Banter RDT 172 - Switching to wrestling chat. Not really Full Stop

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Amendments are just that, changes to an original document. They are designed in a way that they can be amended further or repealed at any time. This argument of rights is so stupid, the narrow mindedness of some people is truly astounding.

The second amendment was written at a time when the most powerful weapon was a musket.. I’m sure full military grade AR-15s was exactly what the founding fathers had in mind all those years ago.

This is exactly right but it is really really difficult to get the 2nd amendment completely repealed. It's never going to happen honestly. The main hurdle is that they need 38 states to sign off on constitutional amendments. That's nigh on impossible when there are about 20 x Republican+10 states.

The amendment is pretty explicit in saying that the right to keep and bear shall not be infringed. Like it or not Dem states' open-carry or fully auto ban or even 'may issue' policies can be challenged on this basis. This is the part which needs to be changed if they can do anything as there isn't the appetite to have a Australian style ban on all firearms. (Even more centrist Dems like Biden claim to support the basic idea of 2A)

Imo the Dems need to make it a serious cost-be-damned, long term, mission in the same way Republicans have with abortion. Although it would be hard to reconcile that with other issues like Climate and Health which are probably even more important to most centre and leftwing ppl
 
The amendment is pretty explicit in saying that the right to keep and bear shall not be infringed.

Except for the bit that says it’s for the purpose of maintaining a militia.

It’d just need SCOTUS to give that a narrow interpretation. But that won’t happen.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Except for the bit that says it’s for the purpose of maintaining a militia.

It’d just need SCOTUS to give that a narrow interpretation. But that won’t happen.

Yes that is an approach to it but at the end of the day the Dems need to win back SCOTUS to make that interpretation. Otherwise any national ban will be thrown out on an individual rights interpretation. The reasonable right wing qu is what really is a well-regulated militia? It is a touch dicey to have the govt (esp federal) regulating it when you consider the original purpose of 2A, although licences and background checks would probably be an element of it.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top