Justice Stevens thinks he knows how to 'fix' the Second Amendment

ohioboy said:
Federalist 29:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._29
Click to expand...
The 2nd Amendment was a collective right—not an individual right. That's why it says "the right of the people" and not 'the right of individuals' to bear arms, and that's why it's prefaced with the statement about being for a militia and state security.
 

JonDouglas said:
Now that's exactly the logic leaders totalitarian countries use to take guns away from the populace. Since guns aren't the only things used as weapons, exactly how many other things would you take away from people. You really should get used to the realtiy that people are what kills people.
Click to expand...

But guns make killing both easy and palatable.

Most killings would probably not happen if the killer had to get up close and personal. If they had to get up close and look the person in the eye or feel the knife penetrate the flesh and get the blood on themselves.

Guns allow people to kill each other in a highly impersonal way and from a distance as well as in mass numbers.

You cannot disassociate guns from violent crime and death.

Also, even if the pro-gun crowd's little axiom about people not guns kill people were true, it still doesn't address the issue of other violent crimes in which guns are used. Like armed robbery, bank robbery, carjacking, kidnapping, etc. Guns are used almost exclusively in those crimes to intimidate victims into complying with criminals' demands.

How do you excuse guns in those incidents?

Do you think the rate of armed robberies in this country would be anywhere near as high as it is if guns were not so readily available for thugs to use them in those non-murder related crimes?
 
A recent national poll of registered voters done by McLaughlin & Associates shows that 72% of registered voters support the second amendment. Additionally, 73.4 percent agreed that the Founding Fathers “understood the importance of law-abiding citizens right to legally own firearms for things like hunting, sport and personal protection” and that the Second Amendment is “one of our most important and cherished civil rights in the U.S. Constitution.”

The poll is on page 3 of the PDF in the link below, an image of page 3 is at the bottom
https://www.saf.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/National-SAF-Topline-4-13-21.pdf

2apoll.jpg
 
digifoss said:
A recent national poll of registered voters done by McLaughlin & Associates shows that 72% of registered voters support the second amendment. Additionally, 73.4 percent agreed that the Founding Fathers “understood the importance of law-abiding citizens right to legally own firearms for things like hunting, sport and personal protection” and that the Second Amendment is “one of our most important and cherished civil rights in the U.S. Constitution.”

The poll is on page 3 of the PDF in the link below, an image of page 3 is at the bottom
https://www.saf.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/National-SAF-Topline-4-13-21.pdf
Click to expand...
Polls on the subject of guns and gun control are all over the place.

https://www.newsweek.com/heres-what-americans-think-about-gun-reform-according-polls-1578401
 
Quoting par. 9 in digs post 57, whoever wrote that poll/article was mistaken. The Founders had the 2nd AM originally as the 4th AM, not as the 2nd as sent to the states for ratification.
 
digifoss said:
And for the looters and rioters; ahhh, the good ole days...
Click to expand...
Richard J Daley, would have made for a superb cuckoo clock maker.

Was just chatting with my husband about this, and my husband said, if he was a nut-job, regardless of whether or not the individuals he was hunting were arsons, burglars, molotov-cocktail throwers, etc, they'd be in his sights, and it would be perfectly legal, because Richard J Daley said so.

Proof that crackpots existed back in the day and still exist in our world today.
 
I disagree that Mayor Daley was a crackpot. He was, however, a much hated racist dictator and ran Chicago like it was his own personal imperium, much along the same lines as Leander Perez Sr. of Plaquemines and St. Bernard parishes before him.
 
Question to any/all Americans.

Re: the second amendment, was the intent of the amendment to allow for everyday Tom , Dick and Harry, to leave their home with a rocket launcher in the trunk of their cars, a couple of hand grenades stowed-away in the glove-box, a pistol shoved down the crotch of their pants, with another stuck in their sock, with the addition of a machine gun sitting in the backseat?

Is that what the second amendment was set out to accomplish?

What about protecting ones castle? Was the intent of the second amendment to allow a homeowner to protect themselves (inside of their own home), or was the second amendment a vision to allow for ever Tom, Dick and Harry, to gallivant around in public grandstanding and waving their guns around in the faces of all while playing judge, jury and executioner?
 
Another question to any/all Americans here.

Is it legal for anyone to carry around with them a machine gun in public just like people carry around pistols?
 
digifoss said:
I disagree that Mayor Daley was a crackpot. He was, however, a much hated racist dictator and ran Chicago like it was his own personal imperium, much along the same lines as Leander Perez Sr. of Plaquemines and St. Bernard parishes before him.
Click to expand...
A racist is a crackpot.
 
Aunt Marg said:
Another question to any/all Americans here.

Is it legal for anyone to carry around with them a machine gun in public just like people carry around pistols?
Click to expand...
Seriously?? How would someone carry something that large & heavy?
A machine gun is fully automatic, which means it constantly fires with one trigger pull as long as the trigger is held back:
 
win231 said:
Seriously?? How would someone carry something that large & heavy?
A machine gun is fully automatic, which means it constantly fires with one trigger pull as long as the trigger is held back:
Click to expand...
There are much smaller versions... compact versions.

Strap over shoulder much the same as my husbands hunting rifles have.

Here are a couple of random images I pulled up.

Yes, correct, fully auto.
Beretta-PMX-11-cover.jpg
nintchdbpict000354930926.jpg
 
Automatic weapons, aka machine guns, were semi-outlawed in 1934 with the NFA. Their domestic manufacture was outlawed by Reagan in 1986. I have owned and been around firearms all my life and have only known one person that owned an automatic rifle. Despite how many of these scary looking guns appear, they are semi-automatic weapons, not machine guns. That means they can only fire one bullet each time the trigger is pulled. Bump-stocks can replace the OEM stocks on semi-automatic rifles and allow the user to operate it in nearly the same manner that an illegal automatic rifle operates. That's what that Paddock crackpot / serial-killer used to murder all of those people in Las Vegas. There's no reason for anyone to have a bump stock. Bump stocks are more dangerous than any AK or SKS rifles .
 
digifoss said:
Automatic weapons, aka machine guns, were semi-outlawed in 1934 with the NFA. Their domestic manufacture was outlawed by Reagan in 1986. I have owned and been around firearms all my life and have only known one person that owned an automatic rifle. Despite how many of these scary looking guns appear, they are semi-automatic weapons, not machine guns. That means they can only fire one bullet each time the trigger is pulled. Bump-stocks can replace the OEM stocks on semi-automatic rifles and allow the user to operate it in nearly the same manner that an illegal automatic rifle operates. That's what that Paddock crackpot / serial-killer used to murder all of those people in Las Vegas. There's no reason for anyone to have a bump stock. Bump stocks are more dangerous than any AK or SKS rifles .
Click to expand...
Have a look at this video, Digi.

Hog hunting using a machine gun (in Texas).


What am I missing here?
 
As far as I can tell, those appear to be semi-automatic rifles using what is called short-burst mode. They aren't really "machine guns", but they can fire either 2 or 3 rounds with one trigger pull. One mode was where a round would be fired when the trigger was pulled, and a second round fired when the trigger is released. I'm not sure how the 3-round burst works. Those are legal.
 
digifoss said:
As far as I can tell, those appear to be semi-automatic rifles using what is called short-burst mode. They aren't really "machine guns", but they can fire either 2 or 3 rounds with one trigger pull. One mode was where a round would be fired when the trigger was pulled, and a second round fired when the trigger is released. I'm not sure how the 3-round burst works. Those are legal.
Click to expand...
Thank you for weighing in on this, Digi.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top