Gun Control & RKBA

Marengo

(3,477 posts)

153. Can you provide evidence that it is otherwise?

Reply to guillaumeb (Reply #152)

Tue Feb 14, 2017, 04:32 PM

Feb 2017

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

244 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Can you be a Progressive Democrat and still the support the Second Amendment? [View all] Berlin Vet Feb 2017 OP

Of course you can AJT Feb 2017 #1

OK so here's my thoughts. hollowdweller Feb 2017 #80

Some lever actions hold 7 (or so), yagotme Feb 2017 #189

Yes, but only if you can't read English DuckBurp Feb 2017 #2

The Founders and the SCOTUS disagree gejohnston Feb 2017 #7

Actually, I think you're wrong, but here's a Valentine anyway. DuckBurp Feb 2017 #56

what is the purpose of the wincest Feb 2017 #58

To enumerate some natural rights, yagotme Feb 2017 #190

Absolutely. pablo_marmol Feb 2017 #3

Thanks for the link. Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #4

You are most welcome! NT pablo_marmol Feb 2017 #5

Great Article Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #10

:-) pablo_marmol Feb 2017 #14

on the first, gejohnston Feb 2017 #6

Support the Second Amendment does not mean supporting Scalia's version of it. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #8

Can we support the Democratic party version? Obama's version? hack89 Feb 2017 #20

That was actually an echo of the Scalia version. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #23

So the party platform is RW on the 2A? hack89 Feb 2017 #65

You are asking for the ideal versus reality. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #68

So no state ever properly enforced the 2A? hack89 Feb 2017 #69

Heller created precedent. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #70

Of course not all men were actually equal hack89 Feb 2017 #74

Heller indeed has been an expansion of rights. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #77

That makes no sense hack89 Feb 2017 #78

The hysteria that drives sales will never stop. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #79

Can you name a single AWB that was ruled unconstitutional? hack89 Feb 2017 #82

What I said is that no regulations will be found reasonable. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #83

But that is not happening due to court rulings hack89 Feb 2017 #84

You avoided his. When and where has private gun ownership been strictly tied to militia membership? Marengo Feb 2017 #126

Prior to Heller, this concept of individual self-defense outside the home guillaumeb Feb 2017 #127

Oh, a smoke screen is it? Let's try again: When and where has a Federal court ruled that militia... Marengo Feb 2017 #128

More avoidance? guillaumeb Feb 2017 #129

Are you then arguing that voting is not a universal right.? hack89 Feb 2017 #132

What did Scalia mean by original intent? eom guillaumeb Feb 2017 #133

"The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." hack89 Feb 2017 #134

It is obviously clear to gun owners and gun lobbyists. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #136

It is mainstream within the Democratic party. hack89 Feb 2017 #138

Was he a "hack" on Texas v Johnson, Maryland v King, Brown v Entertainment, Florida v Jardine... Marengo Feb 2017 #145

What happened to the rest of the Amendment? guillaumeb Feb 2017 #156

No - this is the version you can find in the Democratic party platform hack89 Feb 2017 #161

Intentionally or not, you redacted 1/2 of the Amendment. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #168

So how do you explain the party platform? hack89 Feb 2017 #169

Do I detect avoidance? guillaumeb Feb 2017 #170

Just pointing out that the NRA and Scalia are irrelevant hack89 Feb 2017 #171

Allow me to help you: guillaumeb Feb 2017 #172

So? It still protects and individual right. hack89 Feb 2017 #174

And the Constitution predates the Democratic Party. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #175

Ok. hack89 Feb 2017 #182

Whole lotta comma's in there, yagotme Feb 2017 #191

Two interdependent clauses, and one modifies the other. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #197

I was referring to the original text you quoted. yagotme Feb 2017 #199

A displaced modifier? guillaumeb Feb 2017 #200

Sometimes, when you read something Yoda-like, yagotme Feb 2017 #203

And with you also. eom guillaumeb Feb 2017 #204

Are you seriously trying to argue that... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #154

When and where has a Federal court ruled that militia membership is a prerequisite for the private.. Marengo Feb 2017 #135

More avoidance. I understand that you cannot answer without guillaumeb Feb 2017 #137

When or where has a Federal court ruled that Militia membership is a prerequisite for the private... Marengo Feb 2017 #139

In reality, what is understood is that your position stands utterly unsubstantiated as you... Marengo Feb 2017 #146

Your question has nothing to do with open carry, or concealed carry, or supposed self-defense. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #147

God God, what a comedy. You're going hide behind THAT? Where's the evidence I asked for? Marengo Feb 2017 #149

The post, and my responses, concerned Heller. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #150

What do you mean by "dishonest redaction"? Marengo Feb 2017 #151

That should be obvious. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #152

Can you provide evidence that it is otherwise? Marengo Feb 2017 #153

Do you read the Amendment and decide for yourself what words really matter? guillaumeb Feb 2017 #155

All that really matters is the SC's decision, and in Heller a majority agreed the 2nd protects... Marengo Feb 2017 #158

Even Stevens and Breyer Indicated It Was An Individual Right Rucker61 Feb 2017 #218

Where does it say that the 2A was limited to whites only? hack89 Feb 2017 #131

Hate to break it to you, but you have been misinformed gejohnston Feb 2017 #21

Well, someone IS misinformed. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #24

From the link in #3 discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #26

So using your link, we can infer that the original intent was that possession of firearms guillaumeb Feb 2017 #31

The original intent... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #32

SO, reading your second statement, we can infer that Amendments can be amended? guillaumeb Feb 2017 #34

Are you also in favor of... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #36

You discounted my sarcasm and irony. eom guillaumeb Feb 2017 #40

Sorry about that chief discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #63

The purpose of the BoR... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #37

And that Second Amendment included two clauses. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #39

"Merely" prefatory? Straw Man Feb 2017 #60

Your attempt ignores the actual written wording of the Amendment. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #67

Why is it that somehow with you pro-restriction folks there is always a need for a "need"? discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #73

I referred to a literary need. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #76

I get that. We "gun-nuts" are just sensitive on that word "need" discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #87

Understood. I could have been clearer also. eom guillaumeb Feb 2017 #117

Wrong -- YOUR attempt does. Straw Man Feb 2017 #115

I feel we've discussed this before but thanks the exchange discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #72

A nice response. And polite as well. Something that is occasionally lacking in this venue. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #75

As to the points you raise and a thanks again for the polite exchange discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #86

Since you raised the points: guillaumeb Feb 2017 #89

Point by point discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #105

And yet the gun lobby is rapidly pushing to allow gun owners to carry everywhere. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #108

I think it's rather obvious what my preferred list of restrictions would cover discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #109

We both understand that a respectful dialogue is possible, guillaumeb Feb 2017 #116

Voting has nothing to do with it gejohnston Feb 2017 #44

Other states like Utah... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #64

Utah and Wyoming have something of a rivalry gejohnston Feb 2017 #118

Free white women, as a group, were universally prohibited from posessing firearms? Marengo Feb 2017 #207

Not explicitly. But neither were non-whites explicitly named. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #211

Free white women could not, and did not, possess firearms? Marengo Feb 2017 #212

When you start with original intent... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #213

My interpretation depends on a reading of the actual Amendment. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #214

Perhaps you can resolve the mystery discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #215

I am asserting that, in my opinion, guillaumeb Feb 2017 #220

Again I ask: discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #221

I believe in a complete and literal interpretation. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #223

Why Is Your Version Not Supported By History? Rucker61 Feb 2017 #224

Money talks. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #225

Some History Rucker61 Feb 2017 #227

This message was self-deleted by its author discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #226

Ignoring the question isn't an answer. To clarify: discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #228

Blame the Waite Court Rucker61 Feb 2017 #222

Where was militia service a prerequisite for the private ownership of firearms by free citizens? Marengo Feb 2017 #216

Free white women could not, and did not, possess firearms? Marengo Feb 2017 #230

But SCOTUS precedent... sarisataka Feb 2017 #27

There are no cases prior to Heller v. DC. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #35

So there was no precedent sarisataka Feb 2017 #50

No, the collective right of "the people", as opposed to wording such as guillaumeb Feb 2017 #66

Fourth Amendment sarisataka Feb 2017 #88

The term "the people" refers to the theory. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #90

You are avoiding the question sarisataka Feb 2017 #91

A collective right is not an absolute right. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #96

The only right that is arguably collective sarisataka Feb 2017 #99

Good points about the right of assembly. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #100

A GOP dominated Court is unfortunate sarisataka Feb 2017 #102

Good for your state. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #103

no it doesn't gejohnston Feb 2017 #42

Like Scalia, you ignore what you cannot explain in the individual vs group argument. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #43

Group rights simply do not exist gejohnston Feb 2017 #45

Again you reiterate Scalia's nonsensical excuse for scholarship. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #47

You haven't read any of the links, gejohnston Feb 2017 #48

You have always been a good debater, even if I don't agree with your premise... tortoise1956 Feb 2017 #120

We must agree to disagree on this. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #123

Where free white women as a group prohibited from owning firearms? Marengo Feb 2017 #140

In Plymouth, well before the Second Amendment, it appears that free blacks could own guns HoneyBadger Feb 2017 #180

An interesting article, but how does it relate to the Second Amendment? guillaumeb Feb 2017 #184

You seem reluctant to address this point discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #185

Provisions for an army had a 2 year limit. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #186

A 2 year limit does not preclude a standing army discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #187

My point about the army goes to original intent. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #188

Your point about the army is a conclusion you've drawn discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #206

As your "scholarship" is so superior, please provide an example of a Federal court ruling... Marengo Feb 2017 #143

So 200 plus years isn't precedent? ileus Feb 2017 #122

Other than Heller v. DC, what SCOTUS precedent guillaumeb Feb 2017 #125

When and where has a Federal court ruled that militia membership is a prerequisite for the private.. Marengo Feb 2017 #141

So you'd argue befor heller no individuals owned firearms? ileus Feb 2017 #148

Interesting question. trc Feb 2017 #9

Assault Weapons Ban Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #12

Same as 1994? yagotme Feb 2017 #192

CT and NY Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #198

The thrust of my post was on a national AWB, yagotme Feb 2017 #201

Old Liberal female here who supports the Second Amendment. democrank Feb 2017 #11

Mental Health Issues Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #13

Re. mental health issues, "progressives" reward lip service, ignore *complete* malfeasance. pablo_marmol Feb 2017 #16

Sorry, Berlin Vet, for my not-so-clear attempt regarding "mental health issues" democrank Feb 2017 #22

Out of the 4 you list, yagotme Feb 2017 #193

A progressive Democrat sarisataka Feb 2017 #15

Should Say It Often Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #17

I just can't wrap my head around the fact, yagotme Feb 2017 #194

I have to ask HAB911 Feb 2017 #237

Precrime is a regressive fantasy- all of us have to trust *everyone* we interact with friendly_iconoclast Feb 2017 #239

The very idea of "earning" or "qualifying for" trust is anti-rights n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #240

LOL! HAB911 Feb 2017 #241

YMMV discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #242

Agreed. yagotme Feb 2017 #243

As GE has mentioned, UBCs can only aspire to create very slight improvement. pablo_marmol Feb 2017 #18

Yes. Nt hack89 Feb 2017 #19

I don't agree with your last point about requiring guns to be in a safe, doc03 Feb 2017 #25

what would you recommend if there are children in the home? Phoenix61 Feb 2017 #29

on my to buy list once the grandkids are created gejohnston Feb 2017 #49

You could secure most of the guns in a safe. If you want doc03 Feb 2017 #51

My grandfathers M92 Winchester carries 13 rounds. It was built in 1911. oneshooter Feb 2017 #81

Sure you can. democratisphere Feb 2017 #28

Personally, I would like to make handguns illegal Phoenix61 Feb 2017 #30

If someone is shot and killed... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #33

No, but criminals aren't going to have Phoenix61 Feb 2017 #41

What's the purpose of having laws... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #167

If your local police were confiscating unregistered guns, yagotme Feb 2017 #195

No, if you support the NRA interpretation of the 2nd amendment you're a RW nutjob SecularMotion Feb 2017 #38

"There is not one Progressive or Liberal organization that supports weakening gun regulations." wincest Feb 2017 #59

Not progressive, not liberal SecularMotion Feb 2017 #61

what is your defination wincest Feb 2017 #62

Can we at least agree the 2A protects and individual right? Nt hack89 Feb 2017 #71

As long as you agree that the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. SecularMotion Feb 2017 #92

I have never believed otherwise hack89 Feb 2017 #93

Now you're just being delusional SecularMotion Feb 2017 #94

One issue has broad support hack89 Feb 2017 #95

Correct HAB911 Feb 2017 #238

Very few people are progressive, moderate or conservative on all issues. Kaleva Feb 2017 #46

Yes RoadhogRidesAgain Feb 2017 #52

As originally written, or as demagogued by the NRA et al? Zambero Feb 2017 #53

Yes, and it's not even difficult. HassleCat Feb 2017 #54

I'm sure this has been said a thousand times... sagetea Feb 2017 #55

Gun debate a microcosm of our national psychosis Worktodo Feb 2017 #57

No fuck all gun humpers!!! gopiscrap Feb 2017 #85

This is going to to be a difficult time for you, isn't it? hack89 Feb 2017 #98

i accept your offer wincest Feb 2017 #244

Reason For This Post Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #97

I checked your website and found no mention of guns SecularMotion Feb 2017 #104

ARC Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #106

Did you ask them the same question? SecularMotion Feb 2017 #107

No Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #110

Do they know you're using the name of their organization to pimp gun rights on DU? SecularMotion Feb 2017 #111

Feel Free Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #113

Are you attempting to silence that poster with a threat? Sure appears that way to me. Marengo Feb 2017 #142

He might be asking if... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #112

I See Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #114

Some posters here, yes. yagotme Feb 2017 #196

Yes... Mike Nelson Feb 2017 #101

Post removed Post removed Feb 2017 #119

You can't be a progressive and NOT support the 2A. ileus Feb 2017 #121

yes, especially if you consider that the Bill of Rights protects civil liberties. aikoaiko Feb 2017 #124

yes bluecollar2 Feb 2017 #130

In theory, yes. Reality is a tougher proposition. Paladin Feb 2017 #144

Depends. Can we agree on a definition for "Progressive Democrat" TXCritter Feb 2017 #157

Thanks Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #159

OK, an actual answer to your strategy question TXCritter Feb 2017 #160

Thanks for your response Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #165

Yes but now there's two of us TXCritter Feb 2017 #173

What Other Federally Protected Rights Rucker61 Feb 2017 #217

Yeah, and I'm as progressive as it comes but I'm like Scalia on this, a strict constructionist... brush Feb 2017 #162

Re: "...there is no regulation to keep them out of the hands of the mentally unstable." discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #163

How do the mass killers get them then, all thru the gun show loophole? We both know that's not true. brush Feb 2017 #164

- $$$ not being spent to keep the database updated, discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #166

They have to be adjudicated first. hack89 Feb 2017 #208

The founding fathers used handguns for more than target shooting HoneyBadger Feb 2017 #177

Oh, I forgot, those one shot jobs, right, certainly not full-auto uzis or even glock semi... brush Feb 2017 #179

Sure, if you are part of a well regulated militia. Nt HopeAgain Feb 2017 #176

License & registration MedusaX Feb 2017 #178

Thanks Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #181

A license good in every state in the union? Sounds good. hack89 Feb 2017 #183

heck yeah!!! samnsara Feb 2017 #202

Depends on what you call "support." Warpy Feb 2017 #205

So self defense is not a valid reason to own guns? Or recreation? hack89 Feb 2017 #209

what are military style weapons? wincest Feb 2017 #210

Sorry, but you've been conned re. "military style weapons". pablo_marmol Feb 2017 #219

Of course you can discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #229

In paragraph #1, yagotme Feb 2017 #231

I'm Confused Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #232

No, if the conviction is actually registered in the system, yagotme Feb 2017 #233

You've got it right. Straw Man Feb 2017 #234

Thousands? Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #235

Not all turn aways are for criminal reasons, yagotme Feb 2017 #236