Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Does 2A really guarantee the right to bear bombs, nukes, etc?
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3  Send TopicPrint
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Does 2A really guarantee the right to bear bombs, nukes, etc? (Read 434 times)
Sicklers Dink
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 10544
Location: British Columbia
Joined: May 8th, 2017
Re: Does 2A really guarantee the right to bear bombs, nukes, etc?
Reply #10 - Mar 5th, 2018 at 12:38pm
Print Post  
SkyChief wrote on Mar 4th, 2018 at 11:07pm:
"Does 2A really guarantee the right to bear bombs, nukes, etc? "

Only when these "rights" are pursued to their absurdity. 

Check in with with Don_G.  -  he's our "go - to" authority when it comes to absurdity!   Smiley  Cheesy

"reductio ad absurdum" fails every time. 

Don_G. learned this the hard way.



I draw the line on rational vs. absurd much lower than bombs and hand grenades which are past absurd.

Like ahhell suggests, the absurd would include handguns and that would probably solve 9/10's of the gun problem. Military type assault weapons would take care of the other 1/10th.

that position would be absurd to only about a third of Americans most likely.

The gungoonery isn't popular in the US, it's only a small number finding a way to hold politicians at ransom.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 30208
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Does 2A really guarantee the right to bear bombs, nukes, etc?
Reply #11 - Mar 5th, 2018 at 6:04pm
Print Post  
SnarkySack wrote on Mar 5th, 2018 at 9:20am:
[b]   Congress shall have the power ... to provide for...
To provide for is a key phrase you are probably skipping right over.

Maybe you think 'provide for' is synonymous with 'regulate' which you think is synonymous with 'control'.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 30208
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Does 2A really guarantee the right to bear bombs, nukes, etc?
Reply #12 - Mar 5th, 2018 at 6:05pm
Print Post  
Sicklers Dink wrote on Mar 5th, 2018 at 12:30pm:
His name is his political statement. It's also his personal statement he wants to get across.  If he starts talking he'll come across as very anti-establishment. Maybe even extremist enough to promote violence. Maybe that's why he's quiet?
You know this person well?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SnarkySack
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 3081
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Does 2A really guarantee the right to bear bombs, nukes, etc?
Reply #13 - Mar 5th, 2018 at 6:24pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Mar 5th, 2018 at 6:04pm:
To provide for is a key phrase you are probably skipping right over.

Maybe you think 'provide for' is synonymous with 'regulate' which you think is synonymous with 'control'.


That's the dumbest refusal to admit to being wrong I have read from you and that's saying something.


  

I used to be burnsred . . .
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 30208
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Does 2A really guarantee the right to bear bombs, nukes, etc?
Reply #14 - Mar 5th, 2018 at 6:46pm
Print Post  
SnarkySack wrote on Mar 5th, 2018 at 6:24pm:
That's the dumbest refusal to admit to being wrong I have read from you and that's saying something.


Here's what I said-

"The federal government doesn't have any power to regulate State Militias, the States do. It's clear in the Constitution and the reasons are made clear in the Federalist Papers."

Your reply quotes the Constitution saying that Congress is obligated to "provide for" the State Militias.

It's a common phrase.

Divorced parents are often required to provide for their children.

Adults for the most part should provide for themselves.

Do you really not understand what "provide for" means?

Edit: Names like "Maine State Militia" sort of gives it away don't you think?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
DontTread44
Libertarian Full Member
***
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 92
Joined: Nov 22nd, 2016
Re: Does 2A really guarantee the right to bear bombs, nukes, etc?
Reply #15 - Mar 5th, 2018 at 7:12pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Mar 5th, 2018 at 7:05am:
Since all you do is ask questions, why should anyone answer?

What do you think, and why?

At least pretend to try to answer questions for yourself.

In the context of an organized State Militia, certainly. And while the individual Right to bear arms exists, no one but terrorists is going to want to "bear" bombs and nukes outside of the context of an organized militia regulated by their state.

As usual, the focus on individual Rights is the wrong angle.

Focus on the laws that currently prohibit known convicted violent felons from bearing arms of any sort, and try to keep terrorists out of the country.


What's wrong with asking questions?  Cry
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SnarkySack
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 3081
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Does 2A really guarantee the right to bear bombs, nukes, etc?
Reply #16 - Mar 5th, 2018 at 7:19pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Mar 5th, 2018 at 6:46pm:
Here's what I said-

"The federal government doesn't have any power to regulate State Militias, the States do. It's clear in the Constitution and the reasons are made clear in the Federalist Papers."

Your reply quotes the Constitution saying that Congress is obligated to "provide for" the State Militias.


You omitted several words there:

to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia,

How is organizing, arming and disciplining not regulating?  If the federal government provides for arming, they can choose which arms to provide so they can say, "sorry Tennessee!  No nukes for you!"

Just admit you're wrong this time and your credibility might be salvaged.  Keep pursuing this and you make yourself look worse and worse.

  

I used to be burnsred . . .
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 30208
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Does 2A really guarantee the right to bear bombs, nukes, etc?
Reply #17 - Mar 5th, 2018 at 7:21pm
Print Post  
DontTread44 wrote on Mar 5th, 2018 at 7:12pm:
What's wrong with asking questions?  Cry


Do you think anyone will get their own nukes if the Supreme Court says its their right?

Were you imagining that is something that might happen unless the government "regulates" it?

Your worried that some rich guy like Jeff Bezos will buy some nukes from Russia?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 6732
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Does 2A really guarantee the right to bear bombs, nukes, etc?
Reply #18 - Mar 5th, 2018 at 10:52pm
Print Post  
This is actually one of the rare threads where Don clearly has the upper hand.

If you say people shouldn't have doomsday devices, which are clearly arms, because that's unreasonable, then you accept, inherently, that the Second Amendment is constrained by common sense rather than being boundless - there is no absolute right to bear any arms.

This means that if someone wants to have a discussion with you about it being unreasonable for one child to die, you have to address it on that person's home turf. Because you just admitted Reasonable > 2A.

Nevermind that reasonable is going to be different for different people, and you are fast becoming the minority here.
  

Making Sci-Fi great again since 2063.

Not taking Jeff seriously until he admits this is animal abuse (which he says should be illegal): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE-IT7_CaE4
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 30208
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Does 2A really guarantee the right to bear bombs, nukes, etc?
Reply #19 - Mar 6th, 2018 at 6:09am
Print Post  
SnarkySack wrote on Mar 5th, 2018 at 7:19pm:
You omitted several words there:

to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia,

How is organizing, arming and disciplining not regulating? 
Organizing arming and disciplining are just what they say, and it's the job of the States to do it.

Congress is supposed to provide the means is how I read it, and that seems reasonable since the militias might be called into service of the entire nation.

It's no different than a divorced father who doesn't have custody being required to provide for the feeding, housing and clothing of his child, even though the child's mother actually does those things.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Does 2A really guarantee the right to bear bombs, nukes, etc?
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy