Posted on 02/26/2018 2:30:54 PM PST by Mafe
As the Parkland, Fla., school shooting revealed yet again, when it comes to firearms, the differences between Americans has become too monumental to overcome. On one end of the political spectrum are left-wing politicians and pundits calling for the elimination of the Second Amendment and severe restrictions on virtually every kind of gun. On the other end are Americans who believe the best way to stop mass shootings is to have even more weapons available to the public, and for everyday citizens, including teachers, to be better armed so that they are capable of defending themselves and others from murderers like Nikolas Cruz.
How can this stark divide ever be reconciled? Although it may be difficult for many to accept, the answer is likely that it cant. The United States is in desperate need of a new Second Amendment, one that recognizes the fundamentally different views people today have about guns, their role in society, and our rights as citizens.
When the Founders first wrote and passed what we know call the Second Amendment, they viewed the Constitution in an entirely different way than most people do today. Originally, the U.S. Constitution was, for the most part, only understood to govern the relationship between Americans and their federal government. The Bill of Rights was largely meant to protect the states and the people from an out-of-control centralized power in the nations capital. Most laws were passed at the state and local levels, and state constitutions determined the limits of those laws, including gun laws.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
already poted
Don’t. Go. There.
lol
posted
Im against repealing the 2nd Amendment, but repealing it wouldnt do a freaking thing unless there was also a new amendment authorizing the feds to regulate gun ownership. The 2nd Amendment only confirms the pre-existence of rights expressed in the Declaration of Independence and presumed in the Constitution. Our right to bear arms exists and is constitutionally protected with or without the 2nd 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. Article [II] (Amendment 2 Bearing Arms)
Notice the right to bear arms in the 2nd Amendment along with the other unalienable rights in the first ten amendments are PRE-EXISTING RIGHTS that are God-given, not man or government given. 2nd Amendment says the feds cannot INFRINGE on the pre-existing right to bear arms. The first ten amendments including the 2nd do NOT grant rights. They merely REMIND government not to violate those rights. Totalitarian governments grant rights. A free people know their rights come from God and know they cannot be separated from those rights.
Lets just wait until “ we” start rewriting the Constitution...
easy peasy
BS
There’s an easy way to “reconcile the differences”...
We keep our rights, you sit down and shut up.
They passed a law legalizing same sex marriage and didn't seem to have much of problem forcing on all the states.
Those who mess with the Constitution when in the majority, will have to live with messing with the Constitution when they aren’t.
Trump’s appointments should settle this for the next fifty plus years.
That’s good enough.
Haskins is an idiot. Useless RINO in the vein of George Will. Thinks because hes a journalist hes something special
Put money on he has soft hands
You can wish shit away. But the second amendment is going nowhere.
Thank God your the hall monitor, here is my pass.
How can we ever have an Honest Debate with so much propaganda in the media in the first place?? So I propose we regulate the Propagandist’s:
Until we Comprehensively Regulate the commercial activity for hire or compensation regarding the 1st amendment and the “free speech” clause, where we immediately license and require background checks for All Commercial Speech for Hire or Compensation, with absolute strict rules for Truth and Fact, for anything not clearly labeled Opinion, Such as: “Nothing in this broadcast should be considered Real or Factual in anyway”
with severe penalties for any violations, including prison, fines and a Permanent Ban from ever engaging in Commercial Speech activity for hire or compensation.
Just so you know, this has NOTHING to do with Free Speech, this is “Commercial Activity” and they Fed Gov can Regulate Away!!!
That’s the thing about court decisions - they can only repeal existing law, not create new law.
<<>>
John Roberts can.
Ah, there's a problem.
No God, no unalienable rights.
One of the many reasons God is being removed from society.
That would leave the government to bestow or not 'rights'.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.