Glock Talk

Glock Talk (http://glocktalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Okie Corral (http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=29)
-   -   Shouldnt anti-gunners be called traitors? (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1469532)

umadcuzimstylin 02-04-2013 05:18

Shouldnt anti-gunners be called traitors?
 
I can understand accidentally going against the Constitution but intentionally going against the Constitution makes you a traitor.

SIG-SOG 02-04-2013 05:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by umadcuzimstylin (Post 19947144)
I can understand accidentally going against the Constitution but intentionally going against the Constitution makes you a traitor.

And a POS.

Bren 02-04-2013 05:26

I agree, but so far the Supreme Court has only found that the constitution gives you a right to own some kind of gun - not specifically anything they are trying to ban right now. Everything else is just our opinion.

Not to mention, we all oppose somebody's constitutional rights on some issue, whether it's the Westboro Baptists Church, the KKK, the Brady Campaign, Occupy ______, or the democrat party.

Blast 02-04-2013 05:29

Liberals misinterpret the Constitution to fit their agendas.

devildog2067 02-04-2013 06:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blast (Post 19947156)
Liberals misinterpret the Constitution to fit their agendas.

Be honest, conservatives do too.

umadcuzimstylin 02-04-2013 06:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blast (Post 19947156)
Liberals misinterpret the Constitution to fit their agendas.

Sophists gonna sophist.

umadcuzimstylin 02-04-2013 06:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bren (Post 19947151)
I agree, but so far the Supreme Court has only found that the constitution gives you a right to own some kind of gun - not specifically anything they are trying to ban right now. Everything else is just our opinion.

Not to mention, we all oppose somebody's constitutional rights on some issue, whether it's the Westboro Baptists Church, the KKK, the Brady Campaign, Occupy ______, or the democrat party.

Thats insane! It doesnt say in the 2nd amendment that you have the right to bear arms at the governments discretion.

Wolfdad 02-04-2013 06:27

The philosophy of conservatism emphasizes liberty. The philosophy of liberalisim emphasizes control.

IhRedrider 02-04-2013 06:37

Well, to stand against the Constitution only makes your action illegal thus you are a criminal. To be found a traitor, the US would have to be at war. Oh wait, we do have the war on terrorism, the war on poverty, the war on drugs........ I wonder how much a good set of gallows cost.

certifiedfunds 02-04-2013 06:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfdad (Post 19947252)
The philosophy of conservatism emphasizes liberty. The philosophy of liberalisim emphasizes control.

Correct. My political philosophy imposes nothing on them. Their political philosophy imposes on me.

HerrGlock 02-04-2013 06:52

I don't know about traitors.

I prefer the descriptor "urinalysis taste testers", personally.

Gallium 02-04-2013 06:54

Specifically every politician, military person, police officer, judge, etc who swears an oath to protect and defend the constitution of the USA is a liar and traitor IF and when they decide the 2nd Amendment is only a convenience that can be bypassed.

Specifically, I wish folks like Holder, Obama, Cuomo, Schumer, et al could be charged and tried for crimes against the state, because really, their actions border on criminal.

Simply replace "2nd amendment" with "1st amendment" to see the point.

- G

Bren 02-04-2013 07:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by umadcuzimstylin (Post 19947251)
Thats insane! It doesnt say in the 2nd amendment that you have the right to bear arms at the governments discretion.

It also doesn't say which arms you have a right to bear or how many or how big the magazine can be or when and where you can bear them. That is all left to court interpretation. Every right in the bill of rights is subject to government discretion - each one has a library full of law defining what the government can and cannot do, except for the 2nd Amendment, which doesn't have enough law to fill a smll notebook.

kensb2 02-04-2013 07:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bren (Post 19947357)
It also doesn't say which arms you have a right to bear or how many or how big the magazine can be or when and where you can bear them. That is all left to court interpretation. Every right in the bill of rights is subject to government discretion - each one has a library full of law defining what the government can and cannot do, except for the 2nd Amendment, which doesn't have enough law to fill a smll notebook.

I thought that the 2A provides protection from the FED .gov regarding the RKBA, and basically left it up to the individual states to decide what weapons their citizens have. This makes the most sense to me, since the citizens are supposed to have weapons to defend their state from FED .gov tyranny. Why does the SCOTUS have to make this so complicated?

M&P Shooter 02-04-2013 07:30

Shouldnt anti-gunners be called traitors?
 
Yes, this administration belongs behind bars and I bet there's 4 Americans in their graves from Benghazi right now agreeing with me:crying:

Bren 02-04-2013 07:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by kensb2 (Post 19947369)
I thought that the 2A provides protection from the FED .gov regarding the RKBA, and basically left it up to the individual states to decide what weapons their citizens have. This makes the most sense to me, since the citizens are supposed to have weapons to defend their state from FED .gov tyranny. Why does the SCOTUS have to make this so complicated?

No, the 2nd Amendment says you have a right, enforceable against the federal fgovernment only, to keep and bear arms. The supreme court said, recently, in McDonald, that the 14th Amendment means that the states are also not allowed to violate the 2nd Amendment. Nothing about the 2nd Amendment has ever said "this issue is reserved to the states."

The 10th amendment says "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," but under the current interpretation of either the commerce clause or the taxing power, the feds have authority to regulate guns, expresssly delegated by the constitution.

arclight610 02-04-2013 07:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bren (Post 19947357)
It also doesn't say which arms you have a right to bear or how many or how big the magazine can be or when and where you can bear them. That is all left to court interpretation. Every right in the bill of rights is subject to government discretion - each one has a library full of law defining what the government can and cannot do, except for the 2nd Amendment, which doesn't have enough law to fill a smll notebook.

In United States v Miller in 1939, the Supreme Court ruled that the 2nd amendment only protected military style weapons commonly used in the military and militia at that time.

umadcuzimstylin 02-04-2013 08:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bren (Post 19947357)
It also doesn't say which arms you have a right to bear or how many or how big the magazine can be or when and where you can bear them. That is all left to court interpretation. Every right in the bill of rights is subject to government discretion - each one has a library full of law defining what the government can and cannot do, except for the 2nd Amendment, which doesn't have enough law to fill a smll notebook.

Exactly! It is written vague to not have restrictions not for the government to decide how they restrict you. It says you have the right to bear arms which means open carry any gun you want. It plainly says right to bear arms yet the government thinks it say right to bear arms according to your interpretation lulz.

PhotoFeller 02-04-2013 08:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bren (Post 19947472)
No, the 2nd Amendment says you have a right, enforceable against the federal fgovernment only, to keep and bear arms. The supreme court said, recently, in McDonald, that the 14th Amendment means that the states are also not allowed to violate the 2nd Amendment. Nothing about the 2nd Amendment has ever said "this issue is reserved to the states."

The 10th amendment says "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," but under the current interpretation of either the commerce clause or the taxing power, the feds have authority to regulate guns, expresssly delegated by the constitution.

Bren- Please boil the Supreme Court's rulings on 2A down to the fundamental issue: Is it clear, in your judgement, that Congress can legislate bans against certain weapons and magazines?

SPIN2010 02-04-2013 08:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by kensb2 (Post 19947369)
I thought that the 2A provides protection from the FED .gov regarding the RKBA, and basically left it up to the individual states to decide what weapons their citizens have. This makes the most sense to me, since the citizens are supposed to have weapons to defend their state from FED .gov tyranny.

You just have to look to NYS to see how effective that theory is. Can anyone really believe the STATE.GOV & FED.GOV are not kissing cousins? Just look to Katrina after action ... that was patriotic by all the LEO/NG/ACTIVE MIL wasn't it? GET FOR REAL!

Wolfdad 02-04-2013 09:23

"shall not be infringed"

pizza_pablo 02-04-2013 09:42

Yes!!

WarCry 02-04-2013 10:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfdad (Post 19947764)
"shall not be infringed"

This argument needs to end, because it makes gun rights crowd look bullheaded, stubborn, and uneducated.

Let me give you another example:

"Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech"

And yet the FCC exists, restricting content of broadcasts.

When you start standing up for full-blown, hard-core porn to be broadcast on NBC at 7pm, then you can make the "shall not be infringed" arguments.

As for the Supreme Court on AWB/magazine restrictions, it has yet to be determined. "Heller" said reasonable restrictions are acceptable. "McDonald" said that applies to the States as well. And "Reasonable" has yet to be decided, but I'm willing to bet a case will be coming soon, probably out of New York, that will help make that determination.

kirgi08 02-04-2013 10:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfdad (Post 19947764)
"shall not be infringed"

Ayep.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pizza_pablo (Post 19947818)
Yes!!

:agree:

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarCry (Post 19947881)
This argument needs to end, because it makes gun rights crowd look bullheaded, stubborn, and uneducated.

It is the law of the land........

Let me give you another example:

"Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech"

This is the crux.

And yet the FCC exists, restricting content of broadcasts.

So do a bunch of .gub folk that Illegally do the same thing.This nation has gone about the systematic destruction of the COTUS.FDR started it and them their folk that can vote for raises and or money fer votes.That is how Santa got ta park his sleigh at 1600 yet again.

When you start standing up for full-blown, hard-core porn to be broadcast on NBC at 7pm, then you can make the "shall not be infringed" arguments.

Porn =s the 2a. :headscratch:

As for the Supreme Court on AWB/magazine restrictions, it has yet to be determined. "Heller" said reasonable restrictions are acceptable. "McDonald" said that applies to the States as well. And "Reasonable" has yet to be decided, but I'm willing to bet a case will be coming soon, probably out of New York, that will help make that determination.

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED,KEEP IT SIMPLE.......... .'08.

WarCry 02-04-2013 11:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by kirgi08 (Post 19947968)
Ayep.

Porn =s the 2a?

Of course not, and that's just showing you're being willfully narrow-minded.

Porn DOES = the FIRST Amendment (the courts have said so), but it's still RESTRICTED on when/where/how it can be displayed.

Why are you okay with restrictions on the First Amendment?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 23:02.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2013, Glock Talk, All Rights Reserved.