Does the right to bear arms extend to all Americans or only "A well regulated militia?"
36-40, M
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Budwick · 70-79, M
The right of citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as a safeguard of the liberties of a republic, since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers and will generally, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.
So there is clearly intended more than simple defense of your home, though it does include defense of yourself.
It's for personal defense and it's for citizens defending the republic, the freedom of the republic against oppression, including political oppression.
So there is clearly intended more than simple defense of your home, though it does include defense of yourself.
It's for personal defense and it's for citizens defending the republic, the freedom of the republic against oppression, including political oppression.
1-25 of 35
SW-User
@Budwick and does that mean no limits? again i am asking a supporter of 2nd amendment are there limits you support?
Budwick · 70-79, M
@SW-User Good liberal come back!
Draw lines in the sand - throw monkey wrenches!
I think we can cross nuclear weapons off the list of needed weaponry. And , it's been illegal for individuals to own automatic weapons since the 1930s.
So sure, we can draw lines, but the line is quite far away from no weapons at all.
Draw lines in the sand - throw monkey wrenches!
I think we can cross nuclear weapons off the list of needed weaponry. And , it's been illegal for individuals to own automatic weapons since the 1930s.
So sure, we can draw lines, but the line is quite far away from no weapons at all.
SW-User
@Budwick well, the original use of militia, at Lexington and Concord was against political oppression. But once the former oppressees gain power, the militia is used to suppress the Whiskey Rebellion and the Confederate Rebellion, not to mention at Jackson and Kent State and so forth, making a full circle as the militia became a tool of oppression.
SW-User
@Budwick as a good liberal i have not said no guns at all, but yes i do think there needs to be lines. i do not think discussing limitations is unreasonable, and there are some gun rights people who are opposed to the automatic weapons limitations.
Budwick · 70-79, M
@SW-User Interesting - Good thing the people remained armed so as to not be over run by the newly formed enemy!
Budwick · 70-79, M
@SW-User Well, then I guess you must be well satisfied.
Weapons are still legal.
Limitations are always being discussed.
Consider becoming conservative - your current team would like to change the terrain completely!
Weapons are still legal.
Limitations are always being discussed.
Consider becoming conservative - your current team would like to change the terrain completely!
SW-User
@Budwick not a chance but thanks for the invite. I am a very fine thinking liberal.
but i do think things like better back ground checks, limits on magazines make a lot of sense.
i do agree the 2nd amendment gives gun rights, therefore discussing sensible constitutional limits makes a lot of sense.
and we do h ave a crisis of gun deaths in this country.
but i do think things like better back ground checks, limits on magazines make a lot of sense.
i do agree the 2nd amendment gives gun rights, therefore discussing sensible constitutional limits makes a lot of sense.
and we do h ave a crisis of gun deaths in this country.
SW-User
@Budwick it's an absurd situation, it would be funny if people weren't dying. Where is Peter Sellers when you need him?
Budwick · 70-79, M
@SW-User
Your comment is at odds with itself!
2nd amendment says with infringement.
And the first thing you want to impose is limitations.
Yeah, everything the left moans about is a crisis.
The 'crisis' is the crazy people walking free 'in the wild'.
Most if not all of the mass shooters had red flags all over the place and liberal laws protecting their privacy ended costing peoples lives.
i do agree the 2nd amendment gives gun rights, therefore discussing sensible constitutional limits makes a lot of sense.
and we do h ave a crisis of gun deaths in this country.
and we do h ave a crisis of gun deaths in this country.
Your comment is at odds with itself!
2nd amendment says with infringement.
And the first thing you want to impose is limitations.
Yeah, everything the left moans about is a crisis.
The 'crisis' is the crazy people walking free 'in the wild'.
Most if not all of the mass shooters had red flags all over the place and liberal laws protecting their privacy ended costing peoples lives.
Budwick · 70-79, M
@SW-User I don't get it.
SW-User
@Budwick there are limitations on all rights
Budwick · 70-79, M
@SW-User
I think we can cross nuclear weapons off the list of needed weaponry. And , it's been illegal for individuals to own automatic weapons since the 1930s.
So sure, we can draw lines, but the line is quite far away from no weapons at all.
So sure, we can draw lines, but the line is quite far away from no weapons at all.
SW-User
@Budwick i think a bit more would be good
Budwick · 70-79, M
@SW-User Thanks for being vague - it's makes open discussion so much easier!
SW-User
@Budwick yow nasty
so much more thorough back ground checks, including gun shows, etc, red flag laws, limit magazine size, maintain bumpstock ban,
so much more thorough back ground checks, including gun shows, etc, red flag laws, limit magazine size, maintain bumpstock ban,
SW-User
@SW-User just ban the things from everyday public use and possession
Budwick · 70-79, M
@SW-User Thank you!
Background Checks ✔️
Including Gun Shows ✔️
Red Flag Laws - Maybe - seems to have different meanings to different people. If it means getting crazy people out of circulation - I'm in.
Magazine size - let's talk. What for?
Bumpstock already outlawed. Wanna put it on double secret probation? We could also make murder extra illegal!
Background Checks ✔️
Including Gun Shows ✔️
Red Flag Laws - Maybe - seems to have different meanings to different people. If it means getting crazy people out of circulation - I'm in.
Magazine size - let's talk. What for?
Bumpstock already outlawed. Wanna put it on double secret probation? We could also make murder extra illegal!
SW-User
@Budwick i said keep bumpstock illegal,
if i had feelings im sure ur sarcasm would make me cry inside hahaha
so mag size because it seems bigger mags mean more potential of killing more.
if i had feelings im sure ur sarcasm would make me cry inside hahaha
so mag size because it seems bigger mags mean more potential of killing more.
Budwick · 70-79, M
@SW-User Who is talking about making bump stocks legal?
It's a non-issue as far as I know.
Larger magazines means less frequent reloading.
Leaving crazy people loose in society means more potential killing.
It's a non-issue as far as I know.
it seems bigger mags mean more potential of killing more.
Larger magazines means less frequent reloading.
Leaving crazy people loose in society means more potential killing.
SW-User
@Budwick agreed on crazy people, but less reloading also means more chance to kill more quickly
1-25 of 35