It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Illinois Resolution Seeks Seizure of Privately Owned Weapons

page: 3
27
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:26 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

All able bodied men (and these days women) who aren't conscientious objectors be armed.

And on that note, I gotta respectfully bow out of the conversation as I'm getting all frothy at the mouth.
It's been fun...




posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

I know what a militia is, Shamrock.

Forgive me for being a little slow but I don't really get what you mean.

What was it you were replying to specifically?



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: ApparentlyStupid
a reply to: introvert

All able bodied men (and these days women) who aren't conscientious objectors be armed.

And on that note, I gotta respectfully bow out of the conversation as I'm getting all frothy at the mouth.
It's been fun...


But the constitution and the Militia Act of 1903 does not contain a clause about conscientious objectors.

Are you beginning to see the problem here?

The 2nd is so vague that it has allowed people and politicians to define it as they see fit. Just as you did.



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Maybe they are taking action to clean up the areas of Chicago that are veritable war zones, where the gangs are murdering each other on a daily basis. They need to do something to get a grip on this situation. Nothing they've tried has worked so far. Let them try this, and at least make the effort. Who knows? It might be an improvement.

This is a desperate act.......



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:31 PM
link   
This bill was introduced back in November. For all those who want to play God and enact gun control, and for those who want to play victim and cry out for nothing - rest not, for this is Cook County politics.

Nothing ever gets done, in Cook County politics.

(Unless it involves billionaire Bruce Rauhner making money)

But hey, freegames.net probably understands local politics better than someone who experiences it.



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Gun grabbers are always going to be grabbing guns.

They have no regard for the Bill of Rights.

But that is seen daily, so this is really no surprise.



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Gun grabbers are always going to be grabbing guns.

They have no regard for the Bill of Rights.

But that is seen daily, so this is really no surprise.


What guns have been "grabbed"?



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:33 PM
link   
Let me spell this for all those that think they are better than the supreme court interpretation of the second amendment.


Overview United States: Gun Ownership and the Supreme Court, from the library of congress,

On June 26, 2008, in District of Columbia v. Heller (PDF), the United States Supreme Court issued its first decision since 1939 interpreting the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Court ruled that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution confers an individual right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes such as self-defense. It also ruled that two District of Columbia provisions, one that banned handguns and one that required lawful firearms in the home to be disassembled or trigger-locked, violate this right.

The Second Amendment, one of the ten amendments to the Constitution comprising the Bill of Rights, states: “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.” The meaning of this sentence is not self-evident, and has given rise to much commentary but relatively few Supreme Court decisions.

In cases in the 19th Century, the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment does not bar state regulation of firearms. For example, in United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 553 (1875), the Court stated that the Second Amendment “has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government,” and in Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252, 265 (1886), the Court reiterated that the Second Amendment “is a limitation only upon the power of Congress and the National government, and not upon that of the States.” Although most of the rights in the Bill of Rights have been selectively incorporated (PDF) into the rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment and thus cannot be impaired by state governments, the Second Amendment has never been so incorporated. [UPDATE: In McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010), the Supreme Court addressed this issue, ruling that Second Amendment rights are applicable to states through the Fourteenth Amendment.]


www.loc.gov...


Since United States v. Miller, most federal court decisions considering the Second Amendment have interpreted it as preserving the authority of the states to maintain militias. Several of the post-Miller lower court opinions are discussed here (PDF).

The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Second Amendment this term was precipitated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit’s decision in Parker v. District of Columbia (PDF), 478 F.3d 370 (D.C. App. 2007). There, the D.C. Circuit, in a 2-1 decision, ruled that three District of Columbia laws regarding private gun ownership - namely a ban on new registration of handguns, a ban on carrying a pistol without a license, and a requirement that firearms be kept unloaded and locked - violated the Second Amendment. The court held that individuals have a right under the Second Amendment to own handguns for their own personal protection and keep them in their home without placing a trigger lock on them. This is the first decision since the Supreme Court decided Miller in which a federal court overturned a law regulating firearms based on the Second Amendment.




The supreme court interpretation and final establishment of the rights of private individuals to own guns,


In the majority opinion authored by Justice Antonin Scalia, the Court first conducted a textual analysis of the operative clause, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The Court found that this language guarantees an individual right to possess and carry weapons.


So for those that thinks they know better than the supreme court, well is going to be nothing but personal opinion.





posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting
Maybe they are taking action to clean up the areas of Chicago that are veritable war zones, where the gangs are murdering each other on a daily basis. They need to do something to get a grip on this situation. Nothing they've tried has worked so far. Let them try this, and at least make the effort. Who knows? It might be an improvement.

This is a desperate act.......


There's only one way to deal with the gang murders.

And it's definitely not any new "law".




posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting
Maybe they are taking action to clean up the areas of Chicago that are veritable war zones, where the gangs are murdering each other on a daily basis. They need to do something to get a grip on this situation. Nothing they've tried has worked so far. Let them try this, and at least make the effort. Who knows? It might be an improvement.

This is a desperate act.......


There's only one way to deal with the gang murders.

And it's definitely not any new "law".



Legalize drugs... correct?



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Gun grabbers are always going to be grabbing guns.

They have no regard for the Bill of Rights.

But that is seen daily, so this is really no surprise.


What guns have been "grabbed"?


People will always try to find a way to negate the 2nd Amendment. Because they are cowardly fools who have no regard for freedom or rights.

If you cannot understand that, then the fault lies with you.



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:47 PM
link   
So, 3 Illinois Democrats want to reinterpret the 2nd, to take our guns.
Not at all surprised, but it'll never fly.



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Gun grabbers are always going to be grabbing guns.

They have no regard for the Bill of Rights.

But that is seen daily, so this is really no surprise.


What guns have been "grabbed"?


People will always try to find a way to negate the 2nd Amendment. Because they are cowardly fools who have no regard for freedom or rights.

If you cannot understand that, then the fault lies with you.


Again, what guns have been grabbed?

How has the 2nd become "negated" to the point that guns have been seized from individuals?



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

Legalize drugs... correct?



Well that's one way, but it won't stop the competition.

You would have to add more "methods".

Guns for example are "legal" but you still have an underground market that invites violence.




posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:50 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Thankfully none, but as you can see is always those politicians that think they can try.

Either they are stupid or dumb and stupid both at the same time.



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:50 PM
link   
Once the 2nd Amendment is over-turned, then I suspect that some will allow us to use the term "gun grabber".

If we still have a 1st Amendment afterwards.



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Guns are illegal here, but we get no mass shootings...
So it's not really working the old "criminals will still get guns argument" in my book.


What do you think could be the real factor?
Bare in mind we have chronic mental health issues too, still no mass shootings.



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Gun grabbers are always going to be grabbing guns.

They have no regard for the Bill of Rights.

But that is seen daily, so this is really no surprise.


What guns have been "grabbed"?


People will always try to find a way to negate the 2nd Amendment. Because they are cowardly fools who have no regard for freedom or rights.

If you cannot understand that, then the fault lies with you.


Again, what guns have been grabbed?

How has the 2nd become "negated" to the point that guns have been seized from individuals?


DO WE WAIT UNTIL THEY HAVE BEEN TAKEN BEFORE SPEAKING OUT?



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Gun grabbers are always going to be grabbing guns.

They have no regard for the Bill of Rights.

But that is seen daily, so this is really no surprise.


What guns have been "grabbed"?


People will always try to find a way to negate the 2nd Amendment. Because they are cowardly fools who have no regard for freedom or rights.

If you cannot understand that, then the fault lies with you.


Again, what guns have been grabbed?

How has the 2nd become "negated" to the point that guns have been seized from individuals?


DO WE WAIT UNTIL THEY HAVE BEEN TAKEN BEFORE SPEAKING OUT?


Who is going to take them?

Specifically, please.



posted on Dec, 26 2015 @ 08:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Gun grabbers are always going to be grabbing guns.

They have no regard for the Bill of Rights.

But that is seen daily, so this is really no surprise.


What guns have been "grabbed"?


People will always try to find a way to negate the 2nd Amendment. Because they are cowardly fools who have no regard for freedom or rights.

If you cannot understand that, then the fault lies with you.


Again, what guns have been grabbed?

How has the 2nd become "negated" to the point that guns have been seized from individuals?


DO WE WAIT UNTIL THEY HAVE BEEN TAKEN BEFORE SPEAKING OUT?


Absolutely not, but what you and others are doing is crying wolf and when someone actually does try to take our right away, no one will believe you.

This bill is a joke and will not amount to squat.

Don't cry wolf over this.
edit on 26-12-2015 by introvert because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join