Where in the 2nd amendment does it say "for sporting or hunting purposes"?

[Zebo]

If you area actually interested in 2nd amendment discussions, try here.

They still let people have guns in CA?:whiste:

 

[dmcowen674]

Should private ownership of guns be banned completely?

Yes, it would be a giant step forward in the fight against crime. 74%

You have to realize there are millions of dumb people in the New York City area.

 

[Macamus Prime]

Your arguments are based in fear and paranoia.

So is the "when the wall comes down" and "what if" - but, thats moot in a one sided conversation.



And, when Obama and his Red Army comes to take away your virgin white daughters, you can tell me; "told you so,..." then.

Until that point,.... blow your own heads off for all I care.

 

[olds]

They still let people have guns in CA?:whiste:

Just barely. But we are gaining ground.
http://www.calgunsfoundation.org/
https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=....org/downloads/documents/CGFHandoutLowres.pdf

 

[jonks]

Could someone point me to the sec... at the White House. [/QUOTE] knock knock.

 

[HumblePie]

So your answer is "no-one has actually ever said that but I will pretend that they do so I can make a strawman".

No, it has also been said directly. I gave you the Wild West wording as something you can use to search for and find it your damn self. I am not going to do your research for you.

If you need help, just look specifically for posts made by classy and a few others.

 

[HumblePie]

Look, I gave the primary Constitutional reason for allowing gun ownership by every available citizen (within reason of not crazy or commited a criminal act) legally. That is protection of citizens against a government gone haywire. I've also given a secondary reason as one of protection against those people who are criminal or crazy.

I can go on to list much more.

Here is another one. I do not at the moment own a gun, but I've borrowed them on occasion. I used to do hikes in Colorado when I last lived there and always borrowed a friends sidearm. Either his .44 Mag with the 4" barrel, or a Smith 329. You never know what you are going to encounter when you are hiking the Rockies in early spring. There are more than a few hungry/starving predator animals that will and do attack hikers. Personally, I rather have something to protect myself against a bobcat or bear than be lunch.

Guns are just another tool people can use. They can be dangerous, just like a knife, or other tool like a car or bulldozer or whatever. The thing is this mindless fear mongering over gun ownership is complete crap.

 

[Tom]

Constitution doesn't literally say there is a right to "own" firearms at all. "bear" isn't ownership. Some towns had magazines where militias stored commonly owned weapons.

 

[matt0611]

Constitution doesn't literally say there is a right to "own" firearms at all. "bear" isn't ownership. Some towns had magazines where militias stored commonly owned weapons.

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms"

Why do lefties hate the Constitution so much? Don't answer, I already know why.

This topic has been done dozens of times in this forum, if you don't get it by now you never will.

 

[JD50]

Constitution doesn't literally say there is a right to "own" firearms at all. "bear" isn't ownership. Some towns had magazines where militias stored commonly owned weapons.

I'm curious what exactly you think the word "keep" means.

 

[jonks]

I'm curious what exactly you think the word "keep" means.

isn't it like a castle?

 

[Linflas]

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms"

Why do lefties hate the Constitution so much?

Because it was one of the best efforts to date to restrict and control the power of government.

 

[shortylickens]

OP is a great troll.

 

[comptr6]

Can someone post a link to the 2nd amendment? I've never had the chance to read it and I'd like to see if it says anything about hunting/

 

[QuantumPion]

Constitution doesn't literally say there is a right to "own" firearms at all. "bear" isn't ownership. Some towns had magazines where militias stored commonly owned weapons.

Oh I get it, you are advocating that the government buy all citizens their own guns and ammo! That's a pretty far right-wing position to take! But it has worked well for Switzerland so it could work here as well.

 

[Scotteq]

Can someone post a link to the 2nd amendment? I've never had the chance to read it and I'd like to see if it says anything about hunting/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

http://www.answers.com/topic/amendment-ii-to-the-u-s-constitution

The Second Amendment reads:

“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.”

That's it.

 

[HumblePie]

Constitution doesn't literally say there is a right to "own" firearms at all. "bear" isn't ownership. Some towns had magazines where militias stored commonly owned weapons.

Uhh, if the firearms are all locked up in one place, then you are limit the use of "bearing" them which is something not stipulated either in the Constitution. The Constitution does not stated, "limited right to bear arms" or the "regulated use to bear arms" or anything like that. It states the right to "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Not allowing ownership by individuals and keeping guns locked up as communal property is an infringement which is something specifically against the Constitution.

And yes, the word KEEP is something that equates to OWN in my book and most people who are not retarded.

 

[QuantumPion]

Can someone post a link to the 2nd amendment? I've never had the chance to read it and I'd like to see if it says anything about hunting/

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.

In other words, the 2nd amendment explicitly guarantee citizens right to own military weapons, for the primary purpose of militia participation. Note that "well regulated" in 18th century meant well-trained.

Also note that the Miller supreme court case (which legalize the NFA, which restricts/taxes the ownership of short-barrel shotguns, machine guns, etc) did so on the basis that such weapons were not suitable for military service. The exact opposite of "sporting clause". In other words, the Supreme Court said it was OK to restrict the ownership of some guns if those guns were not typical military-purposed guns.

 

[Tom]

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms"

Why do lefties hate the Constitution so much? Don't answer, I already know why.

This topic has been done dozens of times in this forum, if you don't get it by now you never will.

"keep" doesn't mean "own" either. Own means own, they could have said own if they meant own.

the number of times people are wrong doesn't influence the rightness or wrongness of the meaning of words.

And my comment is about the use of literal meaning of words, or their absence, in terms of the topic and why it doesn't need to contain "sporting and hunting" for some states or judges to interpret it to mean that.

btw, I love the Constitution and this country.

 

[QuantumPion]

"keep" doesn't mean "own" either. Own means own, they could have said own if they meant own.

the number of times people are wrong doesn't influence the rightness or wrongness of the meaning of words.

And my comment is about the use of literal meaning of words, or their absence, in terms of the topic and why it doesn't need to contain "sporting and hunting" for some states or judges to interpret it to mean that.

btw, I love the Constitution and this country.

Lol. You should quit while you are behind.

 

[xj0hnx]

I live in NYC. Can you imagine the following situation:

You are in a crowded subway train. Everyone is packing heat. A crazy person goes crazy and tries to pull his gun out. People get scared. About 10 people pull out their weapons to shoot this idiot down.

What happens next?

Can you explain to me how arming every American (sane and insane) is a good thing?

You liberal wild west hyperbolic fantasy world is noted, and dismissed as it has never materialized, and wouldn't.

We live in a country where we are at war every moment of the day.

We NEED RPGs, machine guns, armor penetrating bullets, explosives and conceled weapons.

Wait,... no we are not.

Oh yeah, what IF the police don't respond in time?!?!

Yeah, I need a big fucking weapon to drill lead holes through someone setting foot on my property. Granted, he was lost while looking for his dog at 1pm in the afternoon, but it was MY property and I NEED TO DEFEND IT ALL COSTS!!!

Now, if only there was a way for gun owners to be reimbursed for the 300 bullets they should be allowed to pump into trespassers,...

Yet again, you hyperbolic drivel noted, and dismissed.

Doesn't hold the same weight in court. Marriage is not a regulation. If DOMA gets repealed there isn't even a need to force states to honor, they have too because that is in the constitution.

And unlike the right to bare arms, gay marriage isn't in the Constitution.

 

[xj0hnx]

So is the "when the wall comes down" and "what if" - but, thats moot in a one sided conversation.



And, when Obama and his Red Army comes to take away your virgin white daughters, you can tell me; "told you so,..." then.

Until that point,.... blow your own heads off for all I care.

Uh oh, the thinly veiled race card, now it's about protecting our "lily white daughters". You have now been relegated to the bin of mindless oafs.

Constitution doesn't literally say there is a right to "own" firearms at all. "bear" isn't ownership. Some towns had magazines where militias stored commonly owned weapons.

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms"

Why do lefties hate the Constitution so much? Don't answer, I already know why.

This topic has been done dozens of times in this forum, if you don't get it by now you never will.

Tom you are either being very stupid, or just purely dishonest, which is it?

 

[nick1985]

Constitution doesn't literally say there is a right to "own" firearms at all. "bear" isn't ownership. Some towns had magazines where militias stored commonly owned weapons.

I disagree with you.

The founders disagree with you.

The Supreme Court disagrees with you.

 

[xj0hnx]

"keep" doesn't mean "own" either. Own means own, they could have said own if they meant own.

the number of times people are wrong doesn't influence the rightness or wrongness of the meaning of words.

And my comment is about the use of literal meaning of words, or their absence, in terms of the topic and why it doesn't need to contain "sporting and hunting" for some states or judges to interpret it to mean that.

btw, I love the Constitution and this country.

The "hunting, an sporting" bullshit was used originally to protect gun owners as a way to separate the normal firearms owners from gangsters and criminals. It was wording to pacify the loony progressives in an attempt to devilify firearms. This of course backfired when the antigunners started using it to ban entire classes of firearms that are functionally identical to many with "sporting" purpose.

And dummy, if I keep something ...I own it, kind of like I keep my car, I keep my clothes, I keep my AK47's and MAC 10.

 

[xj0hnx]

I disagree with you.

The founders disagree with you.

The Supreme Court disagrees with you.

All sane, honest people disagree with him.