Amend the 2nd amendmentÉ

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.``

Infringed ``Actively break the terms of , Act so as to limit or undermine Which would go against the 2nd amendment if you take anyone..even those you don`t like..right to own a weapon.

Does this also mean that if convicted of a violent crime...the government should not be allowed, as a lot of you say, to take your god given rights to own a firearm. Or should the the 2nd amendment be adjusted to deal with this matter.

Are you OK with this being adjusted, because the times need it to be adjusted and if so why disagree when the times also need more readjustment to the amendment to deal with the problems of today?


Other amendments have need to be changed to deal with the times so why the 2nd amendment.

IE...women rights...equal rights.

reply to post by kerazeesicko


People need to see how evil gun control is.

reply to post by kerazeesicko


Can we also get an ammendment to change our flag to include rainbows and unicorns???

I think they are soooooo cute.........

If you take in the whole of the text that as the second amendment, anyone that can read should be able to comprehend it has nothing to do with hunting. I believe the founders included that amendment as a safeguard against tyranny. We the people having the means to keep the Government in check is the essential to live in a free state.

Hitler took the peoples guns and then the German government killed millions.
Lenin took the peoples guns and then the Soviet government killed millions.
Mao took the peoples guns and then the Chinese government killed millions.

That is just in the 20th century. To think that it can't happen in America you had better think again.

There are some that will use the UK and Australia as examples but not so fast. Over crime has risen everywhere the private ownership has been restricted. If you look at the locations of the latest mass shooting they ALL happen in areas where firearms are restricted.

If you wanted to change the Second Amendment it should be to require all citizens to own and carry firearms. No more soft targets.

reply to post by seeker1963


Well you can...if you like that kinda stuff..

The topic is not about your creepy infatuation with unicorns...

reply to post by kerazeesicko


What country do you live in, Commie? Worry abot yourself and we will worry about us. Never gonna take our guns. Keeps all of the commies from invading...

reply to post by kerazeesicko


Your not even from America so mind your own business.

reply to post by 5pooky


You appear to be on the take our guns..they take my manhood fella`s...so you are not important and offer nothing to the conversation.

By the way I am no commie and I am Canadian..the greatest country around..

reply to post by 1plusXisto7billion


When you have something to contribute then you may matter..but like in life..you do not matter...

Originally posted by SWCCFAN
If you take in the whole of the text that as the second amendment, anyone that can read should be able to comprehend it has nothing to do with hunting. I believe the founders included that amendment as a safeguard against tyranny. We the people having the means to keep the Government in check is the essential to live in a free state.

Hitler took the peoples guns and then the German government killed millions.
Lenin took the peoples guns and then the Soviet government killed millions.
Mao took the peoples guns and then the Chinese government killed millions.

That is just in the 20th century. To think that it can't happen in America you had better think again.

There are some that will use the UK and Australia as examples but not so fast. Over crime has risen everywhere the private ownership has been restricted. If you look at the locations of the latest mass shooting they ALL happen in areas where firearms are restricted.

If you wanted to change the Second Amendment it should be to require all citizens to own and carry firearms. No more soft targets.

I wonder if this was planned when all the FEMA camps and plastic tubs that look like coffins were bought/established.

Originally posted by kerazeesicko
reply to post by 5pooky

 

You appear to be on the take our guns..they take my manhood fella`s...so you are not important and offer nothing to the conversation.

By the way I am no commie and I am Canadian..the greatest country around..

I see.... American wannabe...lol

Originally posted by 1plusXisto7billion
reply to post by kerazeesicko

 

Your not even from America so mind your own business.

This isn`t even your thread so mind YOUR own business..

reply to post by kerazeesicko

I would be very careful with tampering with the language (which is the courts' charge to review). Remember it says "...of the people" which is both individual and collective so while an individual felon may not have that right to keep and bear arms (for obvious reason) the people as a collective of individuals do have that right.

Unicorns schmunicorns.

Based on what I've been reading in these threads as of late, I'm starting to think that maybe the stars and stripes should be replaced with the silhouette of a big ol' ass-whoopin AK47 instead...









Mental note to self: No more south of the border vacationing or shopping trips. They've all turned friggin' cowboy-gone-postal down there.

Originally posted by 5pooky

I see.... American wannabe...lol

Actually it offensive to Canadians to call them Americans...

When visiting other countries it something we get mistaken for them fools . so we correct them right away.

how to you propose to attempt this amending the constitution is not easy and especialy not easy with a republican house i did the math on another thread on ats and something like 110 republicans would have to switch sides to give the dems the 2/3's majority they would need for such an endeavor wont happen right now at least.

passing laws is relitivly easy in the scheme of things compared to amending the Constitution

en.wikipedia.org...

Six amendments have been passed by Congress and proposed but then did not get ratified by the appropriate number of states' legislatures. Four of these amendments are still technically pending before state lawmakers, one has expired by its own terms, and one has expired by the terms of the resolution proposing it (though that expiration is disputed).

they have been trying to pass these 6 from as far back as 1789(Congressional Apportionment Amendment) to the Corwin Amendment(wants to preserve slavery) since 1861 and Equal Rights Amendment and child labor amendments also not being passed yet from1972 and 1924 respectively

its not as easy to do this as one would think and it seems even if it was passed it could get tied up in court for up to a few centuries

en.wikipedia.org... additional relevent link

reply to post by 1plusXisto7billion

Not to mention the Patriot Acts, NDAA, the one plus trillion rounds of ammo for the DHS and other domestic agencies, the bullet proof road, check-point pill boxes, et cetera, ad nauseum.

reply to post by kerazeesicko


Ouch that hurt. We don't like imposters anyway. We are way to Awsome to be mistaken for Canadian

Originally posted by kerazeesicko

Originally posted by 5pooky

I see.... American wannabe...lol

Actually it offensive to Canadians to call them Americans...

When visiting other countries it something we get mistaken for them fools . so we correct them right away.

Wow, hate America much?

This negates any merit your opinion could possibly have about American laws. The 2nd Amendment has been reevaluated in 2008 and 2010 by the supreme court which is the highest court system in our country and was found in 2008 to stand as it is currently interpreted. In 2010 it extended a restriction on the states to say that they cannot restrict the individual of that right with exception to the already federally standing law that an individual does not have the right had they been convicted of a crime.

Our guns won't be taken. Get over it.

Second line