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
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Where do you stand on banning guns? [View all]TPaine7
(4,286 posts)20. Everything you said was false, except for opinion.
The NRA maintains the status quo misreading
The current understanding of the Second Amendment is at least essentially the same as held by the Supreme Court the first time it spoke on the matter (and many other times). The NRA agrees with that essential reading ( according to their briefs and published opinions) but their opinion is not authoritative. They didn't write the historic Supreme Court opinions that spoke about the Second Amendment from the 1800s up till today.
Refusing to allow any regulation, even though "well regulated" is specifically mentioned.
That's just factually false; the NRA has supported regulation.
So anyone with the cash can purchase any weapon the market has to offer which results in the never ending bloodshed and massacres this nation has actually become used to, to the point where they're expected.
Have you no respect for the truth? This is a blatant falsehood; there are many illegal weapons, and no convicted, disqualified felon can legally buy a 22 pistol, no matter how much money he has, nor can someone adjudicated mentally incompetent.
Legal documents from the 18th Century need reinterpretation in the 21st Century...
This is not false, it is simply a very revealing opinion. The Constitution should be reinterpreted--not amended!--to agree with your policy preferences.
...even if they weren't misinterpreted to begin with, which these were.
The Second Amendment was misinterpreted by the Supreme Court in its first statement on the subject, and by the Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment--authors of the Constitution. We know this because you say so, and because the way they interpreted it disagrees with you.
The early Supreme Court, the authors of the Fourteenth Amendment, the rules of legal interpretation and the current Supreme Court are all wrong. You, however, are correct in your interpretation.
And the NRA has a stranglehold on any regulation despite the continuing gun violence and massacres.
Again, this is your opinion, informed as it is by your keen insight, calm deliberation and historical knowledge.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
130 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Wow you just rendered both your vote AND your opinion totally meaningless and irrelevent.
cherokeeprogressive
Jul 2012
#31
How does that differ from the third choice? Isn't the National Guard the military, and aren't they
TPaine7
Jul 2012
#6
How did the NRA mislead the Supreme Court in the 1800s and the Framers of the 14th Amendment?
TPaine7
Jul 2012
#12
DU Member Francis Marion had this to say about the meaning of a weel regulated militia
Trunk Monkey
Jul 2012
#7
Good idea. Allowing honest citizens to legally carry concealed makes for a dangerous ...
spin
Jul 2012
#66
someone interpreting an OC as such a sign sounds fearful and paranoid to me.
gejohnston
Jul 2012
#88
Reopen the NFA registry, and remove SBRs, SBSs, and silencers from the Act. No AWB.
petronius
Jul 2012
#11
Would it surprise you to know that the militia HAS been called out as late as 1942?
Trunk Monkey
Jul 2012
#25
I am talking about actual state sponsored militias such as the Texas State Guard
Trunk Monkey
Jul 2012
#56
You make an interesting point about the implementation of the 2nd, I think it would be very odd
pop topcan
Dec 2012
#106
I wouldn't call limiting ownership of semi-auto assault style rifles to the police and the military
spin
Jul 2012
#42
Almost impossible to carry in public. Severe restrictions on guns manufactured as "assault/tactical"
Hoyt
Jul 2012
#51
Return to intent, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed
TheKentuckian
Jul 2012
#62
Federal government has no constitutional authority to ban arms. SCOTUS said "the Second Amendment,
jody
Jul 2012
#78
One quick question, do you consider double action revolvers to be semi-automatic?
pop topcan
Dec 2012
#108
The capacity of a semi-auto is dependent on the size of the magazine in the weapon. ...
spin
Dec 2012
#109