Second Amendment Rights Are Not Actually Rights (Not All Of Them, At Least)

originally posted by: Azureblue
a reply to: Krakatoa

I guess you have never actually read the Declaration of Independence - No I havent and I am unliley to ever do a) because I far too much reading to do as it is and b)because I am not an Americian. I live on the other side of the world and my post on right and grants was informing people about some that is very important.

Funny how some people feel the need to be aggressive when they reply to something on this forum and frankly I wonder why the mods accept it. Attacking the speaker and not the thought is the most shallow form of discussion there is.

Address my message, please. Show me where I was wrong that your statement about them not being rights but privileges was ill informed. So, to correct you I went to the primary source, showed you a direct quote that refuted your position, and recommended you read the document before making baseless and incorrect claims here.

Aggressive? Hardly. I'm sorry that I hurt your fragile feeling by asking you to read a document that you seem to not even understand, and are unwilling to read, yet willing to make baseless incorrect comments about. My response was on point and correct. But, you cannot even be adult enough to admit that you were wrong. Instead you resort to calling me aggressive. Trust me, if I was being aggressive, you would know because I would be banned.

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: burdman30ott6

The difference between free speech and the 2nd is that free speech is independent of the internet. The internet is a huge amplifier, but you're still able to speak freely without it. With your mouth, for instance. The 2nd isn't independent of firearms/their equivalent, and you must pay to exercise it. To try and explain it in a nice fashion, if free speech worked like the second amendment then you would only be able to speak freely using paid-for items like megaphones. In which case, it would be privilege and not a right, because you would need to spend money to access it.

The 2nd says "arms," not "firearms." A free rock would be an "arm." A ball bat picked up off a shelf at a sporting goods store to stop an assault against you would be an "arm" you have not paid for. etc., etc., etc.

Oh, yes, all the constitutional rights are most certainly illusions.

Might want to share that thought with the Supreme Court.

I'm actually anti-gun-control for the US, anyway.

Coulda fooled me.