The 2nd Amendment is not the problem

[guvnah]

The problem is the 14th Amendment.

Along with all of the good things established by the 14th Amendment, came one glaringly awful consequence. Whether intentional or not, the 14th Amendment has long been interpreted to extend the Bill of Rights to apply to the individual states, and IMO that was a huge mistake. Mostly because I'm a staunch strict constructionist and Jeffersonian advocate for state's rights. The original intent of the Bill of Rights was to limit the powers of the federal government when it comes to infringing on both individual liberty AND the rights of the states to govern themselves. It was never intended to apply to state governments in any way. Applied as intended, and without the undue obfuscation caused by the 14th Amendment, the 2nd Amendment says that any and all federal laws restricting the right to bear arms is unconstitutional, however the individual states are free to restrict the right to bear arms within their borders as they see fit and in accordance with their own constitutions.

As it should be.

 

[freyasman]

I don't agree.

 

[Joe in Tulsa]

The problem is the 14th Amendment.

Along with all of the good things established by the 14th Amendment, came one glaringly awful consequence. Whether intentional or not, the 14th Amendment has long been interpreted to extend the Bill of Rights to apply to the individual states, and IMO that was a huge mistake. Mostly because I'm a staunch strict constructionist and Jeffersonian advocate for state's rights. The original intent of the Bill of Rights was to limit the powers of the federal government when it comes to infringing on both individual liberty AND the rights of the states to govern themselves. It was never intended to apply to state governments in any way. Applied as intended, and without the undue obfuscation caused by the 14th Amendment, the 2nd Amendment says that any and all federal laws restricting the right to bear arms is unconstitutional, however the individual states are free to restrict the right to bear arms within their borders as they see fit and in accordance with their own constitutions.

As it should be.

In that case, States would also be able to restrict freedom of speech, religion, and the press. They could also restrict who can vote. All based on the whim of those in power at the time. Either we, all humans, have basic natural (God given) rights, or we don't. I wish that more people around the world recognized these rights and stopped allowing their governments to restrict them. Then maybe they'd want to stay in their own countries and make them great places to live.

 

[guvnah]

In that case, States would also be able to restrict freedom of speech, religion, and the press. They could also restrict who can vote. All based on the whim of those in power at the time. Either we, all humans, have basic natural (God given) rights, or we don't. I wish that more people around the world recognized these rights and stopped allowing their governments to restrict them. Then maybe they'd want to stay in their own countries and make them great places to live.

Most (if not all) States already have their own constitutions that protect those freedoms.

But regardless, you either believe in the sovereignty of the individual states or you do not. If you don't, you're entitled believe that the same as Hamilton did. In the end his view has won out over Jefferson's anyway.

 

[guvnah]

I don't agree.

Thank you for the insightful commentary.

 

[freyasman]

Thank you for the insightful commentary.

You're welcome.

 

[Constitutional Sheepdog]

The problem is the 14th Amendment.

Along with all of the good things established by the 14th Amendment, came one glaringly awful consequence. Whether intentional or not, the 14th Amendment has long been interpreted to extend the Bill of Rights to apply to the individual states, and IMO that was a huge mistake. Mostly because I'm a staunch strict constructionist and Jeffersonian advocate for state's rights. The original intent of the Bill of Rights was to limit the powers of the federal government when it comes to infringing on both individual liberty AND the rights of the states to govern themselves. It was never intended to apply to state governments in any way. Applied as intended, and without the undue obfuscation caused by the 14th Amendment, the 2nd Amendment says that any and all federal laws restricting the right to bear arms is unconstitutional, however the individual states are free to restrict the right to bear arms within their borders as they see fit and in accordance with their own constitutions.

As it should be.

States cannot restrict rights that are already protected by the Constitution

 

[guvnah]

States cannot restrict rights that are already protected by the Constitution

Exactly, thanks to the 14th Amendment.

IMO, that was a mistake.

 

[Constitutional Sheepdog]

Exactly, thanks to the 14th Amendment.

IMO, that was a mistake.

Yet the second amendment is restricted in many states.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

mistake. Mostly because I'm a staunch strict constructionist and Jeffersonian advocate for state's rights.
.

A Glaring Omission

Because of his democratic ideas, Thomas Jefferson was purposely kept out of the writing of the Constitution.

 

[guvnah]

Yet the second amendment is restricted in many states.

Yes it is, and at the federal level too. All of which I would argue are unconstitutional.

 

[guvnah]

A Glaring Omission

Because of his democratic ideas, Thomas Jefferson was purposely kept out of the writing of the Constitution.

I didn't know that. But I still believe we'd be better off today if his vision had won out over Hamilton's. But regardless, it's all academic now anyway.

 

[Dawg]

Yet the second amendment is restricted in many states.

and now Villages/Towns

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/t...s-dollar1000-a-day/ar-AAvtO8J?ocid=spartandhp

So we have Fed/State/Town/Village..........BEWARE while traveling

 

[freyasman]

and now Villages/Towns

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/t...s-dollar1000-a-day/ar-AAvtO8J?ocid=spartandhp

So we have Fed/State/Town/Village..........BEWARE while traveling

I heard about that.... I hope they get the living shit sued out of them.

 

[Dawg]

I heard about that.... I hope they get the living shit sued out of them.

look how great Chicago gun laws have worked
yes, Village going to need a lot of money for lawyers now

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

I didn't know that. But I still believe we'd be better off today if his vision had won out over Hamilton's. But regardless, it's all academic now anyway.

Wags Wearing Wigs

We don't have to accept elitist dogma written in the horse-and-buggy era.

 

[Capitalist]

The 2nd Amendment must restrict state legislatures and prevent all law makers from restricting gun rights to individuals or it is meaningless.

Same with the 1st A and the rest of the B of R.

 

[guvnah]

The 2nd Amendment must restrict state legislatures and prevent all law makers from restricting gun rights to individuals or it is meaningless.

Same with the 1st A and the rest of the B of R.

Then for all intents and purposes, it's clearly meaningless.

But regardless, I disagree. Even though it's a dead ideal, I still believe in state's rights.

 

[Capitalist]

Then for all intents and purposes, it's clearly meaningless.

But regardless, I disagree. Even though it's a dead ideal, I still believe in state's rights.

I believe in states rights too. And it’s not dead. I also believe the federal government should block states from infringing on individuals’ rights called out in the BoR.

And the 14th Amendment is about the most poorly written amendment we have.

 

[Capitalist]

Yet the second amendment is restricted in many states.

Exactly. Can’t have it both ways.

Statists point to the 14th to reference the death of states rights. Yet they embrace states rights when the state tries to usurp the nation wide 2nd Amendment.