Springfield Armory Forums banner
1 - 2 of 2 Posts

· Banned
42 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
When anyone says will I support the Second Amendment but…they are really saying that they do not in fact support the Second Amendment because the Second Amendment is unconditional not like the other rights.

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Here we have Amendment I, show me where it says that no one can restrict any of these rights? It plainly says “Congress shall notâ€, putting a restriction on a given federal government body “the Congressâ€. No restrictions on the state at all so we had to have a 14th Amendment to stop states from enacting laws denying the rights as recognized by our First Amendment.

Contrary to popular opinion the right to yell fire in a crowded theater is not a federal law, restriction nor even a mandate. But comes from state laws not actually restricting the actual speech but rather placing consequences for the words you utter that may cause harm to body or reputation (slander) of persons. Even here we must still use due process of law before we can find someone guilty of an offence of free speech, or any of the listed rights in the First Amendment.

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]AMENDMENT XIV
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.

Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.

Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]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.

The Second Amendment has no restrictions place on it, as does the First Amendment. It clearly states, “Shall not be infringedâ€, this alone is the most powerful statement in the whole of the Second Amendment. It does not say shall not be infringed “exceptâ€, it does not say shall not be infringed by Congress, nor just the brady bunch. It says “shall not be infringed†clearly restricting any infringement by anyone, except through due process of law.

The Second Amendment needs no protection of the 14th Amendment because it is automatically incorporated to any and all governing bodies. The Bill of Rights was created to restrict government from violating the listed rights and this included all forms of government in the USA unless specified other wise as is in the First Amendment.

Due process of law was always held to mean until sentence was served in full then all rights were restored fully. In the middle of the 20th century we seen the advent of new meanings calling some violations of law to be felony’s and the restrictions of life time punishment for the felony’s to continue well after the time was served.

Today we see some rights restored by the courts except the Second Amendment. Very few have ever had their Second Amendment rights restored even after a court ruled in their favor. The BATFU still holds the right to deny you the Second Amendment rights regardless if a court rules to give it back to you.

It was never once a felon always a felon, until the middle of the 20th century and the need of socialists to control the people of this country and for them to decide what rights you should have. Then we saw the corruption of the meaning and miss-interpretation of the wording of the rights so they could get people to believe it was all wrong for 200 years.

Then we saw the adding of some laws as felons this continued until today where almost everything is a felony, or can be made into a felony for convenience. The rights everyone had is slowly being eroded to a point where most people just shrug their shoulders and say it does not effect me or there is nothing I can do about it. Removing a right is simple today sense most people will not band together and stop it.

If you say, “I support the Second Amendment except,†you are leading more credence to the division of our power to stop further restrictions on rights. Once rights are gone it takes spilling of blood and/or dam near a miracle to get them back.


· Banned
42 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Do you really support the 2A part 2

Rifled barrels = Actually dates as far back at the 15th century but was not really produced until the 18th century. Due to the complexities of producing the rifling. During the revolutionary war for independence we saw the first real use of rifled barrels in muskets. Where marksman (snipers) was given rifled barreled muskets to use against the enemy.

Flintlock = dates some place around 1635 where the need for faster and reliable firing of weapons had a need.

Percussion cap = 1842 where again the need for faster and more reliable firing of small arms was needed.

Metallic case cartridges = was introduced around 1845

Revolvers = has a related history dating as far back as 1597 with the revolving arquebus produced by Hans Stopler, but the real leader in advanced forearms design was Samuel Colt with his 1836 patented designed revolver which enjoyed a lot of new innovations over the years sense.

Lever action rifles = actually dates back to around 1848 but saw no real popularity until right around 1860

Semi automatic weapons = can be dated back to 1885 with Ferdinand Ritter von Mannlicher’s Model 85 semi automatic rifle which spurned other designs and innovations in shot guns, rifles, and handguns.

Full automatic weapons = Actually are dated back to 1862 and are directly related to the Gatling gun.

SURPRISE full Automatic weapons were never against the law for individual citizens to buy, own, and use and still are not against the law. Though in 1934 congress passed the National Firearms Act, effectively placing a tax on manufacturing and transfer of certain firearms and full auto weapons fell under this bogus attempt at restricting personal ownership.

Just what is this about you might be saying? Well it has to do with a train of belief in many circles where some people believe that our founders had no insight into the advancements of modern weapons. You see they were smart men, some were very educated, and most had the foresight to know that weapons would advance in function, design, and lethality.

At no time in our history until the 1934 was there any restrictions place on buying selling, owning, and/or using any small arms by the citizens of this country. I had a copy of and link to the actual minutes of the meeting in congress back in 1932 where they were trying to figure out how to ban ownership, and use of private owned weapons. The Unites States Attorney General then shot down ever conceived scam to ban guns for civilian ownership based on Constitutional grounds except the taxing of them under the interstate commerce clause. Which is technically not a ban but it gave the BATF the authority to deny you the tax stamp on certain weapons they felt one should not own.

Even at that meeting of congress in 1932 one of the reasons for the ban on private gun ownership was racist in nature, where one congressman stated and it is on record, that the worst thing we can do is to let a black man (ni_ _ _r) have a pistol and a bottle of whisky on a train.

Up until the usurping of the governments power over constitutional gun rights in 1934 one could order a full automatic Thompson sub-machine gun or even a BAR right from the Sears and Roebuck catalog and it would be mailed right to you. Many general stores had them on the shelf.

Most of the fears of gun ownership stem from the government fearful of the populist. They use any and all excuses to take from you a GOD given right, backed by our Bill of Rights. Hollywood is no friend to the Bill of Rights unless some restriction is directly placed on them but for the common citizen they support any attempt to deny you of something that was given by a higher authority then them, the government or mankind.

A lot of what we have today and basically sense the early 1900’s is a lack of belief in a GOD who granted us these rights. Where man is steadily renouncing even the thought of a higher being, who is more important and powerful then man himself, we are running into the train of thought that our Second Amendment rights was not granted by such a being but rather by the all powerful government and they can choose to take that right any time they want.

1 - 2 of 2 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.