Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Second Amendment doesn't mention hunting

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
Buzz cook Donating Member (190 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 02:33 AM
Original message
The Second Amendment doesn't mention hunting
That's a refrain I hear a lot from gun kissers. They say it as a rebuke to hunters such as myself that aren't 2nd Amendment absolutists.

They're right of course.

The second also doesn't mention target shooting, skeet and trap, or firearms collecting.

I also should add it doesn't mention a right to self defense.

Many gun lickers claim to be strict constructionist or original intent believers. It's not strange that they would threaten hunters with the lose of their rights because hunting is not an enumerated right. But the disconnect when they then claim that the 2nd is an absolute right to self protection, must give them mental whiplash.

Of course one cannot expect sense from Mall Ninjas
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 02:52 AM
Response to Original message
1. Gun kissers? Gun lickers?
How'd you know my secret passion?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
east texas lib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 05:27 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. Saaaaayyyy...
That's a fine lookin' piece of....wood!;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. It's a hard wood, too.
Might wax it later...

:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
2. What point are you trying to make? n/t
Edited on Sun Feb-24-08 09:17 AM by jody
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmg257 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 11:03 AM
Response to Original message
3. The 2nd secures the right to keep and bear arms - period. What you do with them
Edited on Sun Feb-24-08 11:04 AM by jmg257
is up to you (like all other private property) as long as it doesn't inflict the rights of others.

Proposed amendment from the Pennsylvania ratifing committee:

"7. That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and their own state, or the United States, or for the purpose of killing game; and no law shall be passed for disarming the people or any of them, unless for crimes committed, or real danger of public injury from individuals; "
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
4. I'll see your gun kissers and lickers and raise you a gun-grabbing monkey
Edited on Sun Feb-24-08 11:13 AM by slackmaster


Actually it's an ape.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Retired AF Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. And a gun licker back at you
Edited on Sun Feb-24-08 12:10 PM by Retired AF Dem

By http://profile.imageshack.us/user/bruckner>bruckner at 2008-02-24
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. See what happens when women take 'em up? And I thought it was my age (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EricTeri Donating Member (259 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
5. Somehow you got that whole thing 100% wrong.
The reason gun rights advocates remind people the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting is NOT as a rebuke to hunters. Far from it in fact.

It is mentioned because so many people want to imply that hunting is the only reason one may own a firearm.

And no - the 2nd doesnt mention any of the things you mentioned - for a reason. The 2nd exists to tell government what it may not do, not to tell the people what they may do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boomer 50 Donating Member (288 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Well said!
As a hunter and collector, and industry manufacturer, I have a broad interest in firearms. Not just one aspect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fightthegoodfightnow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. So He Was Right About What He Said About Hunting and the Constitution
How does that make him 100% wrong again?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. See Post #5. The Constitution is couched in appropriately "negative" terms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gorfle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 07:01 PM
Response to Original message
11. The Second Amendment, etc.
That's a refrain I hear a lot from gun kissers. They say it as a rebuke to hunters such as myself that aren't 2nd Amendment absolutists.

They're right of course.

The second also doesn't mention target shooting, skeet and trap, or firearms collecting.

I also should add it doesn't mention a right to self defense.

Many gun lickers claim to be strict constructionist or original intent believers. It's not strange that they would threaten hunters with the lose of their rights because hunting is not an enumerated right. But the disconnect when they then claim that the 2nd is an absolute right to self protection, must give them mental whiplash.

Of course one cannot expect sense from Mall Ninjas


I have never heard of a pro-gun advocate who wanted hunters to lose their right to bear arms, or even to lose their right to hunt. I suppose their are some pro-gun, anti-hunting folks out there though.

In any case, the 2nd Amendment is, first and foremost, about maintaining a well regulated militia, necessary for the security of a free state. It is primarily for defense against a central government tyranny that our country was founded with a decentralized, state-controlled military force.

That said, the arms were frequently provided by the citizens who made up the militia, and moreover, it is not that much of a stretch to say that the most fundamental freedom is the security of one's personal defense. If one can defend the State, then why not the defense of oneself? And if one is unable to defend oneself, how then to defend the State?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. I disagree "2nd Amendment is, first and foremost, about maintaining a well regulated militia".
The right to keep and bear arms is first and foremost about defense of self and property as PA (1776) and VT (1777) said in their first constitutions.

The second use of personal arms is defense of state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
13. You're right, it doesn't make the right to keep and bear arms conditional on hunting,
Edited on Sun Feb-24-08 08:53 PM by benEzra
or on self-defense, or on target shooting, or on collecting. It sets no conditions.

It merely sets out an intended outcome, i.e. the existence of a well-trained* militia, and then the statement of the right: the right of the people to keep and bear arms (not solely hunting arms, not solely defensive arms) shall not be infringed.

In recent years, the gun-control lobby has attempted to make it conditional on hunting, by outlawing all but hunting-style weapons, as if the right to keep and bear arms were contingent on being a hunter.

Yes, 4 out of 5 gun owners are nonhunters. That doesn't mean that the 1 in 5 who hunt should have their guns banned (I support hunting 100%, FWIW), but it does mean that hunters aren't the only gun owners who matter.

That's a refrain I hear a lot from gun kissers...Many gun lickers claim to be strict constructionist or original intent believers...Of course one cannot expect sense from Mall Ninjas

Please, let's have a higher level of discourse here. "You're a poopiehead" rhetoric was lame even in junior high.


----------------------
Thoughts on Gun Ownership

Dems and the Gun Issue - Now What? (written in '04, largely vindicated in '06, IMO)

The Conservative Roots of U.S. Gun Control


*Look up "regulated" in the OED--the primary meaning in 1791 was not "under the control of bureaucrats."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 07:55 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC