Started By
Message

re: Justice Steven's proposed 6 amendments to the constitution

Posted on 5/2/14 at 10:15 am to
Posted by weagle99
Member since Nov 2011
35893 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 10:15 am to
quote:

The original intent of the 2nd amendment was to give the states the ability to defend themselves against Indian attacks, local insurrections, and invasions from foreign powers.


I hope you aren't a voter.
Posted by weagle99
Member since Nov 2011
35893 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 10:17 am to
quote:

It's impossible to determine, from the way it was written, whether the authors of the 2nd amendment meant the right to own a group was individual or collective.



No, it is not. See Heller.
Posted by HonoraryCoonass
Member since Jan 2005
20194 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 10:28 am to
quote:

Actually, the original intent of the 2nd amendment is archaic and obsolete. Nevertheless, Steven's proposal clarifies it.



In other words, it changes the constitution to reflect his own personal preferences.

Posted by Antonio Moss
The South
Member since Mar 2006
49397 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 10:38 am to
quote:

The original intent of the 2nd amendment was to give the states the ability to defend themselves against Indian attacks, local insurrections, and invasions from foreign powers.


Read more, post less.

quote:

“[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation (where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” - James Madison


P.S. Madison wrote the Second Amendment.

quote:

"Who are the Militia? They consist now of the whole people." - George Mason

"militia, when properly formed, [as] in fact the people themselves." - George Mason



P.S. Mason was the founder/framer that pushed hardest for the inclusion of the 2nd Amendment.

And here are some quotes from the other crucial seven founders:

quote:

"Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense." - John Adams



quote:

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." - Thomas Jefferson




quote:

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms in his own lands." - Thomas Jefferson


Like I said, read more.
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
63276 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 10:40 am to
quote:

Bye bye Republican party.
wtf?
Posted by ninthward
Boston, MA
Member since May 2007
22738 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 10:43 am to
quote:

Antonio Moss


thank you!!!

the citizens are the militia

dumb arse liberals dont even know how to interpret the 2nd
Posted by themunch
bottom of the list
Member since Jan 2007
71840 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 2:31 pm to
I think the liberals do know how to interpret the 2nd but still will not yield to the people.
Posted by GXZ
Member since Nov 2012
52 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 3:08 pm to
quote:

Antonio Moss


I lurk, but the majority of those quotes you cited are made up or have been ridiculously twisted out of context.

Madison:

LINK

below in true context in the Federalist papers from Yale

LINK

Jefferson: LINK

Adams: LINK

Almost positive the George Mason quotes are fake as well, but I don't have time at the moment to find sources from any reputable sites. Anyway, I'll go back to lurking now.
Posted by WildTchoupitoulas
Member since Jan 2010
44071 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 3:32 pm to
quote:

I think it hilarious that there are apparently people walking this Earth who must be too young or too poorly educated to know that gerrymandering was created in the first place to guarantee black seats in congress.

I think it's hilarious that you think there were that many blacks in Massachusetts in 1812.
Posted by USMCTiger03
Member since Sep 2007
71176 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 5:55 pm to
So I guess the arms would need to be housed in some militia armory locations guarded by whom? Who would determine when or how frequently the militia would train with the weapons? Or does he mean only used in the event of an actual action?
Posted by gthog61
Irving, TX
Member since Nov 2009
71001 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 7:10 pm to
quote:

I think it's hilarious that you think there were that many blacks in Massachusetts in 1812.


The ghost of Crispus Attucks says "frick you Honky"
Posted by Clames
Member since Oct 2010
19551 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 9:50 pm to
He has the excuse of senility. You just have infantile stupidity.
Posted by Clames
Member since Oct 2010
19551 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 10:01 pm to
quote:

Than why did they use the word...MILITIA...in a clause by itself? 


Well there is a construct of English grammar you need to be familiar with. Seeing as you don't know the difference between "than" and "then", it should suffice to say it is beyond your education level.

quote:

It's impossible to determine, from the way it was written, whether the authors of the 2nd amendment meant the right to own a group was individual or collective. 


It really isn't since the collective rights theories wrt the 2nd Amendment were put in their graves with the Heller and McDonald SCOTUS decisions. You seriously don't know very much about this topic.
Posted by SammyTiger
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Feb 2009
79416 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 10:49 pm to
quote:

He wants to rewrite the 2nd amendment for clarity.


No, he just wants to rewrite the second amendment.

Our founding fathers were very aware of the fact that private citizens should be armed.

1. they had just fought a war with a majority volunteer force, against a tyrannical government. They understood that you cannot rely on government forces to protect freedom

2. They were very wary of making the US government over powerful. An armed populace was originally designed to keep it in check.

Also the death penalty isn't cruel, and it shouldn't be unusual. Some people deserve to die.
Posted by Sentrius
Fort Rozz
Member since Jun 2011
64757 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 10:57 pm to
Jesus, that is quite possibly the most statist proposals much less writing I've seen from a SCOTUS justice in recent times.

Sorry to hear he's rather ignorant on the 2nd amendment and why states are important and their sovereignty has to be protected.
Posted by Turkey_Creek_Tiger
Member since Dec 2012
12343 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 11:00 pm to
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/3/14 at 10:15 am
Posted by CollegeFBRules
Member since Oct 2008
25716 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 11:02 pm to
Just to clarify, are there limits to the type of weapons an average Joe citizen should be able to own?
Posted by Sentrius
Fort Rozz
Member since Jun 2011
64757 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 11:05 pm to
My own limit is if any federal agency can purchase and use the weapon, I should be able to do that as well.
Posted by CollegeFBRules
Member since Oct 2008
25716 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 11:09 pm to
Hmmm...interesting litmus test. If I can find a federal agency in possession of a rocket, you are okay with any citizen without a criminal record owning a rocket? I'm not.
Posted by Gmorgan4982
Member since May 2005
101750 posts
Posted on 5/2/14 at 11:11 pm to
I would trust any citizen more than I would trust the government and the government has a bunch of rockets.
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 9Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram