How Do You Feel About Gun Rights?

[Bigfoot3814]

I recently had an argument with a friend of mine about guns and gun rights here in the United States. He insisted to me that "guns are evil" and that the 2nd amendment did not give an individual the right to own a gun.

The both of us are from New York, and around our part of it people don't get much exposure to guns. And what we do, all of it is associated with gun violence, crime, tragic accidents, and other such unsavoriness. I however do support gun rights and believe that they are among the most important of our constitutionally-protected freedoms, despite not living in a house with guns or even having ever fired a gun myself.

And well, this forum has different kinds of people from all over the world and we haven't had a gun rights discussion in a while, so lets hear what you think! Sock it to me.

 

[Dachs]

Any government that gives me the right to own a gun can't be all good.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

A government should live in fear of its people.

 

[Bugfatty300]

Guns are inanimate objects and thus have no rights at all.

What's next? Are we going to advocate rights for lawnmowers?

 

[CCRunner]

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

How does this not guarantee the right to have guns?

I support guns for everyone over the age of 18 except violent felons. Minors can use but not own guns. But use common sense about what guns should be allowed and stuff. There's no reason for me to be buying eighteen rpgs or a mounted machine gun or anything like that.

 

[Godwynn]

What's next? Are we going to advocate rights for lawnmowers?

What did the lawnmowers ever do to you!?

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

I should clarify. I think Americans have a right to own guns, but that such a right comes with responsibility, and can regulated, i.e. you need a license to get one.

 

[emzie]

A gun is a tool. It has no morals. Just like any dangerous tool, they require regulation. I support licensing with the intent to ensure proper use but not discourage ownership.

 

[Kerozine]

Amendment II

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.

Source: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

The 2nd amendment doesn't specify firearms. What do you say to that?

 

[Dachs]

The 2nd amendment doesn't specify firearms. What do you say to that?

Firearms are a subset of arms, as in armament?

 

[Bigfoot3814]

How does this not guarantee the right to have guns?

Well you didn't include the first half, which is where the controversy begins.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,

Gun control supporters sometimes argue that Country Joe from Idaho purchasing and owning his own firearms has nothing to do with "a well regulated militia". However, there's also this little number:

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The right of THE PEOPLE, in contrast with the militia.

 

[Gogf]

Is something a right if the government can arbitrarily refuse to grant licenses to exercise that right?

 

[Gogf]

Well you didn't include the first half, which is where the controversy begins.

Gun control supporters sometimes argue that Country Joe from Idaho purchasing and owning his own firearms has nothing to do with "a well regulated militia". However, there's also this little number:

The right of THE PEOPLE, in contrast with the militia.

It's not really sensible to ignore the first part of that sentence. Obviously there was a reason it was included in the Constitution, and any good interpretation of the second amendment needs to deal with it.

 

[Kerozine]

Firearms are a subset of arms, as in armament?

Do I have the right to use them as I please?

 

[emzie]

Firearms are a subset of arms, as in armament?

Stop being an activist judge. An originalist would know that guns didn't exist as we know them in 1786. Clearly Americans only have the right to muskets.

 

[Gogf]

Do I have the right to use them as I please?

The amendment says "keep and bear" not "keep, bear, and use however they like." Murder is a crime.

 

[Dachs]

Do I have the right to use them as I please?

You must be mistaking me for somebody with an opinion.

Stop being an activist judge. An originalist would know that guns didn't exist as we know them in 1786. Clearly Americans only have the right to muskets.

Disregarding the lulziness of the post, though, I never specified modern firearms.

 

[Bigfoot3814]

It's not really sensible to ignore the first part of that sentence. Obviously there was a reason it was included in the Constitution, and any good interpretation of the second amendment needs to deal with it.

Well of course. "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,", you need an organized force to keep your security, absolutely. But then they say "the right of the people to keep and bear arms", it's not the right of the militia.

 

[Kerozine]

Stop being an activist judge. An originalist would know that guns didn't exist as we know them in 1786. Clearly Americans only have the right to muskets.

Neato. I've always wanted to own a musket. Now how do I go about exercising my right to one?

WHO DO I SUE?

 

[sonorakitch]

Stop being an activist judge. An originalist would know that guns didn't exist as we know them in 1786. Clearly Americans only have the right to muskets.

And certainly too there was no Ba'hai or Buddhist followers in the US either, so forget about the whole first amendement thing for those guys.

~Chris