Tulsa County Democrats want to infringe on 2A rights

[DFarcher]

If you understand English it is perfectly clear what it means. The first part is just a reason why the right must not be infringed, but the right is specifically spelled out as a right of the PEOPLE not just a right of militia members, the states, or the federal government.

I understand English, Deutsch, American Sign Language, Pig Latin and YOUR interpretation of the second amendment. Nothing perfectly clear about the second amendment. Don't misunderstand me, I prefer your interpretation. Gun owners as a group need to be able to explain their position on firearm ownership, carry, open carry etc if we are going to make a difference. Quoting half of the second amendment every time an issue comes up is not the answer.

 

[n2sooners]

I understand English, Deutsch, American Sign Language, Pig Latin and YOUR interpretation of the second amendment. Nothing perfectly clear about the second amendment. Don't misunderstand me, I prefer your interpretation. Gun owners as a group need to be able to explain their position on firearm ownership, carry, open carry etc if we are going to make a difference. Quoting half of the second amendment every time an issue comes up is not the answer.

It is perfectly clear right up until a lawyer gets a hold of it. It isn't a confusing sentence to anyone except lawyers and politicians (and those who don't like what it says) who have to ignore simple sentence structure to try and make it say something it doesn't say. The only thing that can really be inferred from the opening clause of the second amendment is that the arms that people should be allowed to keep and bear are the same arms a militia/military member would keep and bear.

 

[Commander Keen]

It is perfectly clear right up until a lawyer gets a hold of it. It isn't a confusing sentence to anyone except lawyers and politicians (and those who don't like what it says) who have to ignore simple sentence structure to try and make it say something it doesn't say. The only thing that can really be inferred from the opening clause of the second amendment is that the arms that people should be allowed to keep and bear are the same arms a militia/military member would keep and bear.

I have to agree with this.

 

[Billybob]

Maybe looking at where our 2nd. came from can provide more insight?

THE HERITAGE OF OUR RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS

[As Americans, we are blessed with a rich heritage drawn from all points of the globe. However, our nation's legal and political institutions result from our English roots. Trial by jury, due process, and elected government are the yield of these roots. Among the cherished rights derived from this heritage is the right to be armed. We have this right to combat aggression, to contest oppression, and to provide for our self defense and self sufficiency. Natural rights and the Second Amendment to the Constitution give the law-abiding people of this nation the choice of whether to be armed or not. Opposition to [Page 22] privately held arms is opposition to freedom and the antithesis of our American values....]

http://saf.org/LawReviews/Stearns1.htm

 

[Fredkrueger100]

It just kills me how everyone that is anti 2A uses the term "common sense" measures. There is nothing common sense about what they are doing. I guess they are too gutless to say "gun control" measures. That is what they really mean. These idiots will never learn. I have seen 2 business over the last couple of months post new no guns signs and it really saddens me. I am glad that I am not stupid enough to buy into the media and the anti gun fools. Too bad that more Americans weren't the same way. We wouldn't be going through what we are going through right now.