- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Jones “The Second Amendment is not an absolute right, not a God-given right"
Posted on 11/20/17 at 10:21 am to Jjdoc
Posted on 11/20/17 at 10:21 am to Jjdoc
Doug Jones might be a bigger idiot than Moore and that’s saying something. Why in God’s name would you make this statement while running for public office in Alabama? The only explanation is that he’s intentionally trying to throw the election to Moore.
2
Posted on 11/20/17 at 10:23 am to Blizzard of Chizz
I applaud him for letting the people of alamaba know exactly where he stands
Posted on 11/20/17 at 10:23 am to Blizzard of Chizz
Small time Dem candidate is drinking the Prog coolaid.
Posted on 11/20/17 at 10:23 am to TigersFan64
quote:Wrong again.
And you're leaving out the key point that the framers wanted the militias to be controlled and regulated by the states. They certainly did NOT intend for the militias to be an uncontrolled mob running around doing what they wanted.
The term "well regulated" was in use for a long time before it was included in the 2A, and it meant in good working order, like a well regulated watch that keeps its time with precision. It wasn't talking about regulation like we associate with government oversight, but the ability of the militia (made up of the common citizen) to be ready at a moment's notice to defend the homeland by having the common person able to bear their own arms.
Here is the actual text: "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."
The right belongs to the people, not the militia. Militia's were necessary and since they were made up of ordinary people, the people needed the ability to bear arms.
When discussing the 2A with leftists who don't understand grammar, I've found it helpful to use this picture:
This post was edited on 11/20/17 at 10:32 am
Posted on 11/20/17 at 10:25 am to SidewalkDawg
quote:You're free to disagree but from past experience I've learned that your definition of "objective" is not accurate, which is why you disagree.
As a godless heathen, i'll just have to disagree with you.
Here's a hint as to why I think you're wrong: not all people value their own lives, liberty, or property, much less that of their neighbor.
Posted on 11/20/17 at 10:26 am to TigersFan64
well regulated
- Brian T. Halonen
quote:
Oxford English Dictionary
quote:
1709: "If a liberal Education has formed in us well-regulated Appetites and worthy Inclinations."
quote:
1714: "The practice of all well-regulated courts of justice in the world."
quote:
1812: "The equation of time ... is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well-regulated clock and a true sun dial."
quote:
1848: "A remissness for which I am sure every well-regulated person will blame the Mayor."
quote:
1862: "It appeared to her well-regulated mind, like a clandestine proceeding."
quote:
1894: "The newspaper, a never wanting adjunct to every well-regulated American embryo city."
quote:
The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it.
- Brian T. Halonen
Posted on 11/20/17 at 10:27 am to FooManChoo
quote:
Here's a hint as to why I think you're wrong: not all people value their own lives, liberty, or property, much less that of their neighbor.
You're right, organized religion has really helped us along in those regards. As long as you ignore the crusades, ritualistic sacrifices, current "jihads", and various other reasons people of different religions find to kill each other. Human beings can worship various gods and still be shite heads.
Posted on 11/20/17 at 10:27 am to FooManChoo
History is not on his side. At all.
Like I said. Private citizens had gatling guns... they owned canons. All the way through WWI, people owned automatic weapons.
Like I said. Private citizens had gatling guns... they owned canons. All the way through WWI, people owned automatic weapons.
Posted on 11/20/17 at 10:28 am to TigersFan64
quote:
So is, "A well regulated militia."
Membership in which is not a determining factor for keeping and bearing firearms in the 2nd Amendment.
Posted on 11/20/17 at 10:28 am to Jcorye1
quote:People do terrible things because they are sinners and they all violate the law of God. Whether they prescribe to a religion (even Christianity) or not doesn't change that.
You're right, organized religion has really helped us along in those regards. As long as you ignore the crusades, ritualistic sacrifices, current "jihads", and various other reasons people of different religions find to kill each other. Human beings can worship various gods and still be shite heads
Posted on 11/20/17 at 10:30 am to Jjdoc
We've had this discussion on this board at least 50 times since Obama was elected.
Posted on 11/20/17 at 10:36 am to TigersFan64
quote:
Go back and read the Heller decision. Even Justice Scalia said that it's not an "absolute right."
So? He's wrong.
Virtually everyone who says things like "welp, of course we can't have TOTAL free speech, because rights aren't absolute!" doesn't actually understand what a right is.
The right to keep and bear arms is actually not a right at all, but it is a consequence of the concept of property rights. The second amendment clearly states that one's property rights, where guns are concerned, shall not be infringed by the federal government. I'm not sure exactly how much more "absolute" that statement could be.
Literally any prohibition or restriction on the second amendment by the federal government is a clear violation of the 2nd amendment, and anyone who argues otherwise is merely a confused, hypocritical, legal positivist.
Posted on 11/20/17 at 10:38 am to JuiceTerry
Posted on 11/20/17 at 10:38 am to Jjdoc
quote:
I applaud him for letting the people of alamaba know exactly where he stands
Unlike you, because that quote is not attributed to jones as per your link. i believe the capt refers to this as being a "fricking hack."
This post was edited on 11/20/17 at 10:39 am
Posted on 11/20/17 at 10:43 am to 9th life
quote:
Unlike you, because that quote is not attributed to jones as per your link. i believe the capt refers to this as being a "fricking hack."
quote:
This position is contrary to the clear language of the amendment, which states that the right to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed.”
That is called a democrats foot in the door to limit peoples rights.
Posted on 11/20/17 at 10:47 am to MrLarson
From the link and in the headline of the OP:
what you cited was from the writer, not a quote from Jones.
eta his quote if you are interested:
quote:
During a May 2013 appearance on Rachel Maddow Lean Forward, Murphy said, “The Second Amendment is not an absolute right, not a God-given right. It has always had conditions upon it like the First Amendment has.”
quote:
That is called a democrats foot in the door to limit peoples rights.
what you cited was from the writer, not a quote from Jones.
eta his quote if you are interested:
quote:
We’ve got limitations on all constitutional amendments in one form or another,” Jones said. “I want to enforce the laws that we have right now. The biggest issue, I think, that’s facing the Second Amendment right now is that we need to make sure we shore up the National Crime Information System, the NCIC system for background checks, to both keep guns out of the hands of criminals, but at the same time, cut down on error so that law-abiding citizens can get those.
This post was edited on 11/20/17 at 10:53 am
Posted on 11/20/17 at 11:02 am to TigersFan64
quote:
So why do some people still insist to the contrary on the Second Amendment?
The Right to Bear Arms has tons of restrictions on it. No one has ever claimed that it was absolute. This is a complete strawman.
Posted on 11/20/17 at 11:04 am to TigersFan64
quote:
No, sorry but you are incorrect. You need to learn the meaning of "well-regulated." It does not mean a loose collection of people with guns doing whatever they want to. And the concept of state-controlled militias had been around before the drafting of the Second Amendment.
OK. Yes, your information from DU is more credible than my years of study of Con Law.
Posted on 11/20/17 at 11:07 am to Antonio Moss
You have a link to that?
Also, several of the anti federalists drew up draft bills of rights that were much more explicit. I can't find them online now.
Also, several of the anti federalists drew up draft bills of rights that were much more explicit. I can't find them online now.
Posted on 11/20/17 at 11:11 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
The Right to Bear Arms has tons of restrictions on it. No one has ever claimed that it was absolute
Of course they have argued that the wording of the 2A is absolute. It's retarded to argue that it's anything else.
Page 4 of 5
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News