Notices |
Hello!
Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.
Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....
Please note that the information requested during registration will be used to determine your legitimacy as a participant of this site. As such, any information you provide that is determined to be false, inaccurate, misleading, or highly suspicious will result in your registration being rejected. This is designed to try to discourage as much as possible those spammers and scammers that tend to plague sites of this nature, to the detriment of all the legitimate members trying to enjoy the features this site provides for them.
Of particular importance is the REQUIREMENT that you provide your REAL full name upon registering. Sorry, but this is not like other sites where anonymity is more the rule.
Also your TRUE location is important. If the location you enter in your profile field does not match the location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected. As such, I strongly urge registrants to avoid using a VPN service to register, as they are often used by spammers and scammers, and as such will be blocked when discovered when auditing new registrations.
Sorry about all these hoops to jump through, but I am quite serious about blocking spammers and scammers at the gate on this site and am doing the very best that I can to that effect. Trust me, I would rather be doing more interesting things with my time, and wouldn't be making this effort if I didn't think it was worthwhile.
|
General BS forum I guess anything is fair game in here. Just watch the subject matter doesn't get carried away too much. |
12-09-2007, 12:27 PM
|
#2
|
|
And probably very few can disagree with the results of the poll. A more poignant question would probably be what was the intent behind the written word back in the late 700's. Should we interpret it similarly in 2008?
Regards.
|
|
|
12-09-2007, 12:38 PM
|
#3
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The BoidSmith
And probably very few can disagree with the results of the poll. A more poignant question would probably be what was the intent behind the written word back in the late 700's. Should we interpret it similarly in 2008?
Regards.
|
Good question. There are those, even on the Supreme Court who are strict constructionists and think that the amendments should be viewed as they were written; and others who believe that they are living documents to be seen through modern eyes.
In any case, it says something of note, that such a high percentage of people voted in the manner they did.
|
|
|
12-09-2007, 12:52 PM
|
#4
|
|
Quote:
There are those, even on the Supreme Court who are strict constructionists and think that the amendments should be viewed as they were written; and others who believe that they are living documents to be seen through modern eyes.
|
From my perspective I'm more aligned with the second group thought process. Today's context is completely different. Who would have dreamt in the 1700's of the craziness we are living almost daily today. The key would be how to respect the original intent and regulate without infringing individual liberties.
Regards
|
|
|
12-09-2007, 02:38 PM
|
#5
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucille
Good question. There are those, even on the Supreme Court who are strict constructionists and think that the amendments should be viewed as they were written; and others who believe that they are living documents to be seen through modern eyes.
In any case, it says something of note, that such a high percentage of people voted in the manner they did.
|
But have most of those people actually read the amendment, as passed by the states.
Quote:
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.
|
Most people remember the last part, that is "...the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" and forget the first part about "A well regulated militia". It's easy to debate either side of the question, even for a "strict constructionist". Myself, I am armed with a handgun virtually all of the time. However, I am not clear that the intent of Congress and the states when they passed that amendment meant that concealed weapons, assault weapons, and nuclear missiles were OK to possess and with which to arm oneself. As such, this ought to be a reserved, or state's rights issue, for each of the 50 sovereign states to decide for itself.
|
|
|
12-09-2007, 05:52 PM
|
#6
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The BoidSmith
And probably very few can disagree with the results of the poll. A more poignant question would probably be what was the intent behind the written word back in the late 700's. Should we interpret it similarly in 2008?
Regards.
|
What a slippery slope that would be! If the second amendment could be so treated, then so as well should all the others.
Allowing the government to get foot loose and fancy free with creative interpretations of the document that was created in order to keep the government in check is probably not a real smart idea............
|
|
|
12-09-2007, 06:02 PM
|
#7
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim O
However, I am not clear that the intent of Congress and the states when they passed that amendment meant that concealed weapons, assault weapons, and nuclear missiles were OK to possess and with which to arm oneself. As such, this ought to be a reserved, or state's rights issue, for each of the 50 sovereign states to decide for itself.
|
The problem I have encountered with each state deciding for itself is the reciprocal issue. I had a concealed carry permit for Arizona and the three nearest states (California, Utah and New Mexico) do not recognize my permit. I let my permit lapse, but have been thinking of renewing it. Fortunately Arizona allows for visual carry just about everywhere. (Schools, bars, some public buildings excluded) I'd like to see a consistent policy nationwide. John
|
|
|
12-09-2007, 06:02 PM
|
#8
|
|
It's sad that I'm so uniformed about the issue that a comic served as greatly education for me, but oh well. It made me see the issue in ways that I hadn't before. Some interesting points:
"The Right to Own a Bazooka"
|
|
|
12-09-2007, 06:17 PM
|
#9
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarantulakeeper
The problem I have encountered with each state deciding for itself is the reciprocal issue. I had a concealed carry permit for Arizona and the three nearest states (California, Utah and New Mexico) do not recognize my permit. John
|
To be accurate, I found an updated listing of states that shows Utah and New Mexico "recognize Arizona without written reprocity." John
|
|
|
12-09-2007, 06:20 PM
|
#10
|
|
There's not a need to leave room for interpretation, as that is always a double edged sword. But one thing's for certain though, we need to find a solution to this increasing problem. Right now we are all just waiting to hear in the news where and who's next. Will I be the target while doing Christmas shopping in the mall? Or maybe one of my children while they walk in between classes at school? But as the saying goes our freedoms end where the rights of the other person begin. Don't we have the right to feel safe anymore?
Best regards,
|
|
|
Join
now to reply to this thread or open new ones
for your questions & comments! FaunaClassifieds.com
is the largest online community about Reptile
& Amphibians, Snakes, Lizards and number one
classifieds service with thousands of ads to look
for. Registration is open to everyone and FREE.
Click Here to Register!
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:33 PM.
|
|