Gun Sales to Illegal Aliens

[RockHopper]

The 2a is designed to very simply explain to govt entities that they have no authority over firearms when it comes to "the people". It does NOT say anything about citizenship, or criminal process. As far as I'm concerned, if you live in the U.S, than you have the natural right to own any tool for self-defense that you can come up with.

Now don't take that to mean I believe illegals have a right to be here. That's a completely different subject. As far as I'm concerned we should be mining the southern border, shooting those who make it through the mine fields, and air dropping those already here illegally. (Without parachutes) This invasion would stop pretty quickly.

 

[Seadog]

The 2a is designed to very simply explain to govt entities that they have no authority over firearms when it comes to "the people". It does NOT say anything about citizenship, or criminal process. As far as I'm concerned, if you live in the U.S, than you have the natural right to own any tool for self-defense that you can come up with.

Now don't take that to mean I believe illegals have a right to be here. That's a completely different subject. As far as I'm concerned we should be mining the southern border, shooting those who make it through the mine fields, and air dropping those already here illegally. (Without parachutes) This invasion would stop pretty quickly.

Everything in the Constitution about we the people is implied to the citizens.

Since before and after our constitution restrictions of gun rights to non citizens has been standing law. Nothing has changed.

 

[RockHopper]

Everything in the Constitution about we the people is implied to the citizens.

"Implied" means that you believe it means something other than what it says. It's written in plain English. Any implications are being inserted by disingenuous interests. I find it hilarious that so many people seem to think that the folks who wrote the constitution just weren't quite smart enough to use the words they actually wanted to use.

Nothing has changed.

The topic of this thread is about the change, as instituted by court judgement.

 

[Seadog]

"Implied" means that you believe it means something other than what it says. It's written in plain English. Any implications are being inserted by disingenuous interests. I find it hilarious that so many people seem to think that the folks who wrote the constitution just weren't quite smart enough to use the words they actually wanted to use.

The topic of this thread is about the change, as instituted by court judgement.

It is also laudable that one thinks foreign illegal aliens have the same rights as American citizens. That’s just a little too progressive to buy.

I don’t have to open a link to know that blacks and Indians didn’t have the same rights as Americans before and after the Bill of Rights was wrote. No different than knowing voting in the USA is for US citizens.

A little common sense goes a long way. The Constitution isn’t a living document to reinterpret at liberal will.

 

[Gregorio]

That 'ruling' pretty much gets rid of the need for background checks!

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

What the he##! We're letting the invaders in and now that POS judge wants us to supply them with arms as well?

We need to reemploy the stockade.

Woody

 

[RockHopper]

It is also laudable that one thinks foreign illegal aliens have the same rights as American citizens. That’s just a little too progressive to buy.

I don’t have to open a link to know that blacks and Indians didn’t have the same rights as Americans before and after the Bill of Rights was wrote. No different than knowing voting in the USA is for US citizens.

A little common sense goes a long way. The Constitution isn’t a living document to reinterpret at liberal will.

Now you're arguing my point...

A natural right isn't taken or given by man or legislation. It's synonymous with a god-given right. The 2a doesn't give permissions. It just tells govt that it isn't allowed to interfere.

You are the one re-interpreting it to mean what you want. I take it at face value. People...the people.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Now you're arguing my point...

A natural right isn't taken or given by man or legislation. It's synonymous with a god-given right. The 2a doesn't give permissions. It just tells govt that it isn't allowed to interfere.

You are the one re-interpreting it to mean what you want. I take it at face value. People...the people.

"We the People of the United States" in the Preamble to the Constitution does not say the people "in" the United States. One must be a citizen - a person of the United States - to have these rights and privileges secured and to take part in our governance.

The Preamble goes on to state the purpose of the Constitution is to "... establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity ...", with no mention of non-citizens, foreign governments, or any others whatsoever. "To ourselves" is quite obviously succinct. ANYTHING beyond "to ourselves" is unconstitutional.

We fought for and won the protection of our God given rights and blessings delineated in the Constitution - for ourselves. While all people have inalienable God given rights, those people need to fight for and secure those rights for themselves in their own country. Beyond that, they can enjoy our protections here in the United States only if and when they apply for admission and citizenship and are allowed as provided for in our Constitution.

The Preamble says it all. It is the reason for the rest of the Constitution to exist.

Woody

 

[Seadog]

"We the People of the United States" in the Preamble to the Constitution does not say the people "in" the United States. One must be a citizen - a person of the United States - to have these rights and privileges secured and to take part in our governance.

The Preamble goes on to state the purpose of the Constitution is to "... establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity ...", with no mention of non-citizens, foreign governments, or any others whatsoever. "To ourselves" is quite obviously succinct. ANYTHING beyond "to ourselves" is unconstitutional.

We fought for and won the protection of our God given rights and blessings delineated in the Constitution - for ourselves. While all people have inalienable God given rights, those people need to fight for and secure those rights for themselves in their own country. Beyond that, they can enjoy our protections here in the United States only if and when they apply for admission and citizenship and are allowed as provided for in our Constitution.

The Preamble says it all. It is the reason for the rest of the Constitution to exist.

Woody

Thank you for perfectly explaining that to the challenged one. It is painful that some are so reading comprehension challenged.

 

[avtomatkalashnikov47]

Are you crazy? They just okayed giving every gun sale a pass without a 4473, Pass them out brotha.

That 'ruling' pretty much gets rid of the need for background checks!

kinda funny our own government wouldnt pass one of these so called "background checks"

Selling guns to illegal immigrants...? they must have been involved with operation fast and furious.