Lawman
Well-Known Member
I wont get into understanding of religion as that is whole another topic. All religious text can be considered inflammatory and anti women/homosexual. And text doesn't carry out a random act of violence against society, especially when text in a holy book prohibit doing so.
American Muslims haven't killed innocent Americans in the 50 states, except for those who did mass shootings using... guess what... guns. Which they obtained thanks to lax gun control laws. How about I'll give your side to pass that test on religion and indoctrination (and I'll go take that test, and pass in flying colors), so as long as your gun side also take a mental health evaluation before getting a handgun legally? Sounds like we have a deal.
MY point is what you are waving as a full-fledged right, is in actuality (practice?), not really a right in quite a few states. IT JUST ISN'T. It has nothing to do with religion and what someone believes or indoctrination. We are talking the current laws *today* are not uniform in regards to how the 2A is interpreted across different states. What does the future trend indicate? For or against? It would seem the red states are for and the blue states are not as much, and in some cases, against.
But none of that changes what is today. Today, you can be any religion in any state. But protest by throwing an AR across your shoulders? You can't do that legally in several states. While in others, it's perfectly legal.
Do you see the point that the 2A application is just not the same. It isn't I (myself) who is saying this. It's this Republic, this country, these 50 states, each of whom have a different understanding of what 2A means, and their associate state laws about ownership, purchasing, rights to conceal carry, and open carry. Some states you can open carry and conceal carry. Some states you can conceal carry, but not open carry. Some states you can't conceal carry nor open carry. Some guns allowed in one state, while a neighboring state that gun would be illegal (countless examples of PA vs NJ). My Mossberg 715t which was legal in California was not legal in NJ and I had to sell it to a local pawn shop before moving.
So how can you say I had a right to that gun? Looked more like a privilege I had to have it in California, and a privilege I had to give up moving to Jersey. At least, that was my experience. My particular model which was perfectly legal in CA was not so in NJ.
How can you tout something as a "right" when this Republic, our 50 states, all *clearly* differ on what the 2A is and therefore, what it allows us to do and not allow us to do?
I'm now gun-less because of that move from the SFO base to NYC. So you tell me I have a 2A and a gun right. Practice and reality says otherwise. But as far as I know, I kept my religion intact during the move
Jesus
It's amazing that you can be spouting all the judicial claims being pushed in court as we speak for the gun rights argument while at the same time telling yourself it's not a right.
You've been indoctrinated that it's not a right because certain governments/states/localities say so. And they did it by convincing you of the same argument you parrot in here, that fear should motivate us to give up our rights.
That's not how the constitution works.
You're making our argument for us.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk