Interpreting the 2A

[FrankenCub]

I would love to have both weapons and think I should be able to get it.

Can they regulate it with CCW permits , sure.

Do I think the 2nd should stop being a step child tonthd other rights no.

But just like I can’t just go into a courtroom and speak asvthe judge is trying to hear a case, it can be regulated. It’s what those are..I think I should be able to own the common arms or the effective arms of a basic military person. Semi auto “assault “ rifle fits that. A semi pistol fits that.

Based on how many on how many other Rights that can be restricted in the way and manner they do with the 2nd (none), I don't feel the 2nd was written to be restricted as it is. It's only the step child to the rest of the BOR because it's been allowed to happen that way. Common arms in the military...select fire M4. No, a modern sporting rifle isn't as effective for suppressive fire. We don't have assault rifles, sorry, only AR-15s etc.

 

[Acer-m14]

Yes, they are. Community standards determine obscenity. Go see what happened in the past with Lenny Bruce, stonewall riots, go masterbate on a subway and call it performance art and see if it’s enforced.

In the most recent in a series of free-speech lawsuits involving the city government, a federal appeals court cleared the way yesterday for an artist to photograph a large group of nude people on a street in Lower Manhattan.

In a split decision, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ordered a lower court to schedule a time for the photograph, although it said the lower court should apply ''conditions as it deems appropriate to ensure a minimal intrusion on the neighborhood.''

Court Rules Nude Photo Can Be Taken On the Street

 

[Truebeliever]

like yelling FIRE in a theater .. yes you can .. just have the $$$$ to pay for the damage of everyone there ..

Yes it can be illegal to do so depending on the law written. In NYS, it is disorderly conduct at a minimum and you can be arrested for it. I have seen it.

“person is guilty of disorderly conduct when, with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof:

1. He engages in fighting or in violent, tumultuous or threatening behavior; or
2. He makes unreasonable noise; or
3. In a public place, he uses abusive or obscene language, or makes an obscene gesture; or
4. Without lawful authority, he disturbs any lawful assembly or meeting of persons; or
5. He obstructs vehicular or pedestrian traffic; or
6. He congregates with other persons in a public place and refuses to comply with a lawful order of the police to disperse; or
7. He creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose. Disorderly conduct is a violation.”

Disorderly Conduct in New York, Penal Law 240.20 — NEWMAN & CYR

But I was less about fire in a theater than saying “ Burn down the neighborhood “ to a crowd, or advocate violence toward a certain racial group like “ kill the Jew“ , point atvone, and the crowd does so.

 

[Truebeliever]

In the most recent in a series of free-speech lawsuits involving the city government, a federal appeals court cleared the way yesterday for an artist to photograph a large group of nude people on a street in Lower Manhattan.

In a split decision, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ordered a lower court to schedule a time for the photograph, although it said the lower court should apply ''conditions as it deems appropriate to ensure a minimal intrusion on the neighborhood.''

Court Rules Nude Photo Can Be Taken On the Street

That’s the community standard. Now let’s do that same art in front of a school in session and see what that court says.

 

[E the massive]

That’s the community standard. Now let’s do that same art in front of a school in session and see what that court says.

Schools are gov property.

 

[FrankenCub]

These 1st amendment arguments you are using are acts, just as pointing a firearm at someone is. Now compare the internet, printing presses etc to an AR-15, M4, AK-47. These are objects. The 1st doesn't limit and never has limited objects. You can't use the 1st as an argument to validate limitations on the 2nd.

 

[Truebeliever]

Based on how many on how many other Rights that can be restricted in the way and manner they do with the 2nd (none), I don't feel the 2nd was written to be restricted as it is. It's only the step child to the rest of the BOR because it's been allowed to happen that way. Common arms in the military...select fire M4. No, a modern sporting rifle isn't as effective for suppressive fire. We don't have assault rifles, sorry, only AR-15s etc.

Can a semi auto be effective for a common solider as a minimum standard. The answer is yes. Many armies still field the FN FAL. I didn’t say the best. But it’s still effective.

 

[E the massive]

Can a semi auto be effective for a common solider as a minimum standard. The answer is yes. Many armies still field the FN FAL. I didn’t say the best. But it’s still effective.

Yes. With full auto crew served and indirect fire support.

 

[Truebeliever]

These 1st amendment arguments you are using are acts, just as pointing a firearm at someone is. Now compare the internet, printing presses etc to an AR-15, M4, AK-47. These are objects. The 1st doesn't limit and never has limited objects. You can't use the 1st as an argument to validate limitations on the 2nd.

No, not the same. Obscenity is not the same. Publishing photographs is freedom of the press but try child porn. Mere possession is illegal and the possessor may have had nothing to have done anything with the child .

There is a limit to it.

 

[Acer-m14]

disorderly conduct

is a catch all, just so you have something for a arrest .. the fall back law now ..

girls can go topless in NY .. why can't i go pants less .. ?? oh i was disorderly ..

 

[E the massive]

No, not the same. Obscenity is not the same. Publishing photographs is freedom of the press but try child porn. Mere possession is illegal and the possessor may have had nothing to have done anything with the child .

There is a limit to it.

There is a victim to child porn. No victim to owning a full auto or a pistol. Should we license child porn?

 

[Truebeliever]

Yes. With full auto crew served and indirect fire support.

Yep, it would be more effective to have an automatic squad weapon but I could lay down a base of fire on semi and have the B team move too. Not as effective but it would work.

I could also effectively hold a position with that rifle as well. It’s the minimum and still be effective.

 

[Acer-m14]

There is a victim to child porn. No victim to owning a full auto or a pistol. Should we license child porn?

then we got that Muslim law they believe in .. that's all ok in the USA the way its going ...

 

[E the massive]

Yep, it would be more effective to have an automatic squad weapon but I could lay down a base of fire on semi and have the B team move too. Not as effective but it would work.

I could also effectively hold a position with that rifle as well. It’s the minimum and still be effective.

And no military ever

Yep, it would be more effective to have an automatic squad weapon but I could lay down a base of fire on semi and have the B team move too. Not as effective but it would work.

I could also effectively hold a position with that rifle as well. It’s the minimum and still be effective.

No it would not and no military ever thought it would.
ETA so LEO should be good to go with semi.

 

[Truebeliever]

There is a victim to child porn. No victim to owning a full auto or a pistol. Should we license child porn?

The debate point is that there is a limit . I just demonstrated a limit on the first admendment despite not be allowed to “ abridge” it.

I’m saying the 2nd should be treated like the first.

They can make regulations/laws on the first that were ruled constitutional such as a parade permit. Okay, the state can require a CCW for concealed carry but it better be a shall issue permit and have good reason to deny the permit rather than require us to prove we have good cause, just like a denial of a parade permit. And you can’t charge us more than a parade permit for our CCW. But they could require the CCW for concealed carry. Treat the 2nd as they would the first.

Can they ban the press from publishing child porn? Yes they can just like they could ban nuclear weapons. But they allow nude photos to be taken on the street during certain times and hours. Regulated but look how much “room “ they give the 1st. Give room to the second A.

Do you guys see the difference in your “absolute “ argument vs how these rights ( all of the bill of rights ) have limits.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Yep, it would be more effective to have an automatic squad weapon but I could lay down a base of fire on semi and have the B team move too. Not as effective but it would work.

I could also effectively hold a position with that rifle as well. It’s the minimum and still be effective.

Right. But the military wouldn't be doing that against a militia. They'd supress properly. So what side would be hamstrung. Was the 2A's intent for that to happen?

Was it's intent written for let's say the State of Massachusetts for example (like you said before that it doesn't apply to states) to infringe that right with the banning of certain arms so that the citizens of Massachusetts can't fight the government?

 

[Truebeliever]

And no military ever

No it would not and no military ever thought it would.
ETA so LEO should be good to go with semi.

We are talking the minimum for that solider. Not the whole army as that effective standard. Are front line soldiers given semi auto on the modern battlefield by some NATO armies. The answer is yes. Are they commonly given. Yes. The minimum is that standard.

But that would only be my standard . The court ruled the common standard is the standard. Which is even less. What is commonly owned. Semi auto rifles are, semi auto pistols are, with standard magazines.

 

[Marine Cpl]

The debate point is that there is a limit . I just demonstrated a limit on the first admendment despite not be allowed to “ abridge” it.

I’m saying the 2nd should be treated like the first.

They can make regulations/laws on the first that were ruled constitutional such as a parade permit. Okay, the state can require a CCW for concealed carry but it better be a shall issue permit and have good reason to deny the permit rather than require us to prove we have good cause, just like a denial of a parade permit. And you can’t charge us more than a parade permit for our CCW. But they could require the CCW for concealed carry. Treat the 2nd as they would the first.

Can they ban the press from publishing child porn? Yes they can just like they could ban nuclear weapons. But they allow nude photos to be taken on the street during certain times and hours. Regulated but look how much “room “ they give the 1st. Give room to the second A.

Do you guys see the difference in your “absolute “ argument vs how these rights ( all of the bill of rights ) have limits.

They aren't supposed to be able to ban a newspaper from the posting of child porn. But child porn in itself is illegal and not a protected right. So they could arrest him for child porn charges.

Same as if I post a picture of me menacing an old lady with a gun. The act of posting it isn't the crime or the gun itself the crime. The act of menacing is.

 

[Truebeliever]

Right. But the military wouldn't be doing that against a militia. They'd supress properly. So what side would be hamstrung. Was the 2A's intent for that to happen?

Was it's intent written for let's say the State of Massachusetts for example (like you said before that it doesn't apply to states) to infringe that right with the banning of certain arms so that the citizens of Massachusetts can't fight the government?

Originally , it was just a limitation on the federal government. It was later incorporated to cover the states. The safeguards against such a thing was put into the MA constitution.

 

[FrankenCub]

Can a semi auto be effective for a common solider as a minimum standard. The answer is yes. Many armies still field the FN FAL. I didn’t say the best. But it’s still effective.

What other countries use or have access to has nothing to do with the US. If that were the case, it could be used that most countries have no access to firearms. This is our BOR, not Germany's. The minimal effective rifle for the US Army is the M4.

No, not the same. Obscenity is not the same. Publishing photographs is freedom of the press but try child porn. Mere possession is illegal and the possessor may have had nothing to have done anything with the child .

There is a limit to it.

You're stretching it with this one. There is a victim with child porn and it takes an act to begin with (which is fucking disgusting). Possessing an M4 has no victims and the mere possession of that object will harm no one.
They limit acts in the 1st that can or do cause harm to others, not the method used to express your 1st. If an M4 being the method of expressing the 2nd is restricted, then why is it the internet is not restricted for being the method of expressing the 1st?

 

[Marine Cpl]

We are talking the minimum for that solider. Not the whole army as that effective standard. Are front line soldiers given semi auto on the modern battlefield by some NATO armies. The answer is yes. Are they commonly given. Yes. The minimum is that standard.

But that would only be my standard . The court ruled the common standard is the standard. Which is even less. What is commonly owned. Semi auto rifles are, semi auto pistols are, with standard magazines.

And fully automatics aren't common because they were banned. If they weren't banned, you don't think that everyone here with an AR would have a selector switch?

You see how that common crap is crap? But it's law because some clown in a black robe said so.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Originally , it was just a limitation on the federal government. It was later incorporated to cover the states. The safeguards against such a thing was put into the MA constitution.

It was never intended for the states to infringe on rights that the federal government cannot. If that were the case, then every state can become a police state. The 2A was written to keep a free state.

 

[Acer-m14]

And fully automatics aren't common because they were banned. If they weren't banned, you don't think that everyone here with an AR would have a selector switch?

You see how that common crap is crap? But it's law because some clown in a black robe said so.

cept for the gang banger's who don't give a F .. there common with them ..

 

[E the massive]

We are talking the minimum for that solider. Not the whole army as that effective standard. Are front line soldiers given semi auto on the modern battlefield by some NATO armies. The answer is yes. Are they commonly given. Yes. The minimum is that standard.

But that would only be my standard . The court ruled the common standard is the standard. Which is even less. What is commonly owned. Semi auto rifles are, semi auto pistols are, with standard magazines.

Full auto was standard before NFA, Semi auto with a detachable mag was standard before (??? can't remember).

 

[Marine Cpl]

And tomorrow when they come up with laser guns, since they aren't common, Congress will ban them. Then the police and the military will get them.

Thank you Scalia for your BS conjecture. You've inserted words into the Constitution that aren't there and people eat it up.

200 years from now the Second Amendment will mean nothing because of your ruling.

 

[Truebeliever]

They aren't supposed to be able to ban a newspaper from the posting of child porn. But child porn in itself is illegal and not a protected right. So they could arrest him for child porn charges.

Same as if I post a picture of me menacing an old lady with a gun. The act of posting it isn't the crime or the gun itself the crime. The act of menacing is.

Do you not understand the child porn laws and the press. What is the press?

It is the publishing of a book. If the child porn guys made a magazine and published it calling for the legalization of it, it would be legal and the press even if a pamphet . If they put a child porn picture in the New York Times, it is child porn. It would go to the Surpremr court like the pentagon papers but the court would weigh it first for the merit of the story. But until then, just possession would get you arrested. And since when does the court weigh on the merits of a press story? Not often. Because other stories other than obscenity don’t need merit.

 

[Truebeliever]

And tomorrow when they come up with laser guns, since they aren't common, Congress will ban them. Then the police and the military will get them.

Thank you Scalia for your BS conjecture. You've inserted words into the Constitution that aren't there and people eat it up.

200 years from now the Second Amendment will mean nothing because of your ruling.

See now we aren’t debating the ability to regulate but by what standard.

 

[Marine Cpl]

Do you not understand the child porn laws and the press. What is the press?

It is the publishing of a book. If the child porn guys made a magazine and published it calling for the legalization of it, it would be legal and the press even if a pamphet . If they put a child porn picture in the New York Times, it is child porn. It would go to the Surpremr court like the pentagon papers but the court would weigh it first for the merit of the story. But until then, just possession would get you arrested. And since when does the court weigh on the merits of a press story? Not often. Because other stories other than obscenity don’t need merit.

You aren't getting it. The child porn in itself it's illegal. It doesn't matter if you post it. It's illegal.

 

[Truebeliever]

Full auto was standard before NFA, Semi auto with a detachable mag was standard before (??? can't remember).

Standard for what?

 

[FrankenCub]

Hmmm...they can't regulate if I have 12 social media profiles, yet they can regulate that I can't have 12 round standard capacity mags for my P99. And the special class citizens can have those same mags that I can't. Not only is the 2nd a second class Right, we're second class citizens