Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
This really belongs in another thread. But . . . oh well . . . in the first place, you refuse to see the flaw in using criminal law as an analogy for justifying a limit to Constitutional law . . . and you keep repeating the contradiction that limiting the Second Amendment will save a few lives.
Limiting the Second amendment endangers the lives of the entire nation by incrementally unlimiting government. You somehow are OK with that if it saves even one life. The only way, in my opinion, that could be your point of view is that you don't actually believe in the purpose for which the Amendment was written. In which case, the most logical proposition would be not to tweak the Amendment, but to abolish it.
And that goes for all the other limitations you perceive to exist on the other rights the Constitution protects. So the whole thing should be abolished. Write a new one. Or, more conveniently, do as the Progressives do, just make new laws and appoint judges who will uphold them.
|
"This really belongs in another thread"
I agree. I didn't insert it here, someone else did.
"Limiting the Second amendment endangers the lives of the entire nation by incrementally unlimiting government."
So if the government wants to ban bump stocks, it's reasonable to assume the next step, is they will, what? Kill me and take my IRA? That's tin foil hat conspiracy theory.
Again, the founding fathers made it clear through their actions, that the Bill Of Rights isn't absolute.
"you don't actually believe in the purpose for which the Amendment was written. In which case, the most logical proposition would be not to tweak the Amendment, but to abolish it."
OK, so unless one thinks bump stocks should be allowed, one has zero regard for the US Constutution. Not everything ends up at one radical extreme or the other. Again, I can go on TV and call the President horrible names, the First Amendment gives me that right. But I can't threaten him or anyone else. The freedoms are not an "all or nothing" scenario, and I cannot fathom you would state that they are.