Originally posted by Star428
http://www.infowars.com/the-bill-of-rights-is-not-negotiable-share-this-urgent-declarationPWNed libs.
The first 10 amendments are non-negotiable.
But, go ahead and keep denying it all ya like. Might as well go ahead and deny gravity exists too while you're at it. LOL.
So again, you have posted a link that actively says it CAN be changed- just like any other amendment. Ratification by the States is all part of the process. It happened when the 18th amendment was ratified- and did that last?, and by the same mechanism it could be repealed. It is the exact same process for repealing the 2nd amendment., There is no change made by it being part of the Bill of Rights- which is just a name, with no other legal standing whatsoever.
If the Senate, Congress and the States want it changed, it can be changed. That's the rule.
Incidentally, as ever, Star, we pretty much all live in democracies, and none of us lives in a place where a majority popular vote causes legal change. That is not the feature of a democracy. Your understanding of the word 'democracy' continues to to be utterly wrong.
Originally posted by Newjak
I'm sorry but I had to stop reading the article half way through. Any article that says that Government can not overturn divine law but then goes on to state that a 3/4s majority of the fifty states can obviously has no idea what they are walking about.You can't say government can not override the Bill of Rights only to then give out a way for government to override those rights...
And the Bill of Rights are just Amendments to the Constitution same as any others.
Any amendment can be overturned with a 3/4 majority vote of all states. This country was never intended to be a Theocracy. It was meant to be a secular nation with separation of church and state. Divine Law was not meant to be the ultimate guide when framing legislation. This is not to say that many of the founding fathers were not Christians, they were. They knew how to separate their faith from secular legislation.
The inalienable right of constitutional carry is heavily preached by the NRA. They claim guns are an extension to the inalienable rights of life, property, and pursuit of happiness, meaning guns may be required to protect those rights from anyone that decided to remove those rights. I admit, I'm an NRA supporter and oppose gun control. However, their premise of owning firearms as an inalienable right is flawed. The right to bear arms can be taken from us if ratified, but I would oppose it to my last breath...and I would not give up my firearms willingly. Civil War 2 would result in this country.
Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
Any amendment can be overturned with a 3/4 majority vote of all states. This country was never intended to be a Theocracy. It was meant to be a secular nation with separation of church and state. Divine Law was not meant to be the ultimate guide when framing legislation. This is not to say that many of the founding fathers were not Christians, they were. They knew how to separate their faith from secular legislation.The inalienable right of constitutional carry is heavily preached by the NRA. They claim guns are an extension to the inalienable rights of life, property, and pursuit of happiness, meaning guns may be required to protect those rights from anyone that decided to remove those rights. I admit, I'm an NRA supporter and oppose gun control. However, their premise of owning firearms as an inalienable right is flawed.
👆
Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
The right to bear arms can be taken from us if ratified, but I would oppose it to my last breath...and I would not give up my firearms willingly. Civil War 2 would result in this country.
"Challenge accepted." - Lord-Emperor Obama, First of His Name
Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
Any amendment can be overturned with a 3/4 majority vote of all states. This country was never intended to be a Theocracy. It was meant to be a secular nation with separation of church and state. Divine Law was not meant to be the ultimate guide when framing legislation. This is not to say that many of the founding fathers were not Christians, they were. They knew how to separate their faith from secular legislation.The inalienable right of constitutional carry is heavily preached by the NRA. They claim guns are an extension to the inalienable rights of life, property, and pursuit of happiness, meaning guns may be required to protect those rights from anyone that decided to remove those rights. I admit, I'm an NRA supporter and oppose gun control. However, their premise of owning firearms as an inalienable right is flawed. The right to bear arms can be taken from us if ratified, but I would oppose it to my last breath...and I would not give up my firearms willingly. Civil War 2 would result in this country.
Yeah, of course any amendment can be ratified with a 3/4 state majority vote but it would be extremely hard to get that many people to vote against our second amendment right. 3/4 is much more than a simple majority which is the only amount a democracy would require. Highly unlikely that will ever happen. The chances of it happening are so low that it's really not even worth mentioning. And yeah, of course the U.S. isn't a theocracy but the fact is the overwhelming majority of people back then in America were Christians. The law of the land was made for Christians by Christians. That's what I meant by our country was founded on Christianity but it's actually a republic. Always has been. Hopefully, always will be.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Of coarse you would like to see civil war over gun ownership.
I'm the last person here sitting at home stroking their precious guns praying for a Civil War as an excuse to go out and shoot those they deem not worthy.
But really, there wouldn't be a second Civil War over gun rights, sure there'd be some incidents all over the country, but easily 90+% of gun owners would obey the law and turn over their guns while bitching and moaning. Lots of bitching and moaning.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Of coarse you would like to see civil war over gun ownership.
I hate this happening. I don't want to see gun rights limited or expunged due to idiots that think shooting up schools and theaters is acceptable. Unless someone kills or rapes a member of my family, I can not imagine hating a race or ideology enough to want to commit mass murder.
Originally posted by Robtard
I'm the last person here sitting at home stroking their precious guns praying for a Civil War as an excuse to go out and shoot those they deem not worthy.But really, there wouldn't be a second Civil War over gun rights, sure there'd be some incidents all over the country, but easily 90+% of gun owners would obey the law and turn over their guns while bitching and moaning. Lots of bitching and moaning.
I live in the South. People down here would not give up their shotguns and rifles. Firearms are sacred here.
Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
I live in the South. People down here would not give up their shotguns and rifles. Firearms are sacred here.
IMO, you'd have a hard time finding people who would be willing to give up their freedom and possibly lives just to keep guns when pen meets paper.
Not that I think a complete ban on guns would ever happen, as the "all guns gone" advocates is relatively small. Most advocates want better regulation.
Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
I doubt it will solve anything. We still can't stamp out the drug trade. Firearms would be huge on the black market and still accessible. It's not a cure for the problem.
It's not a cure, but it would be a step in the right direction for the problem. Most shooting are performed with legally obtained guns (as TI's link discussed). Additionally the drug trade is a different issue due to the addicting nature of drugs.
LOL@ people who think that banning guns will save lives when it will actually do just the opposite. Yeah, sure. If and when Hell freezes over and a law is finally passed to ban all guns then the criminals and terrorists will surrender their guns just like the law-abiding citizens would. 🙄
Not to mention we would be extremely vulnerable to an out-of-control government. What so many fools here don't realize is the second amendment right protects all of our other rights. Without our right to bear arms, we can't fight for our other rights. I know most libs have IQ's in the single digits but c'mon. Use some friggin' common sense. For once.
Ok, so, finally everyone is happy that it is possible for the Second Amendment to be repealed, as other amendments have been...
... now it all comes back to challenging the gun culture of the States that is the root cause of these constant massacres. It is going to require both social pressure and legal restrictions in order to start challenging the sanctity of gun ownership.
Else more people are going to die in droves- and all for nothing except paranoid insanity and centuries oudated views.
And Star- stop pretending that relatively gun free states are not possible. The evidence is literally all around you; you have posters form a myriad of other countries here with nothing remotely close to the US gun problem, in no small part thanks to better gun legislation.
Again,
Originally posted by Star428
AS always: http://www.teapartytribune.com/2013/01/05/what-happens-when-governments-disarm-their-citizens
How many times does history have to repeat itself before people finally learn?
Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
I doubt it will solve anything. We still can't stamp out the drug trade. Firearms would be huge on the black market and still accessible. It's not a cure for the problem.
It might not be a cure, but let me put it another way: there isn't a cure for genital herpes either. However there are medications that can reduce the symptoms of the disease.
So it could reduce deaths, not all of them, but possibly some. When I say that I'm talking more about putting more limits on guns as opposed to outright banning of them. I think outright banning them would be a mistake. I wouldn't want to have the only people with guns be cops and criminals.