Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"
- Thread starter isabellah
- Start date
Carmella14
New member
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"
How is it a right?
I am pretty much pro weapon ownership - with caveats on requirements - but there is absolutley no logic towards portraying it as a "god given right" (or whatever other hyperbole you attach to it)
The fact it was an AMMENDMENT means it was an afterthought in the first place
Life, liberty and freedom of expression are what can be classed as "natural rights". Owning an arbitraily constructed piece of wood and metal isn't.
Now significantly any "right" you have, including the right to life, can be removed should circumstances dictate it necessary. The death penalty, self-defence laws and so forth cover this quite explicitly. So with firearm owneership the same applies - hence it is NOT sacrosanct, nor has it ever been
How is it a right?
I am pretty much pro weapon ownership - with caveats on requirements - but there is absolutley no logic towards portraying it as a "god given right" (or whatever other hyperbole you attach to it)
The fact it was an AMMENDMENT means it was an afterthought in the first place
Life, liberty and freedom of expression are what can be classed as "natural rights". Owning an arbitraily constructed piece of wood and metal isn't.
Now significantly any "right" you have, including the right to life, can be removed should circumstances dictate it necessary. The death penalty, self-defence laws and so forth cover this quite explicitly. So with firearm owneership the same applies - hence it is NOT sacrosanct, nor has it ever been
BigJake418
New member
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"
We call it a right because our Supreme Court says it is. We don't have to agree with them (I usually don't), but what they say goes. This makes it a right for us, not a privilage. Even though your opinion is entirley correct in my view.
Personaly, I think we only have priveleges here now, and no rights. This was proven (to me) when they claimed authority to suspend Habeas Corpus from an Act passed by congress. To properly get rid of a constututional artilce (Article 1 sec. 9 in this case), you need a 3/4 vote. Not the simple majority that passing an act needs. Our court system has backed this up.
We call it a right because our Supreme Court says it is. We don't have to agree with them (I usually don't), but what they say goes. This makes it a right for us, not a privilage. Even though your opinion is entirley correct in my view.
Personaly, I think we only have priveleges here now, and no rights. This was proven (to me) when they claimed authority to suspend Habeas Corpus from an Act passed by congress. To properly get rid of a constututional artilce (Article 1 sec. 9 in this case), you need a 3/4 vote. Not the simple majority that passing an act needs. Our court system has backed this up.
greenday0018358
New member
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"
Because our constitution does not give us rights it limits and controls the government on what they can do.
And the bill of rights was not an afterthought.
Because our constitution does not give us rights it limits and controls the government on what they can do.
And the bill of rights was not an afterthought.
hapa_wahine
New member
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"
Playing Devils Advocate (well not really, but bear with me...) why is this right considered inviolate when (a) no other right is and (b) even caselaw shows it can be compromised?
It is bordering on irrational zealotry
Again I reiteirate I a HUGELY pro weapon...how can you be Z-Day ready and not be?....but a system of appropriate checks and balances for ownership is NOT unconstitutional. In fact the original drafting pretty much states that the arming and training of the militia is the duty of the State - hence the restrictions are entirely in keeping with the Constitution
Playing Devils Advocate (well not really, but bear with me...) why is this right considered inviolate when (a) no other right is and (b) even caselaw shows it can be compromised?
It is bordering on irrational zealotry
Again I reiteirate I a HUGELY pro weapon...how can you be Z-Day ready and not be?....but a system of appropriate checks and balances for ownership is NOT unconstitutional. In fact the original drafting pretty much states that the arming and training of the militia is the duty of the State - hence the restrictions are entirely in keeping with the Constitution
frank21142226
Member
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"
You have answered your own question sir.
You have answered your own question sir.
HeathereFeather
New member
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"
To be fair to the founding fathers, they were kinda busy with the whole revolution thing untill the treaty was signed in '83
To be fair to the founding fathers, they were kinda busy with the whole revolution thing untill the treaty was signed in '83
tiffanysgirl
Member
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"
Don't get me wrong, I actually believe in the vast majority of tenets layed out by your constitution - but the very fact it can be ammended shows it is an organic document that needs to change and adapt as society does the same...that is its very beauty
Dogmatic adherence is absolutley not healthy or ultimately useful
Don't get me wrong, I actually believe in the vast majority of tenets layed out by your constitution - but the very fact it can be ammended shows it is an organic document that needs to change and adapt as society does the same...that is its very beauty
Dogmatic adherence is absolutley not healthy or ultimately useful
It depends on what you consider loop holes.
Anyone can own a gun unless that right was removed by the courts and that’s the way it should be.
Nothing prevents that but the fact you will be losing money because you bought them retail and will be selling them for less than retail.
Anyone can own a gun unless that right was removed by the courts and that’s the way it should be.
Nothing prevents that but the fact you will be losing money because you bought them retail and will be selling them for less than retail.
SpeedKillz
New member
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"
I saw a guy on TV that bought some unclaimed storage crates "as seen" in an auction. Turned out that one crate had about 10 pristine new guns in it.
Now...that can't be right can it?
Anyone could have got hold of those guns.
Even if you put a car into auction ownership is still transferred from one person to another so the car can be tracked.
I saw a guy on TV that bought some unclaimed storage crates "as seen" in an auction. Turned out that one crate had about 10 pristine new guns in it.
Now...that can't be right can it?
Anyone could have got hold of those guns.
Even if you put a car into auction ownership is still transferred from one person to another so the car can be tracked.
kimberlyle
New member
That’s not a private sell and they have to have an FFL dealer to transfer them on the sale.
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"
I see. It seemed a lot less structured than that but that could have been TV editing.
At one point they had one crate while another bloke had another from the same lot.
Turned out one part of a gun was in his crate and another part in theirs and vice versa (or part of a "pair" was separate..I can't remember).
They basically just agreed to swap with each other right there in the auction yard so each ended up with what they wanted.
I see. It seemed a lot less structured than that but that could have been TV editing.
At one point they had one crate while another bloke had another from the same lot.
Turned out one part of a gun was in his crate and another part in theirs and vice versa (or part of a "pair" was separate..I can't remember).
They basically just agreed to swap with each other right there in the auction yard so each ended up with what they wanted.
melissa25b
New member
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"
Which still does not invalidate the point I made - in fact it continues to support it
So they couldn't get their ideas together in the 4 years after and then it took another 3 to fill in the bits they missed?
Would you be satisified to comply with such an ammendment if it was passed banning guns?
No "well that wouldn't happen.." or "the majority don't..." qualifiers - would you?
Which still does not invalidate the point I made - in fact it continues to support it
So they couldn't get their ideas together in the 4 years after and then it took another 3 to fill in the bits they missed?
Would you be satisified to comply with such an ammendment if it was passed banning guns?
No "well that wouldn't happen.." or "the majority don't..." qualifiers - would you?
JustTheKidNextDoor
Member
“Shall not infringe” has all ready been compromised and up held which we as the people let go and that’s why many fight any more infringement.
Yea like was stated they had a war going on so they agreed to get things set up and running and add the article (V I believe) to continue the process.
If they repealed the 2nd or if the Supreme Court changes their interruption of it then I would have to comply or go to jail (or hide them really good).
Yea like was stated they had a war going on so they agreed to get things set up and running and add the article (V I believe) to continue the process.
If they repealed the 2nd or if the Supreme Court changes their interruption of it then I would have to comply or go to jail (or hide them really good).
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"
So why do Americans need to pass a driving test before being allowed to drive on the road unaccompanied? Don't you think that an individual should be able to show they can handle a gun properly and responsibly before they are allowed to use one unsupervised?
A free thinking and responsible American adult cannot elect to eat a Kindersurprise egg. But any American adult can buy, own, sell and fire off a deadly weapon unless a court says otherwise? And you're happy with this arrangement?
Are you honestly telling me there is nothing wrong in that thinking? There's nothing wrong in the order of priorities there?
Which assumes there is no corruption at play.
So why do Americans need to pass a driving test before being allowed to drive on the road unaccompanied? Don't you think that an individual should be able to show they can handle a gun properly and responsibly before they are allowed to use one unsupervised?
A free thinking and responsible American adult cannot elect to eat a Kindersurprise egg. But any American adult can buy, own, sell and fire off a deadly weapon unless a court says otherwise? And you're happy with this arrangement?
Are you honestly telling me there is nothing wrong in that thinking? There's nothing wrong in the order of priorities there?
Which assumes there is no corruption at play.