The mighty 2nd: Law? Or math?

[Crassbow]

How many laws, codices, ordinances etc are there concerning all aspects of firearms....Use, manufacture, sale, transport etc etc?
Our NRA claimed 22k after Sandy hook and then 33k after Uvalde, best guess is about 4-7,000 laws now current and enforced on firearms.

OK, let's think: If even ONE of these thousands of laws are valid then the mighty 2nd just ain't. Think harder...If the mighty 2nd don't stop them thousands of laws already, then why in Hell do we keep gibbering 'The 2nd! The 2nd! Gawdamitty! The 2nd!' when one or a hundred more laws can be enacted as needed?

This question has been asked 3452 times on every forum and site featuring fat latents prancing and posing across social media with a parody of the rifle some of us gun owning vets here were issued as 18 year old infantrymen. Not one coherent answer.

Read More

 

[Belevolk]

The difference I see is the Second Amendment part of the Constitution of our Country. The rest are just fodder to the Constitution, The left wants us to surrender out given RIGHTS by trying to circumventing the Constitution. Because an out and out vote to amend the Constitution would FAIL.
"Of the roughly 12,000 amendments proposed since the Constitutional Convention, only 33 have gone to the states for ratification, and just 27 have made it all the way into the Constitution. (In contrast, India adopted its constitution nearly 69 years ago and it's already been amended 101 times.)" from https://www.pewresearch.org/short-r...l-amendments-and-how-seldom-they-go-anywhere/

 

[nvshooter]

quora.com is loaded with Second Amendment questions. I answer a lot of them with verbiage I have used within these very pages in years past. One is, "Why does anyone need an assault weapon?" My response is that "my Right to own a firearm is an Individual Right bestowed upon me by God and as such no need, reason, justification nor rationalization is required for any American citizen to exercise any of his Freedoms as so defined in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights."

Another is, "Why is the Second Amendment so vague?" My response is, "The men who wrote the Second Amendment were absolute masters of the English language. There is nothing ambiguous, vague nor less than specific in the verbiage of the Second Amendment. Only diarrhea-drinking liberals read things into it that are not there..."

One of my favorites is, "How do we solve Climate Change?" My response is, "Get hundreds of people to sing Kum-ba-Yah around a campfire for 100,000 years. It's guaranteed to work!"

I spend far too much of my time away from work on quora, and I know it. But there are just too many really stupid people out there who need a little schoolin' in Civics, et cetera. I feel an incumbency upon me to provide just a minuscule portion of that education. I doubt my efforts will ever help anyone so tragically afflicted, but no one can say I didn't try...

 

[nvshooter]

Another one: "What will be the effects of the government shutdown?" This is one of my favorite ones to answer. I write, "746 million Americans will die within the first fifteen minutes. Worldwide, 26.4 billion people will die within the first three hours. It will take several months, but we'll see 3/4 of Martians die because of the ripple effect across the 41 million-some miles between Earth and Mars. And it's all Trump's fault."

 

[Belevolk]

You do know that your around 3x high on the population for the planet.

I really like the Martian concept that should throw some of them a loop.

Of course it is Trumps fault. He is still living and breathing. Everything is Trumps fault. Just ask a Democrat.
In 1865 a Democrat shot and killed Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States.
In 1881 a left wing radical Democrat shot James Garfield, President of the U...nited States who later died from the wound.
In 1963 a radical left wing socialist shot and killed John F. Kennedy, President of the United States.
In 1975 a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at Gerald Ford, President of the United States.
In 1983 a registered Democrat shot and wounded Ronald Reagan, President of the United States.
In 1984 James Hubert, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 22 people in a McDonalds restaurant.
In 1986 Patrick Sherrill, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 15 people in an Oklahoma post office.
In 1990 James Pough, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 10 people at a GMAC office.
In 1991 George Hennard, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 23 people in a Luby's cafeteria.
In 1995 James Daniel Simpson, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 5 coworkers in a Texas laboratory.
In 1999 Larry Asbrook, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 8 people at a church service.
In 2001 a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at the White House in a failed attempt to kill George W. Bush, President of the US.
In 2003 Douglas Williams, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people at a Lockheed Martin plant.
In 2007 a registered Democrat named Seung - Hui Cho, shot and killed 32 people in Virginia Tech.
In 2009, a left wing radical Islamic sympathizer Major Nidal Hasan fatally shot 13 people and injured more than 30 others on Fort Hood, near Killeen, Texas. The shooting produced more casualties than any other on an American military base.
In 2010 a mentally ill registered Democrat named Jared Lee Loughner, shot Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in the head thus wounding her for life.
In 2011 a registered Democrat named James Holmes, went into a movie theater and shot and killed 12 people.
In 2012 Andrew Engeldinger, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people in Minneapolis.
In 2013 a registered Democrat named Adam Lanza, shot and killed 26 people in a school.
In Sept 2013, an angry Democrat shot 12 at a Navy ship yard.
In 2016 a registered Muslim Democrat murdered 49 people in an Orlando night club.
One could go on, but you get the point, even if the media does nothing.
Clearly, there is a problem with Democrats and guns.
Not one NRA member, Tea Party member, or Republican conservative was involved in these shootings and murders.

 

[nvshooter]

You do know that you're around 3x high on the population for the planet.

I really like the Martian concept; that should throw some of them a loop.

Of course, it is Trump's fault. He is still living and breathing. Everything is Trump's fault. Just ask a Democrat.

Yes, I do know I'm about 3X times the population of the planet. That's one of the mechanisms I use to put sparklers and spinners on the absurdity of my answers to the idiot questions posed by idiot liberals. The United States has less than half a population of 746 million people. Somebody responded to an answer like this who wrote that he was amused with the absurdity of the numbers I used. He saw it for the slap in the face it was to the numbskull who asked the question.

Here's one that made some nutcase go triple-insane: "I will always know that Trump was a monumental success as President by virtue of the tenor of the vulgarity, the lies, the anger, the vitriol, and the vehement hatred written by liberals in their questions and comments regarding Donald Trump. Do you agree?" The noodnik who responded to that question regurgitated all the liberal bilge that has no further value in being heard. He went off about Ivanka and Jared working at the White House, about two of Trump's casinos going bankrupt and all manner of other bullschiff that read like the snarky Rachel Madcow was reading it on MSDNC.

The liberals' hatred of Trump has become so insane that I don't believe a negative word written nor spoken about him by the Criminal Left Establishment. I just chalk-up the disgusting bile written about him to the libtards' insane hatred of him. They have become unhinged over the man. The Insane Left so wanted Himmlery to win in 2016 that when the old bravo-itch didn't, they essentially traded intelligent and mature acceptance of the loss for unbridled rage and seething hatred of all things conservative.

The event that would probably have the libtards tying raw sirloin steaks to the bodies and then jumping into shark waters would be a Trump victory in 2024. A Trump win after eight years of vicious, angry and vehement hatred of him would cause them to seek suicide as an escape from what one quora buffoon said was Trump's page-by-page following of Mein Kampf. Can you believe someone wrote something so asinine? Well, you'll see it on quora...

 

[nvshooter]

"Of the roughly 12,000 amendments proposed since the Constitutional Convention, only 33 have gone to the states for ratification, and just 27 have made it all the way into the Constitution. (In contrast, India adopted its constitution nearly 69 years ago and it's already been amended 101 times.)"

The Framers made the Constitution so difficult to amend such that our laws would have some permanency to them; so that we could look back on the genius of those men and use that 200 years-old genius to craft laws for the present day that would still hold water fifty years or more from now. If our Constitution was a "living document" as the libtards so desire, our laws would have all the permanency of the laws in Botswana, Venezuela or France. Who in helsinki wants to live under that kind of confusion and fear?

 

[AMproducts]

It's really easy for people to get wrapped around the axle and think about the constitution as somehow being a granter or garantor of rights. I tend to think it's important to point it that the bill of rights, which includes the second, was a section that enumerated a number of natural rights, that is, these are rights that supercede everything else. Humans fabricated weapons before we agreed with each other enough to have governments, we were pounding our plows to swords, and pruning hooks for millenia before we had "democracy".

Governments come and governments go, the human condition remains. I can sit around and be mad and try to make logical, rational arguments to people who are neither logical or rational. There's a lesson in realpolitik in the Melian dialogue, just because your cause is just doesn't mean you will succeed or others will rush to your cause. The strong do as they wish, while the weak suffer what they must.

Rather than cultivating a sense of injustice about it, organize, fund, sue. At the moment, we can use the tools of bureaucracy.

 

[nvshooter]

Saw something on a feed on some "news page" (maybe Microsoft News or some such bullschumer) that Boe JiteMe is coming for our guns. Such a pathetic batsard he is. Letting-in several million illegals (smuggling-in fentanyl from China) while simultaneously schiffing on our Bill of Rights. Could there be a bigger alpha-hotel anywhere else in America than this blithering, senile, gaffe-o-matic buffoon?

 

[Belevolk]

Slow Joe does have an agenda to reduce the areas we can shoot here in the west. BLM has basically taken the stand if you do not like our rules then go somewhere else to shoot. They are even using environmental rules because of the amount of lead we shooters use.

 

[Stomper]

Slow Joe does have an agenda to reduce the areas we can shoot here in the west. BLM has basically taken the stand if you do not like our rules then go somewhere else to shoot. They are even using environmental rules because of the amount of lead we shooters use.

Go shoot somewhere else?

I wonder if they'll be so arrogant if someone finally loses it and takes their advice and starts with their private houses?

 

[Belevolk]

I do not see it as arrogant. I see it as control.

 

[OwenP]

So much of what our constitution was meant to honor and protect has gotten twisted up by policymakers who don't actually care. We fought to get out of exsesive taxation and yet here we are. We fought to protect our right to bear arms yet here we are. The world is going to a rather dark place and we just let it happen as a whole

 

[nvshooter]

So much of what our Constitution was meant to honor and protect has gotten twisted-up by policymakers who don't actually care. . .

Yes; the idiots in Washington pass laws that are nakedly unconstitutional to even an immigrant from Russia, let us say. These laws go into effect and may stay so for decades. That moronic 1994 - 2004 gun ban of Sick Willy Klantoon is a perfect example. The Tyranny-crat majorities in both chambers approved it, and Sick Willy signed it. All who pushed it knew it was an illegal law, but they went ahead with it anyway because they knew the Supreme Court would never get around to nullifying it. Its purpose was to make illegal the lines and designs of some several dozen semi-automatic rifles. The FBI Uniform Crime Statistics Report showed the ban to be of zero value in reducing crimes perpetrated by firearms such as ARs and AKs. On that, George W. Bush let the ban expire and that small portion of the Second Amendment was restored. The liberals' response was to make hefty deposits of sewage solids in their panties. And now the batsards want it to be re-instated and expanded to encompass an even larger sampling of firearms currently legal for Americans to own.

How soon will the cretins in DC declare that a bolt-action receiver and barrel bolted into a black chassis is an "assault weapon" because it's so scary-looking?

 

[AlexV]

How many laws, codices, ordinances etc are there concerning all aspects of firearms....Use, manufacture, sale, transport etc etc?
Our NRA claimed 22k after Sandy hook and then 33k after Uvalde, best guess is about 4-7,000 laws now current and enforced on firearms.

OK, let's think: If even ONE of these thousands of laws are valid then the mighty 2nd just ain't. Think harder...If the mighty 2nd don't stop them thousands of laws already, then why in Hell do we keep gibbering 'The 2nd! The 2nd! Gawdamitty! The 2nd!' when one or a hundred more laws can be enacted as needed?

This question has been asked 3452 times on every forum and site featuring fat latents prancing and posing across social media with a parody of the rifle some of us gun owning vets here were issued as 18 year old infantrymen. Not one coherent answer.

Any idiot can draft a "law" that violates the Constitution. It's only when someone tries to enforce such a law that its constitutionality can be brought into question. Even a brief reading of recent history can reveal many laws that were struck down because of the 2nd Amendment. It works as advertised, as far as I can tell.

 

[nvshooter]

Any idiot can draft a "law" that violates the Constitution. It's only when someone tries to enforce such a law that its constitutionality can be brought into question. Even a brief reading of recent history can reveal many laws that were struck down because of the 2nd Amendment. It works as advertised, as far as I can tell.

What's infuriating is that Americans who own guns are befuddled as to why the Criminal Left Party cannot understand the phrase, "shall not be infringed." Boe JiteMe says the Second Amendment is not absolute. An American couldn't own a cannon, the fool says, under the Second Amendment in 1791. I guess because he finished law school in the bottom eleven percent of his class (meaning he failed to learn 89% of what was taught) that he is unable to understand what the two-word phrase "shall not" means. I have written this before in these pages, but will do so again: "Is it absolute-- or not-- that a fully-grown man shall not sexually-abuse a three-year-old girl?" There's that bothersome "shall not" verbiage, yet again. I suspect that Boe JiteMe would say my question is absolute. The Second Amendment has "shall not" within its text as well, but what do you think Boe would say about that? Boe's problem is that his idiotic liberalism has sorrowfully clouded his understanding of the simple language of the Second Amendment.

I say the verbiage of the Second Amendment is written in simple language. The entire Constitution is written in simple language such that Americans who couldn't read could have the Constitution read to them by those who could, and thus be able to understand what was presented in the Constitution and in its attendant Bill of Rights. All this crap about the Second Amendment being vague, ambiguous or less than specific is pure bullschiff. Only Freedom-hating liberals read things in the Second Amendment-- and in the entire Constitution-- that are not there.

The liberals see the alleged "Right to an abortion" in the Constitution, even though those who can read English as well as can we on this site do not see such an imaginary Right. The Criminal Left Party creates Rights out of hole cloth, but cannot see a Right that has existed within the Bill of Rights since it was ratified on December 15, 1791.