General Discussion

pipoman

(16,038 posts)

5. I have yet to find someone who states

Reply to liberal N proud (Original post)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 09:50 AM

Dec 2012

this less than historical view point, who will answer the very simple question...

If the second amendment says, "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." but actually means, "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the militia to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.", why isn't that what it says? Why this obvious ambiguity?

Further to state that those who formed this nation and government wished all arms be held by the state (national guard) are completely ignorant of the intent of reasons for revolution in the first place.

No, the true meaning of the second amendment is quite clear, it is wishful thinkers who don't have the votes to amend the constitution who proclaim falsities to something so unambiguous as the second amendment.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

72 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Second Amendment Has Nothing to Do with Gun Ownership [View all] liberal N proud Dec 2012 OP

Well, that's about the lamest, most cherry picked interpretation of the 2nd amendment I've seen MadHound Dec 2012 #1

So you are a constitutional scholar? liberal N proud Dec 2012 #2

Umm, you did notice the second part of the Second Amendment, didn't you? MadHound Dec 2012 #3

well, that "some retired judge" was Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United CTyankee Dec 2012 #12

As published by Parade magazine, and paraphrased by Daily Kos, MadHound Dec 2012 #13

Do you have any research to the contrary? Please let me know instead of relying on CTyankee Dec 2012 #24

And the same judge who thought that anti-sodomy laws were constitutional, the death penalty was a-ok X_Digger Dec 2012 #23

we are not talking about his opinion about anti-sodomy laws and the death penalty, now CTyankee Dec 2012 #25

So his opinion has value only when he agrees with you? That the size of it? X_Digger Dec 2012 #41

I'm seeing a pattern here... derby378 Dec 2012 #53

same goes for you... CTyankee Dec 2012 #59

oh, don't be tiresome. I agreed with something he said. So what. CTyankee Dec 2012 #57

Don't hold him up as an expert if you're not going to stand behind that.. X_Digger Dec 2012 #61

You know more about constitutional law than he did, obviously... CTyankee Dec 2012 #62

It doesn't take an expert to see that he despised individual rights, generally. X_Digger Dec 2012 #63

Oh, of course I will my dearest. Anything to please you! CTyankee Dec 2012 #64

this is the problem with binary thinking right here.. frylock Dec 2012 #60

He's only representing that those words were those of a judge published in Parade Magazine. AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2012 #16

you make excellent points in your OP samsingh Dec 2012 #26

I'm not. So I won't address Burger's legal claims; other more qualified people already have. Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #29

You are being conned. AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2012 #32

Ah, so it's a false citation? Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #33

Apparently someone at Dailykos made this up, and then at least two OPs have been created AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2012 #35

Amen pipoman Dec 2012 #6

He's not relying upon the actual language published in Parade Magazine and attributed to Burger. AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2012 #11

MadHound I must angrily disagree with your subject. I don't believe OP is that good. nt jody Dec 2012 #27

I accept the President's position that it is an individual right. hack89 Dec 2012 #4

Not a gun owner myself Puzzledtraveller Dec 2012 #58

I have yet to find someone who states pipoman Dec 2012 #5

Since the origional source is Parade Magazine from Jan 14, 1990, that is the best source AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2012 #7

Until 2008 the OP has it correct. Morton Grove, IL, for example was able to ban handguns. The byeya Dec 2012 #8

State rights rule! hack89 Dec 2012 #15

agreed samsingh Dec 2012 #51

liberal N proud, don't let this folks get you down. Thanks for the informative contribution. ywcachieve Dec 2012 #9

If facts matter, his informative contribution was to republish something that was untrue AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2012 #17

I agree with OP. Doesn't matter though, even Scalia agrees restrictions are OK. Let's pass them. Hoyt Dec 2012 #10

Respectfully disagree. H2O Man Dec 2012 #14

The 2002 9th circuit opinion buzzroller Dec 2012 #18

I am the King of France slackmaster Dec 2012 #19

Only if I get to be the reincarnation of Emperor Norton I of the United States derby378 Dec 2012 #54

A good, lengthy, scholarly book review regarding this topic, "To Keep and Bear Arms" by Garry Wills yodermon Dec 2012 #20

Here's the problem with opinions...they are only that... jmg257 Dec 2012 #31

Isn't there something wrong with this math? "State militias = National Guard"? jmg257 Dec 2012 #21

Laurence Tribe was persuaded, before Heller. Yet another GOP ideologue? eallen Dec 2012 #22

Reservist in the Swiss Army are permitted to store military weaponry in their homes. Aristus Dec 2012 #28

Congress has all the authority it needs for the militia in Article I, Section 8, clauses 15 & 16. jody Dec 2012 #30

Scholarly discussion of the 2nd Amendment bongbong Dec 2012 #34

bongbong the best review of both sides of RKBA debate is Heller opinion and dissents and the many jody Dec 2012 #36

More insults from the Delicate Flowers bongbong Dec 2012 #38

No one has to impugn your intelligence but you do have an opportunity to read the material I jody Dec 2012 #42

LOL bongbong Dec 2012 #45

"yo mama" trash talk doesn't bother me. You use the same old insults so readers will start ignoring jody Dec 2012 #48

"More insults" as you call anyone that disagrees with you a rl6214 Dec 2012 #47

Not everybody bongbong Dec 2012 #50

I don't know what a "Tom Tomorrow" is but it doesn't take a rocket scientist rl6214 Dec 2012 #67

The folks who own gun shops and sell guns are loving all this anti-gun BS. crazyjoe Dec 2012 #37

That's bongbong Dec 2012 #39

gun sales are through the roof, real funny. crazyjoe Dec 2012 #65

Yes! bongbong Dec 2012 #66

what's with the delicate flower crap? grow up crazyjoe Jan 2013 #68

It's a term to sooth super-sensitive gun-lovers bongbong Jan 2013 #70

well, that's pretty immature and stupid. crazyjoe Jan 2013 #71

LOL bongbong Jan 2013 #72

Let's try this with the Establishment clause. Igel Dec 2012 #40

IMO some on *both* sides are incoherent. jody Dec 2012 #43

I don't think even the dissenting justices in Heller believe that aikoaiko Dec 2012 #44

I agree! bongbong Dec 2012 #46

I see you're still trying trying to contribute something meaningful. aikoaiko Dec 2012 #52

Yes! bongbong Dec 2012 #56

aikoaiko I'm disappointed that almost none of the anti-RKBA group have read the Heller opinion and jody Dec 2012 #49

Burger did not issue the opinion which is now falsely being attributed to him. AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2012 #55

I don't give a fuck about the meaning of the second amendment TRJuan Jan 2013 #69