1. Welcome To LPSG
    Welcome to LPSG.com. If you are here because you are looking for the most amazing open-minded fun-spirited sexy adult community then you have found the right place. We also happen to have some of the sexiest members you'll ever meet. Signup below and come join us.


Second amendment

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Giacomo cavernosa, Jan 11, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Giacomo cavernosa

    Gold Member Verified

    Joined:
    May 13, 2016
    Posts:
    332
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    3,995
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NY
    Verified:
    Photo
    Here’s the second amendment interpretation debate. Let’s not get petty or unnecessarily argumentative. Just give us your full interpretation of the amendment. Obviously there are necessary gun laws and restrictions beyond the amendment, but let’s try to confine this thread to interpretation of the amendment.
    I’ll start it off

    Here’s the second Amendment:
    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.

    Here’s how I rearranged it to get rid of the commas:
    The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed because a well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free State.

    Here’s my interpretation:
    Citizens must have the right to bear arms because the security of the free state relies on the ability of citizens to form a well regulated militia.. which would require Arms
     
    malakos, Fred90 and pred like this.
  2. Klingsor

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2011
    Posts:
    9,991
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9,696
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Champaign (IL, US)
    Definitely *your* interpretation.

    You've taken a well-regulated militia being "necessary to the security of a free State," and turned into something people have the "ability" to "form," maybe sorta kinda, at some unspecified future date. Meanwhile, as unregulated as they are, they still get to have their weapons.

    If that's actually what the founders had in mind, they did a damn poor job of expressing it.
     
  3. Giacomo cavernosa

    Gold Member Verified

    Joined:
    May 13, 2016
    Posts:
    332
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    3,995
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NY
    Verified:
    Photo
    Like I said, please don’t make this argumentative. We’re just sharing views. I’m genuinely interested in other interpretations.
    However, you didn’t provide your interpretation. I’d like to hear how you interpret it and what you think it means
     
    Perados likes this.
  4. Fred90

    Fred90 Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2018
    Posts:
    1,737
    Likes Received:
    527
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New York (NY, US)
    I'm no constitutional scholar, but your interpretation sounds reasonable to me.
     
    pred likes this.
  5. Perados

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2007
    Posts:
    10,990
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    2,468
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Germany
    My 2 cent...

    The whole amendment is about militia and militia only.
    Because of the war with Britain the idea was that armed forces next to the established military is essential for the security of the nation.

    To be able to create a militia fast a large part of the population should always be armed and trained in using a weapon.

    To guaranty this the right to own weapons shouldn't be limited.



    If you follow just the words, every American has the right to own every kind of weapon. While it didn't sound like a big problem back then, it became one during the decades.
    To own biological, chemical, or nuclear weapons has been limited.

    If it's possible to limit weapons because if technological development, it should be possible to limit this right out of other reasons as well.
    You could ask, how many weapons per person are needed to create a militia... or what kind of weapons?

    Another important questions is, if the reason for this right was the ability to create a militia, what kind of persons would join the militia?
    I doubt 14 years old girl would fight with their dads against invading Canadians (after they have beaten the US army).





    Interesting is that the amendment talks about infringed, you can bend something with infringing it...
    Even if everyone has the right to own as much of any weapon as he likes, it doesn't mean they don't have to follow any regulation. This could include registrations or some kind of license.


    I would like to add that the ademendm only talks about the right to own a gun, not to sell them. You want to limit weapons? Close the shops and fairs.
     
  6. Giacomo cavernosa

    Gold Member Verified

    Joined:
    May 13, 2016
    Posts:
    332
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    3,995
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NY
    Verified:
    Photo
    Of course there are necessary laws and restrictions beyond the amendment, but it sounds like you agree with me on its interpretation. It guarantees the right to arms for all Americans so that they can form a militia in the event of some impending threat
     
  7. Perados

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2007
    Posts:
    10,990
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    2,468
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Germany
    Yes, that was the reason...

    But like I said it raises the question who is able to form a militia - I would exclude children. I doubt those who added the amendment thought about children (or even woman) as they wrote it.

    It also is questionable if a militia still is needed. It's not only unlikely that the USA will get invaded, but if the USA would get invaded I doubt any militia could defend anything.

    The third question is, what kind of weapon is needed to form a militia. Back then you could choose between a rifle, gun, and knife. Nothing to worry about... Now you have different options - would they still have wrote the law in a similar way if they would have known about the technological development?
     
    bigbull29 likes this.
  8. pred

    pred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2011
    Posts:
    740
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    233
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kentucky (US)
    I would say the age part has been addressed with needing to be 18 to purchase a long gun, 21 for a handgun.
     
  9. twoton

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Posts:
    7,526
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    7,044
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Mid Atlantic
    The amendment reads, to me, as being directed at situations where the U.S. was actually facing attack by hostile foreign governments. I'm not 100% up on my U.S. history for that time period, but IIRC the Founding Fathers hadn't a strong intent to maintain a standing national army.

    I don't think the Founders intended that the amendment be interpreted as the population's means of protecting itself from its own government. A lot of people disagree with me, believing that the 2nd is the Border Wall that separates the Bill of Rights from an oppressive federal government .
     
    Perados likes this.
  10. Perados

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2007
    Posts:
    10,990
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    2,468
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Germany
    Ok then the society should change its behaviour... at least in Germany media you see how little girls und boys get their first gun for their birthday. Even more often you see them shooting at a shooting range. - it might be that they don't own the gun legally, but at least as a birthday present it gives the children the impression they would own it.

    I know these are extreme cases, but it shows that something is wrong with the way the US society handles weapons.
     
  11. pred

    pred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2011
    Posts:
    740
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    233
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kentucky (US)
    Well kids in the US get the same thing. I had received multiple guns by the time I was 16. Hell for my birthday my Dad would always take me to a gun show and buy me a gun I liked(usually it was older mil surp stuff. He taught me to use them, clean them, and respect them.

    That said I think we as a society DO have a big problem. The values that were taught to kids in the 50s and 60s gave way to something else. And it’s carried over to kids today. Not all kids, and not all of their parents. But respect, responsibility, they don’t exist in the same way they did 70 years ago.
     
  12. Giacomo cavernosa

    Gold Member Verified

    Joined:
    May 13, 2016
    Posts:
    332
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    3,995
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NY
    Verified:
    Photo
    America was founded through a revolution in which citizens fought their own government. So I would think they considered the possibiltity of govenment tyranny in the future which could require another such revolution.
    However, to me, this doesn’t appear to have much bearing on the amendment itself
     
  13. twoton

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Posts:
    7,526
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    7,044
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Mid Atlantic
    But the idea behind the new govt was that tyranny and oppression would be prevented by the democratic processes rather than thru force of arms. But I’m at the edge of getting out of my depth here because I never really read “The Federalist Papers,” when it had been assigned.
     
    keenobserver likes this.
  14. twoton

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Posts:
    7,526
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    7,044
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Mid Atlantic
    I’m not entirely sure it’s a matter of respect and responsibility. I don’t know what it is, but. It seems to run deeper than a lack of respect & responsibility.
     
  15. pred

    pred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2011
    Posts:
    740
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    233
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kentucky (US)
    It’s at best part of it. But people today are not the same as they were a few decades ago. I know what you’re saying though, it’s hard to explain.
     
  16. twoton

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Posts:
    7,526
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    7,044
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Mid Atlantic
    Insofar as respect goes, I think people (in the U.S.) have an exponentially stronger impulse to express themselves without regard for consequences. The respected response is the scorched earth response. Used to be we respected wisdom, discretion, and a regard for the higher virtues. Most important, we respected each other. Few people do, anymore.
     
  17. Perados

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2007
    Posts:
    10,990
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    2,468
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Germany
    sorry my fault I wasn't clear enough. I was talking about German media reporting about US children.
    it sounds like a problem...
    It's one problem, but I don't know it's the problem we should discuss when it's about gun law.
     
  18. pred

    pred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2011
    Posts:
    740
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    233
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kentucky (US)
    How is it a problem for a father to share a hobby with his son and teach him respect and to respect firearms along the way? Teach him to hunt, and valuable life skills?
     
    Gj816 likes this.
  19. pred

    pred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2011
    Posts:
    740
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    233
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kentucky (US)
    I agree.
     
    bigbull29 likes this.
  20. JulieInNaplesFL

    Gold Member Verified

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2006
    Posts:
    2,647
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    2,942
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Naples/ FtMyers Florida
    Verified:
    Photo
    My Father taught me to shoot when I was 11 and spent the first 2 times at the range just teaching me the safety of firearms first. Then he let me fire his 22 then his 32 then his 38 and then his 357, that dam near tore my hand off. Being a big girl, lol I insisted on firing his Winchester Model 12 12ga that proceeded to set me back 10 feet and bruise my shoulder because I did listen to him on how to hold it correctly. I can be cerebral at times.
    Me and hubby shoot monthly and I love my Glock 29 10mm but a little big for the skimpy clothes I wear most times so it's in my purse.

    Want to take my guns lefties? Come and get THEM. (Plural)
     
    ou8my9x6 likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
    Legal Links
    2257 - DMCA - Subpoena Policy - Privacy Policy
    LPSG Charges Used to Appear as Unit 4 Media or Grizzly Empire
    LPSG.com is a site owned and operated by Gamma Entertainment Inc.,
    Gamma Billing Inc. and its subsidiary Digigamma B.V., Mariettahof 25, Haarlem, Netherlands.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice