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.

 

A bigger picture on gun rights

page: 2
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Muninn
a reply to: Mahogany

Instead of trying to play your little game why not just come out and say what you really want to say about our 2nd amendment rights.

I hate these stupid games played by the left.


I want the Constitution to be applied and upheld, in full.

How about you, do you want States to retain their Constitutional rights?




posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinySickTears

originally posted by: theatreboy
a reply to: Mahogany

"The right to bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"

Think that says it all.


if it said it all then you would have posted it all.


A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State


also if it says it all then there would not be constitutional lawyers arguing this # every day with interpretation and precedent
but there is


On the one hand, some believe that the Amendment's phrase "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms" creates an individual constitutional right for citizens of the United States. Under this "individual right theory," the United States Constitution restricts legislative bodies from prohibiting firearm possession, or at the very least, the Amendment renders prohibitory and restrictive regulation presumptively unconstitutional.



On the other hand, some scholars point to the prefatory language "a well regulated Militia" to argue that the Framers intended only to restrict Congress from legislating away a state's right to self-defense. Scholars have come to call this theory "the collective rights theory."


people like you always come in with
"the right to bear arms....."
then boom. drops the mic like you figured it all out.

this # is complicated. there are people far smarter than all of us that have studied this and the law that can not agree on what the founders meant.

this # is complicted.

i wish people would at least agree with that

if it is so cut and dry why are these issues in court?
why are there constitutional lawyers?

its cut and dry right?
whats to argue then?

but we took civics 20 years ago in high school and read rightwing.net and wikipedia so we have it all figured out




I love how you peeps always cut out the rest of the amendment.



posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: Muninn
a reply to: Mahogany

Instead of trying to play your little game why not just come out and say what you really want to say about our 2nd amendment rights.

I hate these stupid games played by the left.


I want the Constitution to be applied and upheld, in full.

How about you, do you want States to retain their Constitutional rights?



Sure you do, sure.



posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Muninn

peeps like me or peeps like the 2nd person to post who got all the stars


"The right to bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"


was kind of my point too but its me posting it so here you are



posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bhadhidar
The 2nd Amendment states that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.

But, just as you have pointed out, it does not address age in its entitlement, nor does it specify what is to be defined as “arms”; the 2nd does not say “the right to bear firearms shall not be infringed”.

We’ve always assumed that the Founders meant firearms, but, as per your argument, since they did not specifically state as such, wouldn’t it be up to the states to decide?


I think arms in well armed militia gives us that meaning. It is definitely weaponry as no one can take your fists away.

But I also believe that the States should have their own rights to self regulate. So they legally can impose their own age. By the way, this is not done by a governor or a cabinet, this is a democratic vote of all people of that state. It's a referendum, and I support it as it is Constitutional.



posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: Muninn

peeps like me or peeps like the 2nd person to post who got all the stars


"The right to bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"


was kind of my point too but its me posting it so here you are


They did not get what he meant to say and starred it anyway, he was agreeing. I starred him too.



posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Mahogany

funny thing is a lot of the people you will find crying about this are in favor of states rights.

ive seen them say as much on these boards


but we are talking about gunz my friend.
people in this country go buck wild about their #ing gunz



posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: Muninn

peeps like me or peeps like the 2nd person to post who got all the stars


"The right to bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"


was kind of my point too but its me posting it so here you are


They did not get what he meant to say and starred it anyway, he was agreeing. I starred him too.


you starred it even though you are saying you support the states rights

im thinking he does not



posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: Mahogany

funny thing is a lot of the people you will find crying about this are in favor of states rights.

ive seen them say as much on these boards


but we are talking about gunz my friend.
people in this country go buck wild about their #ing gunz



Do you think it should be states rights for the 1st?



posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Mahogany

So you are arguing that states can determine WHEN an individual can exercise a Constitutional right.


Would you argue for a state changing the voting age, or not allowing someone of a certain age to have free speech?



I tried to find a youtube link of Sacha Baron Cohen and Who Is America, the episode he makes fun of gun looneys to get them to say they support guns at birth. It's hilarious, I'm sure you'd find humor in it if I could find it. I suggest you watch the series if you can find it.



posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinySickTears
a reply to: Mahogany

funny thing is a lot of the people you will find crying about this are in favor of states rights.

ive seen them say as much on these boards


but we are talking about gunz my friend.
people in this country go buck wild about their #ing gunz


I know, people don't even realize what hypocrites they're being. Tomorrow they'll post a thread about State rights and not even think about what they said in this thread.



posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Mahogany

So you are arguing that states can determine WHEN an individual can exercise a Constitutional right.


Would you argue for a state changing the voting age, or not allowing someone of a certain age to have free speech?



I tried to find a youtube link of Sacha Baron Cohen and Who Is America, the episode he makes fun of gun looneys to get them to say they support guns at birth. It's hilarious, I'm sure you'd find humor in it if I could find it. I suggest you watch the series if you can find it.



You didn't answer his question, I would like to know your answer..



posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Muninn

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Mahogany

So you are arguing that states can determine WHEN an individual can exercise a Constitutional right.


Would you argue for a state changing the voting age, or not allowing someone of a certain age to have free speech?



I tried to find a youtube link of Sacha Baron Cohen and Who Is America, the episode he makes fun of gun looneys to get them to say they support guns at birth. It's hilarious, I'm sure you'd find humor in it if I could find it. I suggest you watch the series if you can find it.



You didn't answer his question, I would like to know your answer..


I already replied to him, that was a second reply. He has not come back yet.


Edit - thanks for playing ref, I can take it from here.
edit on 10-11-2018 by Mahogany because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: Muninn

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Mahogany

So you are arguing that states can determine WHEN an individual can exercise a Constitutional right.


Would you argue for a state changing the voting age, or not allowing someone of a certain age to have free speech?



I tried to find a youtube link of Sacha Baron Cohen and Who Is America, the episode he makes fun of gun looneys to get them to say they support guns at birth. It's hilarious, I'm sure you'd find humor in it if I could find it. I suggest you watch the series if you can find it.



You didn't answer his question, I would like to know your answer..


I already replied to him, that was a second reply. He has not come back yet.


Edit - thanks for playing ref, I can take it from here.



But you didn't answer the question.

Typical of you I suppose.


I'm sure you can but how about an answer instead?

edit on 10-11-2018 by Muninn because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: TinySickTears

The only people trying to debate it are authoritarian leftists who know an unarmed population is much easier to control.

The rest of us know what it means and don't need any interpretations.



posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Muninn

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: Muninn

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Mahogany

So you are arguing that states can determine WHEN an individual can exercise a Constitutional right.


Would you argue for a state changing the voting age, or not allowing someone of a certain age to have free speech?



I tried to find a youtube link of Sacha Baron Cohen and Who Is America, the episode he makes fun of gun looneys to get them to say they support guns at birth. It's hilarious, I'm sure you'd find humor in it if I could find it. I suggest you watch the series if you can find it.



You didn't answer his question, I would like to know your answer..


I already replied to him, that was a second reply. He has not come back yet.


Edit - thanks for playing ref, I can take it from here.



But you didn't answer the question.

Typical of you I suppose.


I'm sure you can but how about an answer instead?


I did. He'll get it.



posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: Muninn

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: Muninn

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Mahogany

So you are arguing that states can determine WHEN an individual can exercise a Constitutional right.


Would you argue for a state changing the voting age, or not allowing someone of a certain age to have free speech?



I tried to find a youtube link of Sacha Baron Cohen and Who Is America, the episode he makes fun of gun looneys to get them to say they support guns at birth. It's hilarious, I'm sure you'd find humor in it if I could find it. I suggest you watch the series if you can find it.



You didn't answer his question, I would like to know your answer..


I already replied to him, that was a second reply. He has not come back yet.


Edit - thanks for playing ref, I can take it from here.



But you didn't answer the question.

Typical of you I suppose.


I'm sure you can but how about an answer instead?


I did. He'll get it.


You got nothing then?




posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 02:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: TinySickTears

The only people trying to debate it are authoritarian leftists who know an unarmed population is much easier to control.

The rest of us know what it means and don't need any interpretations.


What does it mean?

Explain it, please. Can the federal government repeal Constitutionally protected States rights, if it gets to that point?



posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 03:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Mahogany

So you are arguing that states can determine WHEN an individual can exercise a Constitutional right.


Would you argue for a state changing the voting age, or not allowing someone of a certain age to have free speech?



So, you are advocating gun rights at birth?

Wanna reconsider your position before I point out how ridiculous and illegal that statement is. All States have a gun age. And they differ. They are not federally imposed.

Go ahead, prove me wrong.


I bought my son a Savage .22 when he turned 6.


You want gun ownership to be a privilege, not a right.



posted on Nov, 10 2018 @ 03:17 PM
link   
i fired my first gun when i was 7. i have never had to shoot anyone. in regards to state rights, here is a list of states which put the right to bear arms in their state constitution before the us constitution was written. new york, pennsylvania, virginia, maryland, north carolina, vermont, and massachusetts. they all use different text but they all clearly state you can own a gun




top topics



 
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join