack89]

16. So every constitutional amendment is a privilege?

Or just ones you personally don't like?

[stone space]

17. Oh, Good Lord!

So every constitutional amendment is a privilege?

[hack89]

19. So why is the 2nd a privilege?

Care to articulate a cogent argument?

[stone space]

22. That's the one about guns, not people. Guns don't have rights.

Although people with guns certainly are in a position of privilege.

[hack89]

23. It specifically mentions the people's right to keep and bear arms

Where the he'll do you get the notion that it is granting rights to guns?

[stone space]

27. Now we're going in circles. see post #7.

Repeal would help to clarify the fact that guns are not a right.

The confusion would be eliminated.

That's a good thing.

[hack89]

29. The right to keep and bear arms is a right

It is the law of the land.

[stone space]

32. We're talking about repealing that amendment.

It is the law of the land.

Quoting scripture for support is somewhat less than convincing in the context of a discussion involving the rewriting of scripture.

[hack89]

34. More like fantasizing about repealing it

In case you haven't noticed gun control is on a 20 year losing streak and is presently a smoking wreck.

[DanTex]

5. I predict the gungeon swarm coming....

[grossproffit]

6. No.

[unitedwethrive]

12. Sound good to me!!

[romanic]

13. You're not serious are you?

[catnhatnh]

14. Here's my suggestion...

it SAYS militia-let's make it militia. For the right to keep and bear arms you have to have a DD214. That does two things-first you will have had training in small arms and second your fingerprints will be on file.

[hack89]

18. Or we can keep things the way they are

Much simpler solution to a nonexistent problem.

[catnhatnh]

20. I do worry when they sell

arsenals to untrained goobers with no CURRENT police record...

[hack89]

21. So you want to identify pre-criminals

And restrict their rights?What could possibly go wrong?

That being said, nothing unconstitutional about mandating training.

[stone space]

24. Nobody is talking about restricting anybody's rights. Only gun privileges.

And restrict their rights?What could possibly go wrong?

[hack89]

26. The 2A delineates a right

Like every other amendment in the Bill of Rights.

[stone space]

30. So repeal it. What's the big deal, anyway?

We're just talking about a privilege here, not an actual right, after all.

[hack89]

31. No need.

No reason to.

[catnhatnh]

25. And as I stated it says militia

and basic training is how you enter one. The entire problem comes from thinking the second applies to every swinging Richard rather than for a military purpose that it so clearly states.

[hack89]

28. Has there ever been a time in US history

Where private ownership of guns outside of the militia was never common and legal? When was this golden age where only trained militia members owned guns? When did things change? Teach me some history.

[catnhatnh]

35. Not trying to teach you

and it was of course common when people needed to hunt or ward off predatory animals but even early on a militia was formed when Indians threatened settlements. But in modern times Indians are more likely to sue then scalp (which we taught them) and though apex predators are gaining ground i'd guess 90% need not fear them. I want reasonable regulation and believe there really was a purpose that the 4th spoke of "in their persons"-meaning every American, and the 2nd reserved to "the people" as a collective-not individual right. But my guess is we will disagree. If it helps any I have a DD214 and weapons...

[hack89]

36. But the 2A does not prevent strict gun regulation

Last edited Thu Oct 13, 2016, 10:28 AM - Edit history (1)

AWBs, registration, licenses, mandatory training, etc are all perfectly constitutional. The only explicit right you have is the right to own a hand gun in your home for self defense.

This focus on the 2A is merely a deflection from the lack of deep public support for stricter gun control beyond stronger background checks.

So the 1st Amendment is a collective right? Didn't know that.

Go reread the 4th. The part that says "the right of the people to be secure..."

[Quantess]

33. Oh yeah, like that TOTALLY could happen!!!