Why does an Assault Weapons ban not Require a Contitutional Amendment?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Joe Marino

    Member
    Feb 15, 2019
    28
    I think most good Americans think we can never become a socialist, fascist, communist or whatever they want to call it country. Or sure there will be 3 branches of government and those token republicans to make it look like a republic, but with one party rule like here in Maryland. Virginia is solid red, NC close behind, Florida almost there, Texas in less then 10 years. What’s left those states with 3 electoral votes. Further down the line you will see Amendments like the 2nd and 1st go away. Look at California. It was a conservative state, Ronald Reagan was the Governor. And in one generation it became a third world government. Gun ownership will be just like the UK. And further down the line most of the country won’t have money to buy much of any luxury items. It will take a wheel barrel of money to buy a loaf of bread. Venezuela is our future.
     

    bluedog46

    Ultimate Member
    Jan 2, 2011
    1,415
    I think most good Americans think we can never become a socialist, fascist, communist or whatever they want to call it country. Or sure there will be 3 branches of government and those token republicans to make it look like a republic, but with one party rule like here in Maryland. Virginia is solid red, NC close behind, Florida almost there, Texas in less then 10 years. What’s left those states with 3 electoral votes. Further down the line you will see Amendments like the 2nd and 1st go away. Look at California. It was a conservative state, Ronald Reagan was the Governor. And in one generation it became a third world government. Gun ownership will be just like the UK. And further down the line most of the country won’t have money to buy much of any luxury items. It will take a wheel barrel of money to buy a loaf of bread. Venezuela is our future.

    And most of those can directly be tied to illegal immigration, breeding like roaches and the like. Democrats are not "excited" about texas because of their policies, but they hope they can do to latinos what htey did to blacks. Now fairly i thnk latininos will not have the "blind loyalty" most blacks do, but still and all wins are wins. CA is a blue print for liberals and a warning for consrevatives. I think you did mean solid blue though not red for virginia. People get tired of crap. I will never condone what the el paso shooter did or his motive, but i predicted it in 2010. I think i said you would see negative feeback against latinos similar to that against blacks in the 50s and 60s and again not condoning just being realistic.

    We have had one president as of late that has attempted to say WE ARE CLOSED GO AWAY and you see what happens. I do think a second civil war will happen before certain groups answer to others in their own country just so democrats can stay in power.
     

    DP12

    Active Member
    Apr 24, 2018
    333
    SoMD
    There is no such thing as natural rights. Just what the government allows you. You can yell about your right to self defense all you want as the police drag you away. You can scream about freedom of speech as a judge orders you muzzled.
    Like I said, Marxist indoctrination has been incredibly thorough.

    People who have a serf mentality are dangerous to a republic like ours. They accept tyranny with barely a whimper, and criticize those who call it what it is.

    People threaten people all the time. People cause harm through words all the time. You can walk into any crowded theater and yell fire (when there's no fire and the intent is to cause mayhem), and there's no speech law that can stop you. But when there's actual harm, liability laws kick in. Because, whether you agree with it or not, there is a natural right to free speech. But you're also held responsible for the outcome of that speech. That you can be sued doesn't change that fact. Life isn't that simple.
     

    CrueChief

    Cocker Dad/RIP Bella
    Apr 3, 2009
    2,999
    Napolis-ish
    The problem with gun laws is most people have no idea what they are. That is more true in states like MD. The reason hunters are not involved to the extent they could be is every time they go to Bass Pro or whatever for hunting supplies they always leave with what they came for. So to them there is nothing wrong.
     

    rockstarr

    Major Deplorable
    Feb 25, 2013
    4,592
    The Bolshevik Lands
    And most of those can directly be tied to illegal immigration, breeding like roaches and the like. Democrats are not "excited" about texas because of their policies, but they hope they can do to latinos what htey did to blacks. Now fairly i thnk latininos will not have the "blind loyalty" most blacks do, but still and all wins are wins. CA is a blue print for liberals and a warning for consrevatives. I think you did mean solid blue though not red for virginia. People get tired of crap. I will never condone what the el paso shooter did or his motive, but i predicted it in 2010. I think i said you would see negative feeback against latinos similar to that against blacks in the 50s and 60s and again not condoning just being realistic.

    We have had one president as of late that has attempted to say WE ARE CLOSED GO AWAY and you see what happens. I do think a second civil war will happen before certain groups answer to others in their own country just so democrats can stay in power.


    Um most Latinos I know, are more democratic /socialist in their views than most black folks I know. Most Latinos love them some socialism.

    A lot of them leave socialist countries, move here and vote for more socialism
     

    DP12

    Active Member
    Apr 24, 2018
    333
    SoMD
    Um most Latinos I know, are more democratic /socialist in their views than most black folks I know. Most Latinos love them some socialism.

    A lot of them leave socialist countries, move here and vote for more socialism
    You could swap out Californian for Latino and still be dinging the bullseye.

    They can't stand the high tax lib sh1thole Cali has become, so they move to Texas and vote for the same people and policies that made Cali a sh1thole...

    It's insanity.
     

    tidalwave

    Banned
    BANNED!!!
    Jun 29, 2019
    28
    ANd birthright citizenship is what got us into this mess along with a few other things done during that period by yankees ( no offense to the patriots)

    Birthright citizenship is written into the 14th amendment and has been in force since 1868. Are you arguing that the children of slaves shouldn't have been made US citizens?

    "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."
     

    DP12

    Active Member
    Apr 24, 2018
    333
    SoMD
    Birthright citizenship is written into the 14th amendment and has been in force since 1868. Are you arguing that the children of slaves shouldn't have been made US citizens?

    "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."
    I don't think anybody has argued for a very long time that the descendants of slaves shouldn't be citizens. But running across the border and squatting out a kid wasn't ever covered by the 14th Amendment.
     

    Ghostrider1

    Ultimate Member
    Nov 10, 2009
    1,906
    The PGC
    Birthright citizenship is written into the 14th amendment and has been in force since 1868. Are you arguing that the children of slaves shouldn't have been made US citizens?

    "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."

    The key clause is “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” SCOTUS has never ruled whether a person here illegally meets that requirement.
     

    kshaw

    Active Member
    Nov 21, 2012
    310
    Gaithersburg, MD
    The key clause is “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” SCOTUS has never ruled whether a person here illegally meets that requirement.
    Correct. The Congressional Research Service has issued a couple of legal analysis on the topic. It is also interesting to read the Congressional transcripts covering the debate on the 14th Amendment. Some of the Congressmen were unclear on the definition of citizenship. I recall that one Congressman said that we was OK with granting citizenship as long as it did not include the right to own property or vote.
     

    tidalwave

    Banned
    BANNED!!!
    Jun 29, 2019
    28
    The key clause is “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” SCOTUS has never ruled whether a person here illegally meets that requirement.

    I thought "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is what grants those born in use territories citizenship.
     

    bluedog46

    Ultimate Member
    Jan 2, 2011
    1,415
    Um most Latinos I know, are more democratic /socialist in their views than most black folks I know. Most Latinos love them some socialism.

    A lot of them leave socialist countries, move here and vote for more socialism

    Which i call pretty damn stupid. I tell people all the time when you flee a place and then vote for the place you flee to or break into to become the same way that is stupid. Similar to many yankees who move and wonder how the states go to hell. No doubt in my mind they will screw virginia. Maryland has issues. No sales tax is what is saving delaware.
     

    Major03

    Ultimate Member
    To answer the original question of the post...in a nutshell because long ago politicians realized that to make the cultural changes that they wanted to see would require legislating from the bench...so they started putting judges on the bench that were aligned to their world views and political opinions. That way the interpretation of the Constitution would not be based on the law...but a much more malleable and flexible standard.

    When the law is no longer the standard, you can do anything.
     

    jcutonilli

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 28, 2013
    2,474
    Birthright citizenship is written into the 14th amendment and has been in force since 1868. Are you arguing that the children of slaves shouldn't have been made US citizens?

    "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."

    There is no birthright citizenship written into the 14th amendment. The key phrase is "subject to the jurisdiction thereof". Foreigners are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,919
    Messages
    7,258,899
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom