How To Solve Abortion & Semi-Automatic/Automatic Gun Issue

West Dundee Hawkeye

HR All-American
Gold Member
Sep 28, 2003
2,856
1,417
113
Democracy Works

The good people of very Red Kansas just voted to keep abortion legal. Going with the 10th Amendment that power comes from the States unless specifically stated in US Constitution, every State should vote on abortion and having another vote on making semi-automatic/automatic weapons legal in their respective States.

There is nothing in the 2nd Amendment on semi-automatic/automatic weapons being legal.

Democracy works. I attached an article that says a majority want abortion to kept legal.
 
Last edited:

Finance85

HR Legend
Oct 22, 2003
18,781
20,268
113
Democracy Works

The good people of very Red Kansas just voted to keep abortion legal. Going with the 10th Amendment that power comes from the States unless specifically stated in US Constitution, every State should vote on abortion and having another vote on making semi-automatic/automatic weapons legal in their respective States.

There is nothing in the 2nd Amendment on semi-automatic/automatic weapons being legal.

Democracy works. I attached an article that says a majority want abortion to kept legal.
Actually, you are mistaken about 2A. It's very clear. And since it's an enumerated right to the people, and has been incorporated, it's not up to the states for voting.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: IAHawk2011

Gimmered

HR Legend
Nov 9, 2005
14,201
7,862
113
McCook Nebraska
Democracy Works

The good people of very Red Kansas just voted to keep abortion legal. Going with the 10th Amendment that power comes from the States unless specifically stated in US Constitution, every State should vote on abortion and having another vote on making semi-automatic/automatic weapons legal in their respective States.

There is nothing in the 2nd Amendment on semi-automatic/automatic weapons being legal.

Democracy works. I attached an article that says a majority want abortion to kept legal.
The text of the second amendment ties arms to militia service, so arms that are useful to the preservation of the militia are in fact protected by the constitution.

There is a process to amend this fact, but it cannot be voted away. The constitution protects the rights of the minority, the majority doesn't need to be protected.
 

Joes Place

HR King
Aug 28, 2003
127,561
124,968
113
The text of the second amendment ties arms to militia service

Weird, that we can use the "militia" reference in 2A to justify fully automatic weapons, but cannot use that same passage to limit access to guns by people who are not part of any "militias"; the militias of the 21st century being city police, county police, state police, state national guardsmen....etc.
 

FAUlty Gator

HR Legend
Oct 27, 2017
31,307
36,220
113
Didn't read OP but I'm assuming it's a "Guns for Abortions" program. Turn in your gun and get a free abortion. Not bad. Orrrr, Don't get an abortion and get a free gun! Damn. Works both ways.

I'm so torn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NoleATL

Finance85

HR Legend
Oct 22, 2003
18,781
20,268
113
The text of the second amendment ties arms to militia service, so arms that are useful to the preservation of the militia are in fact protected by the constitution.

There is a process to amend this fact, but it cannot be voted away. The constitution protects the rights of the minority, the majority doesn't need to be protected.
Read the Federalist papers, and the quotes by the founders, and you will understand what was meant by the term militia. There's also a nice little comma in the text of the 2A. Moving the goalpost isn't going to help your argument.
 

NoleATL

HR Legend
Gold Member
Jul 11, 2007
30,879
29,648
113
Actually, you are mistaken about 2A. It's very clear. And since it's an enumerated right to the people, and has been incorporated, it's not up to the states for voting.
Weapons of today did not exist when the 2nd amendment was written so they are not covered. Ask Scotus.
 

Gimmered

HR Legend
Nov 9, 2005
14,201
7,862
113
McCook Nebraska
Read the Federalist papers, and the quotes by the founders, and you will understand what was meant by the term militia. There's also a nice little comma in the text of the 2A. Moving the goalpost isn't going to help your argument.
The militia was pretty much every able bodied male, and being tied to the militia is not a requirement for being in a militia. The People's right however does in fact mean the people. That much has been made clear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Finance85

SSG T

HR Legend
Gold Member
Jul 10, 2002
43,590
62,036
113
The militia was pretty much every able bodied male, and being tied to the militia is not a requirement for being in a militia. The People's right however does in fact mean the people. That much has been made clear.

It wasn't when the Constitution was voted on and approved. Every state had a state controlled militia with membership rolls, organized force structure (regiments, battalions, companies, along with rank structure for each), locations and training requirements (do they meet monthly, annually?).

So, if we are going originalist here, everyone currently in a recognized and state run, and funded, militia can have access to firearms. Ban them for everyone else.

Edit...most didn't consider "every male aged 17 to 45 (or whatever random age)" to be in the milita. They considered them to be eligible for the militia. And they would be on the membership roll.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joes Place

notlongago

HR Heisman
Jul 28, 2012
5,442
2,675
113
Democracy Works

The good people of very Red Kansas just voted to keep abortion legal. Going with the 10th Amendment that power comes from the States unless specifically stated in US Constitution, every State should vote on abortion and having another vote on making semi-automatic/automatic weapons legal in their respective States.

There is nothing in the 2nd Amendment on semi-automatic/automatic weapons being legal.

Democracy works. I attached an article that says a majority want abortion to kept legal.
So you're a proponent of removing the NFA so states can vote to make automatic firearms legal? Im intrigued...
 

notlongago

HR Heisman
Jul 28, 2012
5,442
2,675
113
Weapons of today did not exist when the 2nd amendment was written so they are not covered. Ask Scotus.
Not a rabbit hole you want to explore (but FWIW, there was semi auto tech when it was written. And another FYI just for fun - cannons were and are legal)
 

Gimmered

HR Legend
Nov 9, 2005
14,201
7,862
113
McCook Nebraska
So you're a proponent of removing the NFA so states can vote to make automatic firearms legal? Im intrigued...
In 1933 people could walk into a store and walk out with a fully automatic firearm. I have a bet (bottle of pop) that by 2033 I will be able to do the same. This is what the Bruen ruling will give us.
 

Aardvark86

HR All-American
Jan 23, 2018
3,196
3,317
113
Read the Federalist papers, and the quotes by the founders, and you will understand what was meant by the term militia. There's also a nice little comma in the text of the 2A. Moving the goalpost isn't going to help your argument.
In fairness, I'm not sure the federalist papers have anything to say about the 2A since it was, of course, enacted after the federalist papers
 

seminole97

HR Legend
Jun 14, 2005
19,490
19,929
113
So, if we are going originalist here, everyone currently in a recognized and state run, and funded, militia can have access to firearms. Ban them for everyone else.

Can you address this part of history?

It seems that federal jurisprudence just a few decades from the adoption of the Bill of Rights doesn’t follow your novel legal theory that the right ‘of the people’ to keep and bear arms was not an individual right.

The Dred Scott decision didn't just discuss whether or not a former slave could be a citizen.

It discussed what that would mean:

In that decision the court observed the rights of citizens:

‘persons…, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went.’

If this novel legal theory were correct (gun ownership is tied solely to militia service) Taney's Court would have nothing to fear with regard to former slaves being armed if they could only do so under the stipulations of the Congress or legislature. But he observed no such limitation. You can’t find it in the writings of the Founders a few decades prior either. It’s a whole cloth invention that requires ignorance of the history of the revolution and the Bill of Rights.
 

Joes Place

HR King
Aug 28, 2003
127,561
124,968
113
It wasn't when the Constitution was voted on and approved. Every state had a state controlled militia with membership rolls, organized force structure (regiments, battalions, companies, along with rank structure for each), locations and training requirements (do they meet monthly, annually?).

So, if we are going originalist here, everyone currently in a recognized and state run, and funded, militia can have access to firearms. Ban them for everyone else.

Edit...most didn't consider "every male aged 17 to 45 (or whatever random age)" to be in the milita. They considered them to be eligible for the militia. And they would be on the membership roll.
That's EXACTLY how it worked.

Today, our "militias" are our city/county/state run forces.
Doesn't mean bans for everyone else; it DOES enable restrictions and regulations on ownership.
And the word "regulated" is in the originalist text, which applied to "militias". Asserting "no regulation" for everyone else is simply nonsensical.
 

West Dundee Hawkeye

HR All-American
Gold Member
Sep 28, 2003
2,856
1,417
113
I thought automatic weapons were legal. If they are not, then my mistake.

I think the root cause of all the crime is lack of Savings and the destruction of the working class but I also think it is beyond stupid to have semi-automatic weapons be legal.

Nobody commented on abortion and that is the big issue this Mid Term election.

My whole point is we should trust democracy.
 

BanjoSaysWoof

HR MVP
Dec 2, 2017
1,629
3,238
113
Democracy Works

The good people of very Red Kansas just voted to keep abortion legal. Going with the 10th Amendment that power comes from the States unless specifically stated in US Constitution, every State should vote on abortion and having another vote on making semi-automatic/automatic weapons legal in their respective States.

There is nothing in the 2nd Amendment on semi-automatic/automatic weapons being legal.

Democracy works. I attached an article that says a majority want abortion to kept legal.

I am a gun guy… I own three semi-automatic rifles, a shotgun for home defense, a skeet shooting gun, and a pistol.

semi-automatics should be a privilege and not a right. We already say you can’t own a tactical nuke. There are accepted limits to 2A and we need to apply them to modern times. Many states ban automatic weapons for civilian use.

a rancher in Montana who needs a 12 guage in hand to keep the predators away certainly needs to be able to buy one asap.

a semi-auto? Not so much….

I live in New Jersey, or as my conservative friends call it, the peoples republic of NJ… it is relatively strict about gun laws.

for me to get a “long gun license”, I had to go through a background check, get finger printed, etc. It allows me to buy any long gun as often as I want. (Handguns work different).

I went to my local gun dealer (attached to the shooting range) to buy a .22 version of my pistol (cheaper to range shoot). They were out of stock.

I was furious… I said “f it” and impulse purchased a kriss vector 9mm carbine. If you’re not familiar, google it.

from the time I said “I want”, to the time I was shooting at the range next door? 27 minutes.

it shouldn’t be that easy to buy a semi-automatic. Even if I did have a background check a few years earlier, and my motives were pure, I shouldn’t have any need, and nor does anyone else, to get that gun faster than a pizza. A 6 week waiting period for emotions to cool and a proper background check isn’t irrational.

my solution is we have multiple tiers of firearms:

1) banned— weapons of war like tanks, rocket launchers etc.

2) banned except for commercial use like shooting ranges—- automatics; 50 cal sniper rifles, etc. (things that don’t pass the smell test for “this makes sense to own”)

3) priveleges—- anything that is semiautomatic. If it can go bang without reloading or any time consuming human input, it’s a privilege not a right. Extra background checks, long wait period, etc.

4) rights: shotguns, lever actions, bolt actions etc.
 

notlongago

HR Heisman
Jul 28, 2012
5,442
2,675
113
I am a gun guy… I own three semi-automatic rifles, a shotgun for home defense, a skeet shooting gun, and a pistol.

semi-automatics should be a privilege and not a right. We already say you can’t own a tactical nuke. There are accepted limits to 2A and we need to apply them to modern times. Many states ban automatic weapons for civilian use.

a rancher in Montana who needs a 12 guage in hand to keep the predators away certainly needs to be able to buy one asap.

a semi-auto? Not so much….

I live in New Jersey, or as my conservative friends call it, the peoples republic of NJ… it is relatively strict about gun laws.

for me to get a “long gun license”, I had to go through a background check, get finger printed, etc. It allows me to buy any long gun as often as I want. (Handguns work different).

I went to my local gun dealer (attached to the shooting range) to buy a .22 version of my pistol (cheaper to range shoot). They were out of stock.

I was furious… I said “f it” and impulse purchased a kriss vector 9mm carbine. If you’re not familiar, google it.

from the time I said “I want”, to the time I was shooting at the range next door? 27 minutes.

it shouldn’t be that easy to buy a semi-automatic. Even if I did have a background check a few years earlier, and my motives were pure, I shouldn’t have any need, and nor does anyone else, to get that gun faster than a pizza. A 6 week waiting period for emotions to cool and a proper background check isn’t irrational.

my solution is we have multiple tiers of firearms:

1) banned— weapons of war like tanks, rocket launchers etc.

2) banned except for commercial use like shooting ranges—- automatics; 50 cal sniper rifles, etc. (things that don’t pass the smell test for “this makes sense to own”)

3) priveleges—- anything that is semiautomatic. If it can go bang without reloading or any time consuming human input, it’s a privilege not a right. Extra background checks, long wait period, etc.

4) rights: shotguns, lever actions, bolt actions etc.
You're not a "gun guy" as a gun guy knows lethality is contingent on cartridge and projectile design. You're an ignorant blowhard with zero logic who thinks their opinion matters.
 

notlongago

HR Heisman
Jul 28, 2012
5,442
2,675
113
blowhard who thinks their opinion matters I’ll accept.

The rest?

bless your heart.
How's that Montana rancher protecting his cattle from that wolf or coyote pack hanging out 200 yds beyond his fence? That shotgun isn't much use huh? How about 3am when that pack has moved into the herd, that scattergun throwing a 12"-18" pattern isn't much good shooting between two cattle heads is it? You've made it clear you have no idea what you're talking about, but if you'd like to continue the asinine examples, I'm happy to explain why they're wrong.
 

notlongago

HR Heisman
Jul 28, 2012
5,442
2,675
113
How does a "bolt action" not work?

One shot, and they scatter, spud.
Not true, not would that be helpful in stopping future attacks on the herds. (But you are proving my point - platform is irrelevant, it's cartridge and projectile design that determines lethality)
And he said ranchers get shotguns.

Look, if I want opinions on texting and driving, I'll tag you, but you've more than demonstrated that youre woefully underqualified to offer any semblance of value to this discussion, so I'll be ignoring anything else you have to say on the matter.
👋
 
Last edited:

Joes Place

HR King
Aug 28, 2003
127,561
124,968
113
Not true, not would that be helpful in stopping future attacks on the herds.

Yes, true.

And how TF does it matter which gun you use in "preventing future attacks on herds".
This is as dumb as your take that "drones" have supplanted piloted aircraft...
 

Latest posts