General Discussion

OneTenthofOnePercent

(6,268 posts)

18. The Hughes Ammendment needs repealed anyways.

Tue Jul 24, 2012, 07:43 AM

Jul 2012

The current interpretation of the Second Ammendment is that it protects an indivual's right to own firearms... to allow for an armed populace in order to protect the Freedom of State. The founders intended for The People to have access to military-effective firearms (small arms, at the least). Like it or not, that is the interpretation.

And before someone says, "Herp-Derp, well all they had were muzzle loaders and muskets, guns are different today"... that was the cutting edge miltary armament of the time. Warships and cannons/artillery used in battle were commonly provided and owned by private mechants as well - I'm sure they were well of this. In addition to that, our other rights have evolved with time (ie: freedom of speech, new religions, etc...). What justifies the special-pleading that the 2nd Amendment should not evolve with technology as well?

Repeal the Hughes Ammendment.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

42 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Assault rifles [View all] JonLP24 Jul 2012 OP

Derp Yeah Its Spin Jul 2012 #1

What a waste of time to post this thread justanidea Jul 2012 #2

Which would be interesting JonLP24 Jul 2012 #4

I need a 120 round clip for my 12 gauge shotgun, really I do. n/t 2on2u Jul 2012 #3

Why, for weight training? Reasonable_Argument Jul 2012 #7

Fail. I know more than most about firearms, and no they don't need to be banned, the 2on2u Jul 2012 #15

Which "system" is that? NT Llewlladdwr Jul 2012 #37

You already know the answer to that question, the one that has a shoddy mental health 2on2u Jul 2012 #39

"and there is unintended affects" geckosfeet Jul 2012 #5

Just a portion of it JonLP24 Jul 2012 #6

One of the "unintended affects" of a heavily armed society geckosfeet Jul 2012 #11

I was under the impression JonLP24 Jul 2012 #13

Most shootings are done with .22 handguns obamanut2012 Jul 2012 #20

.22 are NOT prima facie Saturday night specials ProgressiveProfessor Jul 2012 #41

We Either Have a Machine Gun Ban, or We Don't. Junkdrawer Jul 2012 #8

Ok, now what? Reasonable_Argument Jul 2012 #9

So justanidea Jul 2012 #10

Bump stocks, tech triggers, and now rubber bands.... Junkdrawer Jul 2012 #12

The ATF justanidea Jul 2012 #14

I noticed you avoided my post nt Reasonable_Argument Jul 2012 #16

The Hughes Ammendment needs repealed anyways. OneTenthofOnePercent Jul 2012 #18

Eleventysquillion $ for the ATF and they ban SHOELACES. Tejas Jul 2012 #34

Automatics are not available to consumers obamanut2012 Jul 2012 #21

They are now. Again: With bump stocks, tech triggers, and now rubber bands.... Junkdrawer Jul 2012 #23

Why do you think anyone will even remember this after the next election? Llewlladdwr Jul 2012 #38

a few points... OneTenthofOnePercent Jul 2012 #17

I already know JonLP24 Jul 2012 #24

Then you are using it incorrectly just like the rest. Tejas Jul 2012 #30

I understand that JonLP24 Jul 2012 #32

These are my civil rights, let's both be nice. Tejas Jul 2012 #33

Assault rifle definition ... spin Jul 2012 #19

Got it. See #24 JonLP24 Jul 2012 #25

Most of the problem is in the magazines, not the guns. Who the fuck needs 100 rounds? HopeHoops Jul 2012 #22

The 100 round magazine did stop the massacre. ManiacJoe Jul 2012 #26

Interesting speculation that the 100 round mag may have saved lives in this instance. Kaleva Jul 2012 #27

I own a Glock 19 (9mm semiautomatic pistol) MercutioATC Jul 2012 #31

to me, yes. 4 seconds is all I need to close on you. pasto76 Jul 2012 #36

You, and apparently a lot of other people. MercutioATC Jul 2012 #40

yep, cause 16 years of training and war experience means Im soft just liek you pasto76 Jul 2012 #42

You're probably right JonLP24 Jul 2012 #35

assault thread spanone Jul 2012 #28

Holmes did not use an Assault Rifle. Tejas Jul 2012 #29