1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The second amendment

Discussion in 'North American Politics' started by Estro Felino, May 25, 2022.

  1. Estro Felino

    Estro Felino Believer in free will
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2014
    Messages:
    18,315
    Ratings:
    +7,551
    Religion:
    Christianity
    This thread is for discussing the second amendment civilly and cordially.
    :)


    Feel free to express why you endorse it, and why you think it should not be changed.
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  2. Daemon Sophic

    Daemon Sophic Avatar in flux

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2009
    Messages:
    5,079
    Ratings:
    +3,667
    For reference on the 2nd amendment of the U.S.A.

    Second 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.
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  3. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    13,015
    Ratings:
    +3,653
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    Since English is not my first language and I am not good at syntax can you break it down alone these lines.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Viker

    Viker Spirit in Black

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2011
    Messages:
    7,303
    Ratings:
    +6,195
    Religion:
    In Diabolica
    Notice. It starts with 'well regulated'. Many Americans ignore that part in favor of the last part 'the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed'. Should give outsiders a glimpse of the issues we are having.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  5. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    13,015
    Ratings:
    +3,653
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    Well, here is my take and it is a totality read based on my understanding of the historical context and thus a form of reading the original intent.

    All persons have a right to weapons as well-regulated and if you break the rules, you don't have that right. Further the purpose of allowing all persons the right is that it makes it more democratic and thus allows for a militia to be able to stand up to a government army.

    So the right of bearing arms is connected to partake in the defence of the people against the power of the government.
     
    • Useful Useful x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. joe1776

    joe1776 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2017
    Messages:
    4,908
    Ratings:
    +1,938
    Religion:
    None
    It doesn't matter how we think the Second Amendment should be interpreted.

    In the USA, our Constitution is useful only as a tool enabling the minority to obstruct the will of the majority. The strategy is simple: If the facts are on your side, argue the facts. If the facts are against you, argue the law.

    It's absurd to think that we should be guided on our 2022 moral choices about guns by the Founders, men who owned slaves and didn't give women the right to vote or hold public office. If they thought they could get away with it, the Republican Party could make a valid argument that appointing a woman (Kamala Harris) to the Vice-Presidency is clearly unconstitutional.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. Twilight Hue

    Twilight Hue Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    43,713
    Ratings:
    +19,418
    Religion:
    Philosophical Buddhism
    It's a legitimate protection. Especially from the possibility of a rouge government or foreign power that threatens people's constitutional freedoms and rights.

    Unfortunately, as with everything, there are exterior curcumstances like mass shootings that threatens the second amendment itself aside from the valid reasons people are encouraged to keep and bear arms for.

    So it becomes a struggle between security and safety vs ones freedoms against tyranny.

    Without the second amendment people would be ill equipped to handle things that could make mass shooting miniscule in comparison.

    The second amendment needs to stay intact but with some revisions to address modern issues that didn't exist during the time when the amendment was drafted and ratified.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  8. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    13,015
    Ratings:
    +3,653
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    So what is your basis for how to do rights, duties, taxes, laws and government?
     
  9. Twilight Hue

    Twilight Hue Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    43,713
    Ratings:
    +19,418
    Religion:
    Philosophical Buddhism
    And people in those days actually owned their arms, and took them home with them.
     
  10. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    13,015
    Ratings:
    +3,653
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    You could still do that in a sense.
     
    #10 mikkel_the_dane, May 25, 2022
    Last edited: May 25, 2022
    • Like Like x 1
  11. joe1776

    joe1776 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2017
    Messages:
    4,908
    Ratings:
    +1,938
    Religion:
    None
    I'd need a lot of space and time to answer that question fully. However, expert panels unhindered by laws would be the basic structure.
     
  12. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    29,754
    Ratings:
    +16,164
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    History of 2nd amendment:
    The Second Amendment Was Ratified to Preserve Slavery
    For more than 200 years, since 1791, the amendment was interpreted to refer to an organized militia, rather than an individual right to gun ownership. It wasn't until the District of Columbia vs Heller decision, in 2008, that the NRA/Gun industry campaign finally reïnterpreted it to include individuals.
     
    #12 Valjean, May 25, 2022
    Last edited: May 25, 2022
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  13. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    13,015
    Ratings:
    +3,653
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    Okay, make a thread.
     
  14. Twilight Hue

    Twilight Hue Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    43,713
    Ratings:
    +19,418
    Religion:
    Philosophical Buddhism
    Yea. I can buy a rifle tomorrow if I want, but I'll be required to take a background check and a three day waiting period before I can take possession of it. I'm OK with that requirement.
     
  15. mikkel_the_dane

    mikkel_the_dane Shadow Wolf's Aspie sibling

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    13,015
    Ratings:
    +3,653
    Religion:
    The Wrong One
    No, I meant a militia and guns as a right.
     
  16. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    24,106
    Ratings:
    +30,284
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    When the second amendment was written, average citizens used their own weapons when called up for military duty (not exclusively, but largely). These militias were instrumental for winning the revolutionary war. A citizen army was seen as one of the guards against an oppressive government.

    So, the 2nd amendment was written to specifically address that concern. The goal was to keep the federal government in check.

    But it should also be noted that the amendment specifically states that the militia should be well-regulated, meaning that it was run by the individual states (not the federal government). And guess what? All US states have 'National Guards' that do precisely this.

    The problem is that the 2nd amendment, like all others, is not absolute. You do not have freedom of religion to the point that human sacrifice is allowed. You do not have freedom of speech to the point to yell 'fire' in a crowded theater (interesting story on this one, by the way). And you don't have the right to have a personal military stockpile.

    For many people, guns are a necessary tool of their jobs. On a farm, they are simply one of the many dangerous tools that are used on a daily basis. Historically, hunting was a means of income and a way to put food on the plates. That is less so today, of course.

    The current difficulties have to do with how to regulate gun ownership in such a way that those who are unstable, untrained, and irresponsible are not allowed to own these dangerous pieces of machinery.

    At the very least, I would expect every gun owner to be part of a well-regulated militia that gives rigorous training on the use and misuse of their devices and has regular mental health screening to be sure the person is stable enough to continue to own their weapons. That would satisfy the 2nd amendment and lead to a much healthier attitude towards guns.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    29,754
    Ratings:
    +16,164
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  18. esmith

    esmith Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Messages:
    14,052
    Ratings:
    +2,242
    Religion:
    No name designated at this time.
    I read it as two parts.
    Part 1. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State.
    The security of a free state is formost and a militia is necesary, when needed, to insure that security.
    Part 2. the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    A militia is cosnsist of citizens that are not subsidized by the government for their equipment.
    Thus the citizens must supply their own equipment; hence the right to bear arms is a Constitutional right.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  19. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    24,106
    Ratings:
    +30,284
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    Also, to 'bear arms' originally meant to join such a militia.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  20. stvdv

    stvdv Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2018
    Messages:
    15,689
    Ratings:
    +9,346
    Religion:
    Sanathana Dharma [The Eternal Religion]
    I did not know that. Not mine either, and "law language" is not my favorite. I prefer easy language
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
Loading...