You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #108: Ok, lets try this again. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
beevul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-11 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #91
108. Ok, lets try this again.
First, lets examine the purpose and function function of the bill of rights itself, rather than any amendment.

What is the bill of rights, and what is its purpose? The bill of rights is a list of restrictions on government. The purpose of those restrictions, is to PROTECT rights.

I'll now cite evidence in support of that.

First, the preamble to the bill of rights:

THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution

The framers felt government needed some declaratory and restrictive clauses, so that government would not misconstrue or abuse its powers. They wrote those declaratory and restrictive clauses down, and passed them into the law of the land, which we call the bill of rights:

Now, lets examine some amendments:

Amendment 1 says "congress shall make no law", and clearly congress is government.

Amendment 3 says "No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law."

Whos soldier? The governments.

Amendment 4 says "The right of the people to be secure in their persons...shall not be violated..."

Shall not be violated by whom? Governent.

Amendment 5 says "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury..."

Held to answer by whom? Government.

Do you see the trend here?

Now lets look at amendment 2 :

"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"

Shall not be infringed by whom? Government. Just like the other amendments. Why? Because a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state.

The function of the document and the amendments it contains, is strictly to restrain government. Nothing more. Reading a part of the document as a restriction on people, is reading the document contrary to its intent, purpose, and function.

Its just that simple.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -Some criteria for an adult discussion of gun control. beevul  Jan-27-11 10:32 PM   #0 
  - lol calling people dishonest & telling people to quit pretending sounds pretty adult to me nt  msongs   Jan-27-11 10:35 PM   #1 
  - If it walks like a duck, and looks like a duck...  beevul   Jan-27-11 10:36 PM   #2 
  - If SCOTUS isn't helping, it is part of the problem.  sharesunited   Jan-27-11 10:47 PM   #3 
  - Unless it's repealed, the 2nd Amendment isn't going anywhere  badtoworse   Jan-28-11 08:05 AM   #35 
  - So, your 'criteria' for an adult discussion  enlightenment   Jan-27-11 10:51 PM   #4 
  - Which number in my post contains an example of that?  beevul   Jan-27-11 10:53 PM   #5 
     - I'm not going to do comparisons - that's not the point.  enlightenment   Jan-27-11 11:15 PM   #9 
        - Heres the point.  beevul   Jan-28-11 12:19 AM   #15 
  - On any topic on DU, the only way to have an adult conversation is to only reply to  petronius   Jan-27-11 11:06 PM   #6 
  - Touche.  beevul   Jan-28-11 01:27 AM   #22 
  - Ok, Ill bite...  whoneedstickets   Jan-27-11 11:08 PM   #7 
  - Under the law that "shoulder thing lady" proposed  guitar man   Jan-27-11 11:34 PM   #10 
  - Take a deep breath...  whoneedstickets   Jan-27-11 11:39 PM   #11 
     - I don't own any automatic weapons  guitar man   Jan-27-11 11:45 PM   #12 
     - Ok, but by analogy...  whoneedstickets   Jan-27-11 11:55 PM   #13 
        - It's pretty valuable as it is  guitar man   Jan-28-11 12:02 AM   #14 
        - As the proposed law is currently written there are no exemptions for any  oneshooter   Jan-28-11 07:28 AM   #30 
        - Sporting purposes are being tested again by .......The Working Group .  Katya Mullethov   Jan-28-11 07:49 AM   #34 
        - You would be wrong  one-eyed fat man   Jan-28-11 09:23 AM   #36 
        - Glacier Gal, saw her last year. Great aircraft! n/t  oneshooter   Jan-28-11 09:28 AM   #37 
        - There is still a problem.  one-eyed fat man   Jan-28-11 11:43 AM   #43 
        - wow  Nuclear Unicorn   Jan-28-11 02:34 PM   #46 
        - NFA problems  one-eyed fat man   Jan-28-11 12:40 PM   #45 
           - One could choose a trust  Katya Mullethov   Jan-28-11 06:12 PM   #48 
     - Automatic weapons- machineguns, etc-have been relegated to a special category  old mark   Jan-28-11 12:57 AM   #18 
        - Limited to those who can play the game...OR...  whoneedstickets   Jan-28-11 01:02 AM   #19 
        - Theres a huge difference though...  beevul   Jan-28-11 01:25 AM   #21 
        - Sure, a capacity limit wouldn't be easy to implement.  whoneedstickets   Jan-28-11 01:55 AM   #23 
        - No, it wouldn't.  beevul   Jan-28-11 02:36 AM   #24 
        - It violates basic statist rules of the road  Katya Mullethov   Jan-28-11 07:34 AM   #32 
        - Only Canada.  one-eyed fat man   Jan-28-11 09:44 AM   #38 
        - Sure. One of the biggest sellers after the last attempt to "ban" mags over 10 rounds  old mark   Jan-28-11 07:15 AM   #28 
        - The law went into effect in 1934....nt  old mark   Jan-28-11 07:12 AM   #27 
        - ...some animals are more equal than others  one-eyed fat man   Jan-28-11 09:13 PM   #49 
  - Good post.  beevul   Jan-28-11 12:27 AM   #16 
  - It would be great to get some answers.  whoneedstickets   Jan-28-11 12:45 AM   #17 
     - The state...  beevul   Jan-28-11 01:17 AM   #20 
     - Mass killing?  one-eyed fat man   Jan-28-11 10:29 AM   #40 
  - Such a law would not have the desired effect.  GreenStormCloud   Jan-28-11 03:22 AM   #25 
  - Ridiculously broad and by far not the least restrictive.  benEzra   Jan-28-11 10:44 AM   #41 
  - I would be happy if there were no gun control  tularetom   Jan-27-11 11:13 PM   #8 
  - You can legally buy 40 AKs on the same day!  Blacksheep214   Jan-28-11 05:05 AM   #26 
  - You don't help make your point...  mvccd1000   Jan-28-11 07:28 AM   #29 
  - For most people , gun ownership is legal...pot ownership is not.  old mark   Jan-28-11 07:33 AM   #31 
  - My Congressman is...  Blacksheep214   Jan-28-11 09:48 AM   #39 
     - My new Senator is Pat Toomey...I feel your pain...The only thing I have against pot  old mark   Jan-28-11 11:19 AM   #42 
  - Your day is already here , somewhere .  Katya Mullethov   Jan-28-11 07:42 AM   #33 
  - Your right to buy a bag of weed has been infringed  slackmaster   Jan-28-11 11:58 AM   #44 
  - Your money  one-eyed fat man   Jan-28-11 02:37 PM   #47 
  - Why use Mexican weed?  Blacksheep214   Jan-29-11 02:19 AM   #51 
     - Chicken or egg  one-eyed fat man   Jan-29-11 07:58 AM   #52 
        - Didn't research it, did ya?  Blacksheep214   Jan-29-11 08:24 AM   #53 
        - Most of the folks smoking dope  one-eyed fat man   Jan-29-11 09:51 AM   #58 
           - "Is there a dope equivalent of a having a glass of wine to complement a meal?"  PavePusher   Jan-29-11 10:11 AM   #60 
           - That is my question  one-eyed fat man   Jan-29-11 11:03 AM   #62 
              - Squelching one's house fly like EEG .  Katya Mullethov   Jan-29-11 05:44 PM   #82 
           - Yes. There actually is.  beevul   Jan-29-11 06:37 PM   #84 
        - As did I.  beevul   Jan-29-11 06:31 PM   #83 
           - I was alway a fan of Gregory Boyington  RSillsbee   Jan-29-11 10:21 PM   #89 
  - All those dudes were DOPERS!  one-eyed fat man   Jan-28-11 10:51 PM   #50 
  - Who are you, Vishnu?  AtheistCrusader   Jan-29-11 02:47 PM   #74 
  - I'm all for an adult discussion  PhillySane   Jan-29-11 08:36 AM   #54 
  - Thoughts...  benEzra   Jan-29-11 09:07 AM   #55 
  - AR-15  PhillySane   Jan-29-11 09:22 AM   #57 
     - The AR-15 is only available in "semi-auto mode".  PavePusher   Jan-29-11 10:02 AM   #59 
     - Yes, definitely. The most popular civilian rifle in the US, and among the least misused of all guns.  benEzra   Jan-29-11 10:28 AM   #61 
        - This is a military weapon, is it not?  PhillySane   Jan-29-11 11:18 AM   #63 
           - I'm really trying to understand your rationale.  shadowrider   Jan-29-11 11:21 AM   #64 
           - Not just military.  jeepnstein   Jan-29-11 11:44 AM   #65 
           - A well regulated militia...  PhillySane   Jan-29-11 12:13 PM   #66 
              - You want a definition of "well-regulated militia"?  shadowrider   Jan-29-11 12:14 PM   #67 
              - Militia...  jeepnstein   Jan-29-11 12:55 PM   #68 
              - It seems to me  PhillySane   Jan-29-11 01:43 PM   #70 
                 - Take "well-regulated" during the TIME it was used. DON'T apply a modern  shadowrider   Jan-29-11 01:50 PM   #71 
                 - That's the way it is.  jeepnstein   Jan-29-11 01:57 PM   #72 
                 - "A well regulated militia"...  beevul   Jan-29-11 07:10 PM   #86 
                 - I still say this is "reading into"  PhillySane   Jan-30-11 08:12 AM   #91 
                    - Ok, lets try this again.  beevul   Jan-30-11 04:23 PM   #108 
                       - So the second amendment protects restriction of what exactly?  PhillySane   Jan-30-11 11:19 PM   #110 
                          - The bill of rights protects rights via a mechanism of restriction on government.  beevul   Jan-30-11 11:54 PM   #112 
                             - The government RESTRICTS all of these weapons.  PhillySane   Jan-31-11 07:20 AM   #115 
                                - No, actually they aren't.  beevul   Jan-31-11 01:53 PM   #119 
                                   - I have no idea how to read your map  PhillySane   Jan-31-11 02:52 PM   #120 
                                      - It's easy. They are, in fact, legal in *most* states- so your assertion is wrong  friendly_iconoclast   Jan-31-11 03:43 PM   #121 
                                      - Let me interpret this  shadowrider   Jan-31-11 03:59 PM   #122 
                                      - Hey dude  PhillySane   Jan-31-11 04:20 PM   #123 
                                      - Quite a few 'exceptions' there..  X_Digger   Jan-31-11 04:57 PM   #124 
                                      - Excuse me  Glassunion   Jan-31-11 05:20 PM   #125 
                                      - Red=illegal, green = legal - the same way a stoplight is read.  beevul   Jan-31-11 10:58 PM   #126 
                 - No convincing is necessary. There is a militia - and YOU might be a member:  friendly_iconoclast   Jan-29-11 10:02 PM   #88 
                    - I would argue that!  PhillySane   Jan-30-11 08:19 AM   #92 
                       - Ok, say that happens. Now explain to me how to keep guns out of the hands  shadowrider   Jan-30-11 08:47 AM   #96 
                       - Actually there is starting to be a trend  RSillsbee   Jan-30-11 03:03 PM   #105 
                          - True that. But they join BEFORE they acquire a serious record at the direction of the gang  shadowrider   Jan-31-11 07:23 AM   #116 
                       - Read the law again. It doesn't have *any* duty requirement, or qualifications...  friendly_iconoclast   Jan-30-11 02:59 PM   #104 
              - Nice dodge..  X_Digger   Jan-29-11 02:48 PM   #75 
              - Dodge?  jeepnstein   Jan-29-11 04:15 PM   #78 
                 - Oh, your response was spot on.. notice I responded to PhillySane..  X_Digger   Jan-29-11 04:18 PM   #79 
                    - This board is confusing.  jeepnstein   Jan-29-11 04:43 PM   #81 
              - Funny how your goalposts are on 4X4 wheels.  cleanhippie   Jan-30-11 08:37 AM   #93 
           - The ability to fire automatically or in bursts when needed  benEzra   Jan-29-11 02:25 PM   #73 
           - I commend you for thoroughness.  PhillySane   Jan-29-11 04:02 PM   #77 
              - "But even if you save one life because of it, its a good thing".- do you apply this to other rights?  X_Digger   Jan-29-11 04:25 PM   #80 
              - You speak of incremental changes  PhillySane   Jan-30-11 07:58 AM   #90 
                 - Actually, when the second amendment was signed, there was a gun with a 20 round magazine.  X_Digger   Jan-30-11 12:05 PM   #97 
                    - Great!  PhillySane   Jan-30-11 12:36 PM   #98 
                       - And are you going to limit the first amendment to quills and hand-crank printing presses as well?  X_Digger   Jan-30-11 12:52 PM   #99 
                          - It's all fun and games until you start restricting other rights n/t  shadowrider   Jan-30-11 12:56 PM   #100 
                          - 18th and 21st  PhillySane   Jan-30-11 02:02 PM   #101 
                             - Feel free to try to alter or remove the second amendment.  X_Digger   Jan-30-11 02:21 PM   #102 
                                - Mother Superior Jumped The Gun  PhillySane   Jan-30-11 02:29 PM   #103 
              - Keep in mind...  beevul   Jan-29-11 07:25 PM   #87 
                 - And the mere fact that we have so many available to us  PhillySane   Jan-30-11 08:44 AM   #95 
                    - To the contrary.  beevul   Jan-30-11 04:02 PM   #107 
                       - How the hell do you know that?  PhillySane   Jan-30-11 11:11 PM   #109 
                          - How the hell do I know what?  beevul   Jan-30-11 11:58 PM   #113 
           - Clyde Barrow's letter to Henry Ford  one-eyed fat man   Jan-29-11 03:29 PM   #76 
           - No its not a military weapon.  beevul   Jan-29-11 07:02 PM   #85 
           - Why do you contradict yourselves all the time?  PhillySane   Jan-30-11 08:40 AM   #94 
              - I think you misunderstand.  beevul   Jan-30-11 03:59 PM   #106 
              - So you still haven't answered the question.  PhillySane   Jan-30-11 11:25 PM   #111 
                 - I already answered it, but I guess you didn't read it.  beevul   Jan-31-11 12:15 AM   #114 
              - If I was determined  one-eyed fat man   Jan-31-11 11:15 AM   #118 
           - Just about anything is "a military weapon" if you trace the ancestry of the design far enough  Euromutt   Jan-31-11 08:45 AM   #117 
  - In this case, YOU determine what a "reasonable response" is  shadowrider   Jan-29-11 09:11 AM   #56 
  - Have some degree of knowledge about firearms technology and terminology  Taitertots   Jan-29-11 01:13 PM   #69 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC