Time to repeal 2A Says Rolling Stone Mag and Constitutional Law Professor

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Apr 3, 2009
Messages
2,143
Likes
368
Location
Southern NH

Varmint

NES Member
Rating - 100%
16   0   0
Joined
Jul 5, 2014
Messages
20,153
Likes
12,939
Location
North Shore, MA
So as the editorial staff at RSM collectively pisses themselves and publish multiple anti gun articles this Constitutional law prof. cherry picks his points...

http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...the-second-amendment-right-bear-arms-20160613


Rolling Stone Seems to be working overtime to make sure they fear monger...

http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...-harder-to-get-than-an-assault-rifle-20160614

and

http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...w-about-the-ar15-gun-used-in-orlando-20160613

It's a well written argument, he's probably right that the founders didn't envision 1 man killing 50 with a firearm.

But imo, the major flaw in his argument is simply that, like most things the government does these days, it'll have the opposite effect it intends. We won't be more safe, we'll be less safe, from criminals who don't care about 2A, and from our government's tyrannical tendencies.

And even knowing about the AR-15, the founders would still have insisted on 2A, because they didn't make laws based on raw numbers (50 potential murders vs 5), but on principle.
 
Last edited:

GM-GUY

NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
12,061
Likes
10,776
Location
North Central Mass
Get on with it then, repeal it and see what happens. If anyone even puts a bill on the floor to ban 11+ round mags, I'm buying a stack of Pmags and bringing them all home. I live in Mass so that is a crime, and at that point I no longer care.

Unless you address the real problem, unknown/unvetted illegals, gang-bangers and criminals that get the revolving door treatment; banning a type or series or even all guns will do nothing.
 
Rating - 100%
76   0   0
Joined
Dec 26, 2008
Messages
38,085
Likes
17,857
I think the founding fathers new darn well arms would advance. I don't believe for one secound our writers of the constitution didn't use a specific term other than arms by mistake.

We either have to collectively as a United nation come back to the freedoms of the constitution or draw sides.
 
Rating - 100%
49   0   0
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
3,823
Likes
799
Location
North Shore MA - Inside 128
I think the founding fathers new darn well arms would advance. I don't believe for one secound our writers of the constitution didn't use a specific term other than arms by mistake.

We either have to collectively as a United nation come back to the freedoms of the constitution or draw sides.

What do you mean "arms"? Like the cannons, powder and shot that were part of the militia tools utilized? You know, the ones just like the Regular British Army turned on those that made this country free from the over-reaching governing body?

Hmm - hadn't thought of it that way before...
 
Rating - 100%
19   0   0
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
4,842
Likes
2,701
Get on with it then, repeal it and see what happens...

It is the only way to make any gun law Constitutional, IMHO.

If it's no longer relevant, there is a process to change it. 2/3 of Congress (or a Constitutional Convention) and 3/4 of the states to ratify.

The States that didn't ratify will secede immediately, and within the states that did ratify there would be Revolution.

The Armed People, per the Second Amendment, are in fact, a branch of the Government defined in the Constitution, and all Powers not explicitly granted to the Congress or President, or to the States, are reserved to the People. Secession and Revolution are two of those Powers.

What would the Constitutional Professor say to that?
 

Obie1

NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Feb 1, 2012
Messages
7,821
Likes
6,749
Location
WMass
It is the only way to make any gun law Constitutional, IMHO.

If it's no longer relevant, there is a process to change it. 2/3 of Congress (or a Constitutional Convention) and 3/4 of the states to ratify.

The States that didn't ratify will secede immediately, and within the states that did ratify there would be Revolution.



The Armed People, per the Second Amendment, are in fact, a branch of the Government defined in the Constitution, and all Powers not explicitly granted to the Congress or President, or to the States, are reserved to the People. Secession and Revolution are two of those Powers.

What would the Constitutional Professor say to that?

There is also a third way--the original way: take up arms for your cause. Oh wait, who has all the guns?
 

GM-GUY

NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
12,061
Likes
10,776
Location
North Central Mass
I had that discussion with Rep Tsongas about the original intent.

She talked about how they didn't mean, 'Assault Weapons'. I then asked, muskets and what they had then? She said yes; I said okay, where's my cannon? People who had private ships or storehouses had a cannon.

I got the hook about then.

They don't really mean what they had then either - they mean nothing.

The whole the 2nd is fixed in 1789 but everything else evolves with the times is an interesting (idiotic) but interesting piece of ground to stake out.
 

northframingham

NES Member
Rating - 100%
18   0   0
Joined
Jun 9, 2012
Messages
2,668
Likes
1,079
Location
Framingham, MA.
So as the editorial staff at RSM collectively pisses themselves and publish multiple anti gun articles this Constitutional law prof. cherry picks his points...

http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...the-second-amendment-right-bear-arms-20160613


Rolling Stone Seems to be working overtime to make sure they fear monger...

http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...-harder-to-get-than-an-assault-rifle-20160614

and

http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...w-about-the-ar15-gun-used-in-orlando-20160613

It time for everybody to stop buying and supporting Rolling Stone magazine, so the go out of business!
 
Rating - 100%
33   0   0
Joined
Feb 20, 2013
Messages
14,760
Likes
4,072
You know what the founders could not have envisioned?

A situation where THREE HUNDRED people are unarmed against a single armed assailant.
 

Buggin

Dealer
NES Member
Rating - 100%
28   0   0
Joined
Nov 26, 2012
Messages
3,438
Likes
1,028
Location
Just about the middle of NH
You know what the founders could not have envisioned?

A situation where THREE HUNDRED people are unarmed against a single armed assailant.

tumblr_noenylQkFh1s8njeuo1_500.gif
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom