General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNever seen this in a gun discussion
The 2A defenders often/always cite the amendment as a right given to them in the Constitution and therefore cancels out the right to safety. However, I've never seen someone bring up the unalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as written in the Declaration of Independence as a counter argument to the former's insipid logic.
Maybe it's time to start pushing the signers' intent of that document over the framers' one.
MontanaMama
(23,337 posts)Forced birth negates a pregnant persons unalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
CrispyQ
(36,509 posts)MontanaMama
(23,337 posts)and I would expect the evangelical fascists would claim that forced birth would be punishment for the crime of having sex without the intent of having a child. These people are just that illogical. Your point, however, is a good one and my hope is that these are the arguments that will be brought forth in defending the right to abortion.
EX500rider
(10,856 posts)That abortion negates the unborns right to life.
PTWB
(4,131 posts)Aviation Pro
(12,186 posts)But I dont think any amendment is a pure absolute.
I think common sense gun control is, well, common sense.
MontanaMama
(23,337 posts)CaptainTruth
(6,601 posts)boston bean
(36,223 posts)First graders, fourth graders, high schoolers, middle schoolers. Elderly. Church goers. Shoppers. Movie goers. Nightclubs.
And the list goes on and on.
I dont care how many dont murder. I care how many are committing mass murder and murder and what is going to be done about that?
Many are murdered with guns. Many are murdered with other weapons, or no weapons at all. Many are killed by vehicles being driven by assholes with no regard for the safety of those around them.
Im just not sure what point the OP was trying to make by quoting the passage from the Declaration of Independence.
No one has a constitutional right to commit murder.
You know exactly what the OP is saying. Selling and owning unlimited numbers of modern weapons which have no other purpose than the ability to kill human beings quickly and in great numbers is what we are talking about.
Response to Brenda (Reply #14)
Post removed
towerbum
(263 posts)groundloop
(11,522 posts)I'm not sure where you're headed with your statement, and forgive me if I'm wrong, but it sounds just like a right wing justification for doing nothing.
Guns are the NUMBER 1 cause of death in the US among young people. If baseball injuries rose to that level you can bet that there'd be investigations galore figuring out how to make baseball safer. A lot more people used to die in automobile crashes before seat belts and air bags were mandated. The simple fact is that we can't just sit on our collective ass and accept excuses anymore.
DetroitLegalBeagle
(1,926 posts)It has no legal standing or authority in our legal system. References have been made to parts of it in court, but no court has ever recognized it as a binding legal document.
Aviation Pro
(12,186 posts)That should be revisited.
sop
(10,243 posts)"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
"We the People" are supposed to "insure domestic tranquility" and "promote the general welfare." You can't have domestic tranquility or promote general welfare with a bunch of armed yahoos running around killing children, can you?
Gun fondlers are always harping on "originalism." The Preamble comes before the 2nd Amendment. You can't get any more original than that.
DetroitLegalBeagle
(1,926 posts)It's an introduction, it states the overall purpose of the Constitution. It does not give any powers or limitations to the government or define any rights. There is only one case that I know of where SCOTUS has directly addressed the Preamble of the Constitution. In Jacobson v Massachusetts, they said:
Lucid Dreamer
(584 posts)AP> The 2A defenders often/always cite the amendment as a right given to them in the Constitution and therefore cancels out the right to safety.
That's a false statement. Get serious.
Aviation Pro
(12,186 posts)Go plumb the internet and youll find it.
Lucid Dreamer
(584 posts)You can find something in the internet pipes to prove anything.
So that doesn't prove anything...
plimsoll
(1,670 posts)You are correct, it's usually the quiet part, but the upshot from the NRA and the other gun rights groups has always been that there's just no way to prevent these killings without resorting to a Chinese style dictatorship with forced abortions and funny jackets required.
What is new is that it's a God given right. I suspect that if there's any push on the 2nd Amendment they'll start pushing that aspect.
IronLionZion
(45,528 posts)2A does not give people the right to disparage other rights. People have a right to not be shot.
Brenda
(1,072 posts)Right to life has been so horribly cornered by the Religious Nut Brigade.