View Single Post
Old September 29, 2012, 09:02 AM   #34
Senior Member
Join Date: July 1, 2001
Posts: 3,736
Instead of dumbing down the second amendment, we could offer free reading classes for lawyers, judges and politicians. Based on my understanding of the English language, I fail to see how any obstacles, limits or restrictions on gun ownership are remotely constitutional.

Only when you base your argument on previous failures to understand the wording, do attacks on the second amendment make any sense. For example, often "the people" is interpreted as the "people in the militia", but since that wasn't said and people is not a pronoun, it needs no reference and therefore means all people in the USA. The phrase "the people" would be used to point to a group of all US citizens instead of the phrase all people or a people's.....

I also see the word infringed being exceptionally hard for judges to understand... Maybe examples of infringement would help:
FFL licensing
ATF establishment
CCW licensing
Everything in DC
States imposing their own gun laws
Purchase permits
Background checks
Ordering mass quantities of ammo to throw the ammo & primer markets out of balance
Using tax money to destroy safe guns
Imposing excessive penalties on crimes using guns

Even gun owners often buy into some of this. That is where the problem. If you don't like the constitution, renounce your citizenship and move out. Don't dedicate your life to curbing freedom.

How do we change this patern of purposefully poor reading? Get 5 political parties or more in the process. There is no way that you can fairly split all Americans into 2 lines of thought. Any political argument which starts there is derailed. It wouldn't be a bad idea to make each candidate shoot a 10 shot in 10 sec 25 yard group either with a military grade 1911 and post the results online!
Nathan is offline  
Page generated in 0.03323 seconds with 7 queries