Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

njhoneybadger

(3,911 posts) Mon Feb 19, 2018, 02:34 PM Feb 2018

WE THE PEOPLE [View all]

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, INSURE DOMESTIC TRANQUILITY,PROVIDE for the COMMON DEFENCE, PROMOTE the GENERAL WELFARE and SECURE the BLESSINGS OF LIBERTY TO OURSELVES AND OUR POSTERITY,do ordain and establish this this Constitution for the United States of America

The intellectually dishonest interpretation of the second amendment has become a major threat to the rights of we the people as laid out in the preamble of the Constitution!

28 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

WE THE PEOPLE [View all] njhoneybadger Feb 2018 OP

Which interpretation is dishonest? Marengo Feb 2018 #1

Yours and other gunners. You guys fail to acknowledge the first 13 words in the Amendment. Hoyt Feb 2018 #2

What was the original intent? Marengo Feb 2018 #3

Hilliary, Bernie and Obama agree with us, however. hack89 Feb 2018 #7

More gunner BS. Read Stevens' dissent in Heller. I get, when it comes to guns, you guys support Hoyt Feb 2018 #13

Losing arguments are still losing arguments hack89 Feb 2018 #14

We all know that Heller permits strict gun control. hack89 Feb 2018 #15

Supporting right wing Justices is still supporting right wing politicians and supporters. Hoyt Feb 2018 #18

Scalia supported strict gun control. hack89 Feb 2018 #19

I support limiting your "right" to carry lethal weapons, Yes. Hoyt Feb 2018 #20

Good luck with that. hack89 Feb 2018 #21

The argumentum ad verecundiam is a damned popular fallacy. LanternWaste Mar 2018 #27

So there are no legal scholars that support the militia interpretation? hack89 Mar 2018 #28

The "Individual Right" interpretation njhoneybadger Feb 2018 #4

Yet both Hilliary and Bernie say otherwise. hack89 Feb 2018 #5

Well, they had to say that or they they would have been accused of wanting to take away njhoneybadger Feb 2018 #8

It has been in the Democratic Party platform several times hack89 Feb 2018 #9

I don't think rewriting the 2nd Amendment is unreasonable. njhoneybadger Feb 2018 #10

Just unrealistic. Nt hack89 Feb 2018 #12

Maybe someday we will have 2/3 of congress njhoneybadger Feb 2018 #16

You need 3/4 of the states hack89 Feb 2018 #17

38 states is even more than 33 states. Captain Stern Feb 2018 #24

My bad. Nt hack89 Feb 2018 #25

Where and when has that been enforced, as on militia membership as a prerequisite for the... Marengo Feb 2018 #6

Most people are sick, tired and bored with the 2A debate leftstreet Feb 2018 #11

With the exception of limiting the number owned... GulfCoast66 Feb 2018 #22

Thank YOU! smirkymonkey Feb 2018 #23

Arguing the second amendment with gun fetishists is pointless. hunter Feb 2018 #26