Comments (123) (Please sign in to comment)

1. 

   greyolddave said, 2 months ago

   I don’t see anywhere in the Constitution that we have a right to kill with firearms. It also says something about being orderly. The NRA solves the problem by claiming to be “crazy”. We have a “right” for any person to have any weapon. We do NOT have an obligation to be “orderly”.
2. 

   Chillbilly said, 2 months ago

   Asay living in the past. As usual.
3. 

   ODon said, 2 months ago

   Cruz as the rational Senator? Irrational.
4. 

   DesultoryPhillipic said, 2 months ago

   @greyolddave

   I don’t see anywhere that it “obligates” anyone other than the government. Let me re-read it though. I might have missed it.
5. 

   Jase99 said, 2 months ago

   The way I read the Second Amendment it applies to the states, not individual citizens.
6. 

   Xabulba said, 2 months ago

   Why is it the pro-gun people always forget about the rest of what the 2nd amendment says?

   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.

   Meaning if you want to keep a gun you must be part of the “well regulated Militia” not just some douche who wants to shoot stuff up with a AR-15. Oh, you need to help provide security also but most people don’t want to give up their free time to that either.
7. 

   David said, 2 months ago

   @Xabulba

   Why is it the pro-gun people always forget about the rest of what the 2nd amendment says?

   Because people like Assay will be conflated with Streicher. Not that it wouldn’t be deserved…
8. 

   mikefive said, 2 months ago

   @Xabulba

   A perusal of the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers might clarify that for you. Those papers are must reading.
9. 

   cfortunato said, 2 months ago

   No, she’s absolutely correct. We DO restrict arms. And speech. And assembly. Just proof-texting the Constitution like a fundamentalist does with the Bible betrays total ignorance of how law actually works.
10. 

    Xabulba said, 2 months ago

    Thanks for the threat of violence, hope it make you feel manly.
11. 

    dtriedel said, 2 months ago

    So what’s the limit?
12. 

    The Wolf In Your Midst said, 2 months ago

    Remember that the Constitution SPECIFICALLY STATES that one of the duties of the militia is to defend the nation and its government from threats, foreign and domestic- including insurrectionists. So when the “Don’t Tread On Me” crowd decides that it’s time to “go shoot the gub’ment”, it’s every true gun-owning American’s patriotic duty to put them down.
    I mean, we do still care about the Constitution in this country, don’t we? I mean the WHOLE thing, not just the parts some of us like.
13. 

    comics said, 2 months ago

    The right to bear arms has been infringed since before I was born. I can’t buy a nuclear warhead or an RPG or a tank. How am I supposed to defend the nation with a semi automatic?
14. 

    Bruce4671 said, 2 months ago

    @Xabulba

    At the time it was conceived and written, the term “militia” refereed to every adult male in the population of age and physical capability to serve as a combatant in the defense of the community . Not every male currently in a military organization.
    
    The definition persists.
    
    MILITIA
    
    all able-bodied males considered by law eligible for military service. (dictionary.com ex 3)
    
    the whole body of able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to military service (websters ex 2)
    
    So we may quibble about what well regulated means but the fact that a militia is composed of citizens that are NOT part of the military but are private citizens is the point.
    
    Now why is it necessary for citizens to be armed? To maintain freedom. Freedom from what? Tyranny. And what is that?
    
    Again from webster:
    
    TYRANNY
    
    oppressive power, especially : oppressive power exerted by government (ex 1)
    
    And dictionary.com
    
    arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority. Synonyms: despotism, absolutism, dictatorship. (ex 1)
    
    So IF a government wanted to more power and the ability to force it’s decision on the citizens what is the first thing it would seek to do?
    
    Well there are others who have asked that question and observed that the first step is to disarm the population.
    
    To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them. – George Madison
    
    NO my brother. We do NOT forget the first part of that statement. Now tell me how you can blatantly ignore the rest of it and concentrate on the last words "SHALL NOT be infringed.
15. 

    DGF999 said, 2 months ago

    @Bruce4671

    Well said!
16. Load 15 more comments. | Load the rest (108).