Another Second Amendment Special Operation Shooting at Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas

IT HAS JUST BEEN CONFIRMED THAT 14 CHILDREN AND ONE TEACHER ARE DEAD.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

The 2nd Amendment adopted in 1791
"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."

No definition of the type of arms (weapons).
No age restrictions for people.
No training requirements.
No safety requirements.
No licenses.
No background checks.
No mental health requirements.
No red flags.
If any of these things are made laws would they be violations of the 2nd Amendment ?
Infringed: Actively break the terms of a law or agreement.

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@softspokenman You do understand English, correct?

"well regulated" has a definition.

A militia has a definition.

Neither is random idiot with a gun.

And you are right. It doesn't state weapon types. So they could give you pointy sticks and your rights have not been infringed.

And of course we should do everything like it is the 1790s and kill our political leaders because blood letting would still be valid.

The constitution is just a legal document, not a sacred text from a god. It was written by a bunch of rich white dudes.

Idolizing that is makes about as much sense as believing Elon Musk is divinely inspired.

Vin53 · M

What exactly is your definition of "well-regulated"?

@softspokenman

softspokenman · M

@Vin53 More important is what was the definition of the framers who wrote the words "well-regulated" at the time.

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@softspokenman Actually it is very well documented and it has fuck all to do with what the current accepted definition is. The SCOTUS for political reasons pretends it is unclear so they can "interpret" it like a bible passage. It is all political theatre. None of it is in compliance with the letter or the spirit of what it was intended for.

softspokenman · M

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow I think that any reply to you would result in more personal insults and accusations by you so I wont.

Vin53 · M

Who's insulting and accusing you?

@softspokenman

softspokenman · M

@Vin53 I didn't think that you were otherwise your name would have been included on my reply to "POABT".

Vin53 · M

Heh, I must have that person blocked. Carry on friend.

@softspokenman

Graylight · 51-55, F

@softspokenman And yet...

We have age restrictions on firearms sales.
We require training in order to carry certain guns or in certain manners.
There are hundreds of safety regulations for the ownership and use of a firearm.
Permits are required in many US states. Permits are restrictive and temporary in nature whereas licenses are permanent. Permits require occasional inspection and safety regulations.

We have no unalienable rights. No right is absolutely guaranteed and the Constitution may and has been changed at the will of the people.

softspokenman · M

@Graylight Bipartisan meeting to discuss gun violence legislation will be interesting to see their decision.

Graylight · 51-55, F

@softspokenman So interesting. Unfortunately, the best we can hope for is a 2-year age differential in buying firearms and maybe some background check laws, which are utterly toothless. It's all either side is pushing for .

softspokenman · M

@Graylight Maybe it's time for the 'At the will of the people' again?

Graylight · 51-55, F

@softspokenman I thought it always was. It's certainly time to make it that way again. Peacefully.

softspokenman · M

@Graylight 👍 Yes. We don't need any more violence.