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.

 

Question for those of you who oppose ID to vote....

page: 3
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by nwdogg1982



unfortunately, by the wording of the 2nd amendment (to keep and bear arms) there is a clear opening that allows the government to require ID to purchase or obtain the arms.


Can you explain the reasoning for that conclusion. I am having a bit of trouble following it.




posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


No, you will lose. The 2nd Ammendment was meant for INDIVIDUALS to own firearms.

You don't have to join a militia to own one.



He already lost.

The whole "organized militia" thing has been bunk for over a hundred years.

No legal scholar worth his salt would waste time dragging that one out now or anytime since Cohens v Virginia 1821.

A point that was driven home with a sledge hammer recently in 1999 with U.S. v Emerson.

DC v Heller of course.

Anyone pulling out the old "militia clause" crap is either new to the game or just refuses to move on or perhaps simply has nothing better to move on to than a dead tired position that has been proven wrong consistently for over a century.

Similar to believing the Earth is flat.

Now throw all that away. Tear up the Bill of Rights even. That gun is still my property. I dont need some human to approve that. I dont need some document to say its okay. It's mine.

If anything you need to justify why you need to take it away from me.
edit on 19-7-2012 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 08:01 AM
link   
Now that we've established voter fraud is completely overblown and not a threat to the republic, can we please address the problem of the purge that is a result of stringent restrictions on current registered voters?


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 08:10 AM
link   
The inevitable end to this is "compromise" and it's going to lead to a mandatory national ID card or device.

Since the arguments against are all basically "poll tax" oriented to save face the proponents are going to have to establish the ID as free.

To save costs they'll roll all facets of ID into this one single ID with some inspired line like "to make ID accessible to every American and reduce administrative expenses for local and state governments we propose a single ID to serve as permit, license, passport and photo identification"

Now the DMV becomes a branch of DHS. Eventually a national firearms permit will also roll out appeasing those who want national carry and those who frown upon people from South Carolina carrying into New York so the ATF will get involved and requirements will be standardized.

The ID will be tier priced. Free for voting and identification. A fee for the driving modification. A fee for the firearms modification. A fee for passport modification. Any other certifications or markers will also be on the card. Sex offender? Certified CPR? Organ donor?

This is easy enough to do and could be done years ago.

This is how it will be so the argument is a waste of time.
edit on 19-7-2012 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)


SM2

posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by FreeFromTheHerd
 



The national guard didnt exist at the time the Constitution was written. Your argument is both factually incorrect and laughable.


Handguns and rifles didn't exist either.

So if your argument is that it has to be in context of when the Constitution was written...then sure...go out and grab your musket.


If you want to split hairs on the Constitution or the 2nd Amendment specifically, this is one debate you will lose in an extremely humiliating way.


I highly doubt it.




once again you make comments and have no idea on the truth, it does seem to be a reoccurring habit with you.
The rifle was indeed around at the time, as were handguns.

"In the early 1700s, the long rifle becomes popular among settlers in North America. This rifled muzzle loader, which can weigh anywhere from 7 to 10 pounds, is used extensively in the American Revolution and the War of 1812. Called the Pennsylvania Rifle, or the Kentucky Rifle, this flintlock rifle is one of the most iconic guns in American history."

Source www.popularmechanics.com...-2

See the rifle had a rifled barrel, meaning it had "lands" cut into the barrel to put spin on the projectile to increase range and accuracy. The rifling principle was discovered in around 1500 and first started appearing in firearms around 1540.

Handguns were known and used in Europe in the late 1300's.

www.pbs.org...

So, if you are going on that line of logic, the War of Independence was fought with rockets, mortars, artillery, rifles and handguns, where can I can I purchase my mortars and rockets? What store sells artillery?

remember it is better to have people think you a fool then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.






edit on 19-7-2012 by SM2 because: to add a link



new topics

top topics
 
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join