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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
So let me know when the Supreme Court comes around to your way of thinking hack89 Sep 2012 #1
That is not an argument-no content digonswine Sep 2012 #2
I don't like playing fantasy games when it comes to my civil rights. hack89 Sep 2012 #4
But I disagree-I agree with your personal rights- digonswine Sep 2012 #7
There is nothing more secure than an enumerated right hack89 Sep 2012 #13
" It rings hollow. " That is also not an argument. n/t Common Sense Party Sep 2012 #111
The right protected by the second amendment pre-dates the constitution. X_Digger Sep 2012 #3
You are off about what I think- digonswine Sep 2012 #5
The second amendment protects the right. X_Digger Sep 2012 #8
Why the militia qualifier? digonswine Sep 2012 #11
Only if you assume that the rights are limited by the bill of rights. X_Digger Sep 2012 #15
I do not feel that rights should be limited by this document- digonswine Sep 2012 #18
Then that person would be an idiot. X_Digger Sep 2012 #20
I can't quite agree. digonswine Sep 2012 #23
So how do you codify that right to defend yourself without mentioning the 2A? hack89 Sep 2012 #35
Yeah-I don't know really. digonswine Sep 2012 #37
In general I oppose any attempt to weaken anything in the Bill of Rights hack89 Sep 2012 #40
So let me get this straight, Missycim Sep 2012 #61
I will say that it is very unlikely, digonswine Sep 2012 #69
Who would go toe to toe with a standing army? Missycim Sep 2012 #75
You must not have been around here during he Bush days. Common Sense Party Sep 2012 #113
There is no way to construe that through grammar, history or legal precedent. PavePusher Sep 2012 #129
Are you confused? You act as if the 2nd amendment actually grants us rights? DonP Sep 2012 #6
Not confused- digonswine Sep 2012 #9
Why is there no need for a Missycim Sep 2012 #63
I guess I need to know what you are referring to- digonswine Sep 2012 #67
I might have misunderstood you Missycim Sep 2012 #71
I feel this danger is minimal and our response would be ineffective. digonswine Sep 2012 #74
With that attitude it would Missycim Sep 2012 #76
I have guns, too ya know. digonswine Sep 2012 #81
How did we get to the point were we are at today? How did we get to the place where gunners upaloopa Sep 2012 #10
But here we are- digonswine Sep 2012 #14
What is an opinion? Is it just some thought like a wisp that floats around in the air and has no upaloopa Sep 2012 #27
They can insult all they want- digonswine Sep 2012 #31
I think I understand were you are coming from. I respect your right to your opinion and your upaloopa Sep 2012 #43
Since number can be spun, they are useless? digonswine Sep 2012 #54
So the FBI's UCR is gunner statictics? glacierbay Sep 2012 #55
As far as I can tell glacierbay Sep 2012 #34
I feel that the gun lobby is not rational. Instead of gun nut I could say irrational gun people. upaloopa Sep 2012 #52
You are most definitely not in the majority. glacierbay Sep 2012 #59
That is complete bullshit. You don't hear from the majority because they don't make upaloopa Sep 2012 #85
Sorry, you're 100% wrong. glacierbay Sep 2012 #94
"Instead of gun nut I could say irrational gun people." PavePusher Sep 2012 #134
I am unclear on who you are talking about DWC Sep 2012 #141
Ahhh...yet another example of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #22
In most places, you always could gejohnston Sep 2012 #62
How did we get to a point violent crime is on the decline? 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #126
Appaerntly, someone bought into bigotry. PavePusher Sep 2012 #130
but but but gejohnston Sep 2012 #131
Wrong 2A is there to protect us against a standing army. Reread your history books. Peepsite Sep 2012 #12
But that is, in this day and age, nonsense. digonswine Sep 2012 #16
Sure. So that doesn't abolish the 2A. We also have the 3rd. Warren Stupidity Sep 2012 #82
define reasonable regulation gejohnston Sep 2012 #89
that's easy: for you, any change to current regulations are not reasonable unless Warren Stupidity Sep 2012 #101
no I don't know that gejohnston Sep 2012 #103
can you show me one statement of you supporting any proposed new regulation? Warren Stupidity Sep 2012 #108
Most if not all of the proposed federal regualtions gejohnston Sep 2012 #112
so that would be a no. Warren Stupidity Sep 2012 #117
not a run around at all gejohnston Sep 2012 #127
The writers of the constitution opposed a standing army. Remmah2 Sep 2012 #17
Great-so what? digonswine Sep 2012 #21
And you can thank the 2A for your safe home, town, country. Remmah2 Sep 2012 #25
Wow! bongbong Sep 2012 #29
He made a point and backed it up with a historical reference Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #48
You're embarrassing yourself bongbong Sep 2012 #102
Please explain this post- digonswine Sep 2012 #32
Sure Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #68
We are in a very different position today and have every defensive implement that digonswine Sep 2012 #72
Never say never Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #77
I think we have the foreign thing pretty well covered. digonswine Sep 2012 #80
We can send them the guns from our gun buy back programs. Remmah2 Sep 2012 #92
From DU2 Remmah2 Sep 2012 #88
The 2nd amendment is the foundation for gun rights in this country Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #19
I would argue this way: MicaelS Sep 2012 #24
I appreciate the civility sensibleness-Thanks. digonswine Sep 2012 #45
Thank you for the civility glacierbay Sep 2012 #73
Most of us are pretty decent- digonswine Sep 2012 #78
Not really glacierbay Sep 2012 #83
Oh god no! digonswine Sep 2012 #84
Hahahaha glacierbay Sep 2012 #97
Any legal argument will rrneck Sep 2012 #26
Yikes. digonswine Sep 2012 #41
Yikes indeed. rrneck Sep 2012 #60
LOL Marinedem Sep 2012 #28
Great post! digonswine Sep 2012 #33
According to the NRA... bongbong Sep 2012 #30
+1000 ellisonz Sep 2012 #38
That takes care of the 6 million NRA members - what about the 50 million non-NRA gun owners? hack89 Sep 2012 #46
Post removed Post removed Sep 2012 #50
Please post Jenoch Sep 2012 #99
Really? jeepnstein Sep 2012 #104
This message was self-deleted by its author glacierbay Sep 2012 #106
Access to guns and ammunition is not a "right," nor can it be. Loudly Sep 2012 #36
How can you tell someone- digonswine Sep 2012 #39
Guns as an excuse for guns leads us precisely where? Loudly Sep 2012 #47
What is your answer, though? digonswine Sep 2012 #56
Slow down the proliferation and turn off the spigot. Loudly Sep 2012 #58
So how is one supposed to defend themselves if they are unable Missycim Sep 2012 #66
So... Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #100
sharesunited loudly spigot beevul Sep 2012 #109
Lol. Nice. Union Scribe Sep 2012 #116
How do you propose to convince 1/4 of the population that they are perverts? friendly_iconoclast Sep 2012 #143
Shares-- err Loudly doesn't have an answer. n/t X_Digger Sep 2012 #98
I was not aware Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #42
Check your premise. Not a right. You've been brainwashed. Loudly Sep 2012 #49
Then please explain why it's not a right nt Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #70
The Second Amendment isn't a genuine right? glacierbay Sep 2012 #44
It was a bone thrown to those suspicious of the federal government. Loudly Sep 2012 #53
Read the deceleration of Independence Missycim Sep 2012 #65
What you did there.. X_Digger Sep 2012 #133
I think he Shares our almost United opinion that Loudly once went by another name here... friendly_iconoclast Sep 2012 #136
The right to own, say, and do anything is assumed. All rights exist until they are restricted... slackmaster Sep 2012 #90
This message was self-deleted by its author AnotherMcIntosh Sep 2012 #51
I am not sure how it is a straw-man- digonswine Sep 2012 #64
This message was self-deleted by its author AnotherMcIntosh Sep 2012 #96
This is complicated- digonswine Sep 2012 #105
You do know you can Missycim Sep 2012 #57
Well no, if you read the history it was originally all about local militias Warren Stupidity Sep 2012 #79
there never has been a collectivist interpetation gejohnston Sep 2012 #86
That opinion is where the current court is at. Warren Stupidity Sep 2012 #107
it really doesn't gejohnston Sep 2012 #110
It does not matter if the second amendment is obsolete or not. It is LAW. Atypical Liberal Sep 2012 #87
guns are for women veganlush Sep 2012 #91
+1 Remmah2 Sep 2012 #93
Huh? digonswine Sep 2012 #95
You're being buried bongbong Sep 2012 #114
The problem is that their Hollywood Cowboy Culture idiocy Warren Stupidity Sep 2012 #118
Cool straw man, bro. The presence of firearms is clearly what makes Somalia so dangerous. nt rDigital Sep 2012 #119
LOL bongbong Sep 2012 #122
Ironic bongbong Sep 2012 #125
I don't think that helps anything. digonswine Sep 2012 #121
Well.... bongbong Sep 2012 #123
Just name a few, please. digonswine Sep 2012 #124
Our rights are not given to us michreject Sep 2012 #115
That was covered in another post. digonswine Sep 2012 #120
And it's worth repeating michreject Sep 2012 #137
You obviously did not read and- digonswine Sep 2012 #138
"It applies only to a standing militia..." Well, no, actually; it applies to the people. PavePusher Sep 2012 #128
I completely agree with this--- digonswine Sep 2012 #140
You're half right, the militia part isn't needed... ileus Sep 2012 #132
For the sake of argument... discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2012 #135
That is pretty much what I have said numerous times here. digonswine Sep 2012 #139
Cool discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2012 #142
If RKBA is not covered by the 2nd, it is indisputable that it's a natural, inherent, inalienable/ jody Sep 2012 #144
Thanks-I'll peruse them when I have a bit more time. digonswine Sep 2012 #145
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»The second amendment is i...»Reply #76