2nd Amendment,right or privilege?

[FLshooter]

The amendment states, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Given this, the answer of whether the Second Amendment is a right or a privilege may seem obvious.
I believe the second amendment is a right we inherited from our forefathers in 1776.
But,liberals seem to think otherwise,with continued restrictions.
In 1993, the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act was enacted.It prohibits possession of a deadly firearm for people who have been convicted of crimes in court and incarcerated for more than one year; unlawful users of any controlled substance; those discharged from the armed forces under dishonorable conditions; those subjected to Protection from Abuse orders; and those convicted of domestic violence.Now we have red flag laws.And restrictions on what type of firearms we can own.
Of the above categories, one of note is “those who are unlawful users of any controlled substance.” While seemingly cut-and-dry, the introduction of medical marijuana has muddied the waters considerably.Thus, in some states,possession of a valid Medical Marijuana Card or the use of medical marijuana makes an individual an “unlawful user of a controlled substance”?—?someone who cannot possess a firearm legally.
If your right to bear arms can be restricted by past offenses, dishonorable discharge from the armed forces or the use of state-approved medical marijuana, is this truly a universal right?
In my oppinion,liberals have turned your right to bear arms into a privilege that they can remove.And it’s getting easier for them to be able to remove it,with all the new restrictions being added.
The right to bear arms is one of the things I treasure most in life.And it bothers me that liberals are trying to take it.I’m sure the paragraphs could be written on the subject. But I just wanted to start a conversation on this very important subject and hear others’ feedback.

[Lemonaid]

The constitution was created to limit the power of the government. Liberal/Democrats want bigger more powerful government, more control (total) over the people so they are enemies of the constitution (people). I challenge any Democrat to list any good thing their party is for.
They are the enemy of freedom, Conservatives are the champions of freedom, pick a side.
Despite what the clear text of the constitution and Bill of Rights say, your rights are what ever the supreme court says it is.

[TomSawyerNW]

You can bet one thing. The 2A will under a 4-year siege if Biden gets into the WH.

[stanc]

If your right to bear arms can be restricted by past offenses, dishonorable discharge from the armed forces or the use of state-approved medical marijuana, is this truly a universal right?

In my opinion, no, it is not a right, despite what the 2A says. Any activity which is controlled, regulated, restricted, or prohibited by government is not a right, it is a privilege.

In my oppinion,liberals have turned your right to bear arms into a privilege that they can remove.

It's not only liberals who are guilty of that. Need I remind you it was conservative Trump who banned a firearm accessory that was legal to own and use under liberal Obama?

And even conservative Supreme Courts have held that government does have the authority to impose restrictions -- and even prohibitions -- on the "right" to keep and bear.

[TexHill]

People think that the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution gives us the right to bear arms when it does not. Our Creator has given us this right along with the other amendments in the Bill of Rights, not man, nor a government created by man.

The purpose of the Bill of Rights - the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution - is to remind our government that these are God given rights, and to check the government's power where these rights are concerned. If you'll notice, all of the amendments in the Bill of Rights limit the federal government. They do not limit the citizens.

At its core the right to bear arms is not about protecting oneself from bad guys or putting food on the table. These are ancillary benefits. God gave us the right to bear arms because it is our right to defend ourselves against the tyranny of an oppressive government.

[JASmith]

+1 !!

Further, the only reason people remain on earth today is that we have been able to defend ourselves.

The largest human-caused death tallies in history are correlated with the victims having been disarmed.

[stanc]

People think that the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution gives us the right to bear arms when it does not. Our Creator has given us this right...

That's an unsubstantiated belief, not a proven fact.

...along with the other amendments in the Bill of Rights, not man, nor a government created by man.

I'm pretty sure that James Madison -- a man, and member of the US government -- is credited with writing the amendments in the Bill of Rights.

The purpose of the Bill of Rights - the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution - is to remind our government that these are God given rights...

Really? There is no mention in any of the first ten amendments that they were bestowed by God, nor have I ever seen anyone claim that the 7A right to a jury trial came from God. Ditto for the 1A, 3A, 4A, 5A, 6A, 8A, 9A, and 10A, all of which appear to be human ideas.

If you'll notice, all of the amendments in the Bill of Rights limit the federal government. They do not limit the citizens.

And yet the US Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that government can limit the citizens' right to keep and bear arms...

[stanc]

+1 !!

Further, the only reason people remain on earth today is that we have been able to defend ourselves.

Not true. The primary reason people remain on Earth today is because Man is the apex predator on the planet.

The largest human-caused death tallies in history are correlated with the victims having been disarmed.

Actually, one of the largest death tallies in history was twenty million members of the world's armed forces killed in WWII.

[montana]

https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM 262 million people killed by their governments, "not soldiers killed in war" during the 20th century....The common denominator, gun control...

[stanc]

In my oppinion,liberals have turned your right to bear arms into a privilege that they can remove.

The worst violation of the 2A in my lifetime was done by that "great" conservative, Ronald Reagan, when he banned the manufacture of automatic weapons for private citizens.

[Wheelhorse]

The gun control act of 68 mentions firearms used for "all lawful sporting purposes".
The 2A has never been about "sporting purposes" and these words should have never been allowed there.
They started a long time ago whittling on the 2A.

[TomSawyerNW]

There are many ways for the Democrats and liberals to attack the 2A, and a primary one is to tax the hell out of ammo and guns themselves. If I have to fork over, say, $3 ever time I shoot a target, I'll prbly think twice before buying another gun or a box of ammo.

[JASmith]

Not true. The primary reason people remain on Earth today is because Man is the apex predator on the planet.

That is the point --sheep get slaughtered and wolves eat.

That applies to human affairs too -- those who don't resist abuse are abused or killed.

The wolf traits, especially those of aggressive self-defense, are why we continue to exist in spite both human and nonhuman predation of people.

[stanc]

https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM 262 million people killed by their governments, "not soldiers killed in war" during the 20th century....The common denominator, gun control...

https://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/06/books...%20billion. And at least 108 million people were killed in war during the 20th century. The common denominator, armed people...

Don't tell only one side of the story. That's propaganda, not truth.

(And for any who might jump to the wrong conclusion, no, I am not advocating gun control.)

[stanc]

The gun control act of 68 mentions firearms used for "all lawful sporting purposes".
The 2A has never been about "sporting purposes" and these words should have never been allowed there.

I wholeheartedly agree.

[stanc]

That is the point --sheep get slaughtered and wolves eat.

That applies to human affairs too -- those who don't resist abuse are abused or killed.

The wolf traits, especially those of aggressive self-defense, are why we continue to exist in spite both human and nonhuman predation of people.

Sheep (and other prey species) continue to exist, even though they lack wolf traits. Which indicates that "aggressive self-defense" is probably not an important factor in species survival.

[JASmith]

Sheep (and other prey species) continue to exist, even though they lack wolf traits. Which indicates that "aggressive self-defense" is probably not an important factor in species survival.

Sheep exist to serve us.

They are totally dependent on their masters for their lives, food, water and exercise. In the interest of improving the stock to make their progeny better eating by their masters, they frequently have little or no choice on which sheep will become mates. (or, in today’s world of artificial insemination, no sex at all.)

That would be our fate if we are denied the means for self defense.

Do we really want to live in a world where the ruling elite has total control over all aspects of our lives?

[montana]

https://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/06/books...%20billion. And at least 108 million people were killed in war during the 20th century. The common denominator, armed people...

Don't tell only one side of the story. That's propaganda, not truth.

(And for any who might jump to the wrong conclusion, no, I am not advocating gun control.)

262 million deaths compared to 108 million who died in battle, "is not propaganda" but facts. We can assume there will always be weapons and when people are left without the means to self defence, the statistics are much worse for the disarmed compared to the armed....

[stanc]

Sheep exist to serve us.

They are totally dependent on their masters for their lives, food, water and exercise. In the interest of improving the stock to make their progeny better eating by their masters, they frequently have little or no choice on which sheep will become mates. (or, in today’s world of artificial insemination, no sex at all.)

That would be our fate if we are denied the means for self defense.

You overexaggerate. Most, if not all, European countries have no individual right to keep and bear arms, but mating is not controlled or prohibited.

Do we really want to live in a world where the ruling elite has total control over all aspects of our lives?

My answer to that would depend upon whether or not I would be a member of the ruling elite.

And we have strayed far away from the question posed by the OP... :o

[JASmith]

Thread title: Amendment,right or privilege.

The sheep analogy shows why we have the God-given right to self defense — and the tools needed to accomplish that