I am not comfortable with restricting Rights

[cthulu2016]

My chief problem with the Heller decision and the Barack Obama via Lawrence Tribe view of the 2nd Amendment is that if gun ownership is a personal right then personal rights don't mean shit.

Because everyone agrees that gun ownership by adult citizens must be regulated.

To me, rights really are inalienable. I think felons should be able to vote, so I see no reason why a felon would lose the right to own a gun, if it's a Bill of Rights type of right. A felon can write books and worship Jesus. You can't beat a confession out of a felon or make a felon testify against himself.

A mentally ill person should retain their general civil rights. If somebody thinks the CIA put a chip in their head they should damn well be able to vote for the candidate they think likeliest to make the CIA stop that practice. Worship, publication, petitioning the government... so why deny them a gun if the 2nd Amendment confers a personal right?


I agree that the chain of precedent makes a strong case for the 2nd Amendment conferring a personal right. But that is just shorthand for, "This awful thing the current Supreme Court believes did not start with them."

I don't have a fix. I am noting the very serious problem.

I would not tolerate something I believed to be a human right to be regulated the way we regulate guns. The whole point of rights is that they do not carry responsibilities.

Authoritarian assholes say they do, with the regularly a cuckoo pooping out of a clock. But they do not. One is not required to worship only the one true God, or only write innocuous books, or not pester the government with demands that make little sense to some panel of reasonable demands. And one does not have to testify against himself if his alleged crime was irresponsible.


Rather than saying the 2nd Amendment does not confer an individual right, I will merely say that if it does then all rights are up for grabs. For the coherence of our entire Constitutional scheme, it should not be considered a personal right.

The Supreme Court did something convoluted with pornography in the 20th century by staunchly maintaining a stance that the First Amendment is inviolate by defining 'obscenity' as somehow categorically outside the First Amendment. This was a "destroying the village to save it" deal, as a way to protect 1st Amendment rights by saying the thing society was hell-bent on regulating is outside the scope of the 1st. The only two alternatives were to legalize pornography (what should have been done) or countenance banning publications based on content society disfavored, which would start the search for other "bad" publications to regulate. If the same thing were done with guns, the courts would say the 2nd Amendment is an absoute personal right but that "Arms" is defined as a pocket knife... that guns are outside the protection of the 2nd Amd. I am not suggesting that. I am noting that the "rights than can be 'sensibly' regulated" oxymoron problem is not a new one.

[darkangel218]

1. A mentally ill person shouldnt own a gun.

That freaking simple.

.

[upaloopa]

6. No it isn't

Depression, anxiety and ADHD are mental illnesses. I have those mental illnesses and I own a gun. I am no more or less capable of killing someone with it then you are.
Sane people kill too.

[darkangel218]

8. Thats for the legislators to decide which illnesses should ban someone from owning a firearm.

Sane people kill TOO. We can't do nothing about that. But we can do something about the not so sane. Do you disagree with that?

[Aerows]

2. Public safety

is a right, too.

Are you against vaccination to keep diseases under control so as to protect the society at large?

[cthulu2016]

5. Do you read the OP as somehow against regulating guns?

I am puzzled by that. The OP is about how the 2nd Amendment should not be interpreted to confer a personal right.

[BeyondGeography]

3. "with the regularly a cuckoo pooping out of a clock"

You were apparently so fired up about calling everyone who might disagree with you an authoritarian asshole that you forgot to proofread.

[upaloopa]

4. Every act you perform has a consequence

You are responsible for your actions
You are responsible for the consequences of your actions
You should restrict yourself if you are about to perform an act that you know will lead to bad consequences.
An act that is your right to perform has consequences.
Rights have consequences.

[cthulu2016]

7. And consequences are not responsibilities

Not conducting human sacrifice is a function of laws against murder, not part of a First Amendment responsibility to chose good religions.

The responsibility to not kill people does not arise from religious freedom.

[hunter]

9. I think the Second Ammendment ought to be repealed.

Guns ought to be a very tightly regulated privilege like driving, rather than a "right."

[cthulu2016]

10. I agree wholeheartedly

[X_Digger]

12. If you did so, the right would go from being explicitly protected federally, to implicitly via 9th

And still explicitly protected by the various states' constitutions.

aka.. no change.

[cthulu2016]

15. If you assume a congress that would vote to repeal the 2nd

would not be inclined toward tighter federal regulation, then that would be true.

[X_Digger]

18. You don't make a right go away by repealing one of the bill of rights provisions.

I'm imagining the cases in between the repeal and tighter regulation.

The bill of rights didn't *grant* them in the first place- they were pre-existing and the constitution just explicitly protects them.

[hunter]

16. Well, for now, I guess I'll just have to say I think anyone with a gun fetish has a serious problem.

Playing with guns is a "hobby" I don't respect.

[hack89]

13. The process is very straightforward

1. Two thirds vote on proposed amendment in both the House and Senate or a Constitutional Convention.

2. Ratification by 38 states.

[GeorgeGist]

11. I think the 2nd amendment should be repealed.

[dkf]

14. That is the way I see it. Attack the 2nd attack abortion rights and free speech.

You can't discard this right and keep others inviolate.

It's too bad the 2nd amendment and pro-choicers couldn't agree to back off and stand together to strengthen ALL rights afforded us in the constitution.

We the public have been doing a god awful job of protecting and preserving the rights we thought were enshrined in the constitution.

[hunter]

17. I'm sure the same was said of slavery...