Now that the Second Amendment is a winning issue in court, the left is getting desperate. Gavin Newsom is proposing a 28th Amendment that would add the left’s wish lists to the Constitution. There is precisely zero chance of getting 3/4 of the states to approve such an amendment, at least not in my lifetime.
Others on the left are proposing some pretty wild stuff:
a better proposal would be to repeal and replace the 2nd Amendment through Congress and the states.
By replacing the convoluted language of the 2nd Amendment with a list of specific rules for gun ownership, gun violence can be reduced.
This has the same chances of success as Newsome’s 28th Amendment, and for the same reasons. There is also:
Instead of taking decades to secure approval of two-thirds of Congress and three-fourths of the states, I believe a gun summit at Camp David — with gun-rights advocates, law enforcement and survivors — could hammer out new, commonsense gun safety measures in a matter of days.
I don’t see this being Constitutional. Gun rights organizations are done compromising with the left. Compromise to the left means “We want to take all of your rights. You don’t want to give them up. How about we compromise and only take half of them? Then next year, we can do this again.” No. Just no. The gun control side doesn’t deal in good faith. How about this proposal?
The 2nd Amendment begins with “a well-regulated militia” — not just a militia, but a a well-regulated one. An honest interpretation would be that as long as restrictions do not impede the formation of a regulated state militia, they could be deemed permissible.
My suggestion to Newsom: Allow widespread ownership of firearms, but all such arms (some types of small arms might be exempted) would be held by the California National Guard and could be accessed and used only through the Guard.
This hot take was destroyed in the Heller decision. Apparently, the anti-gun idiots haven’t read it.
12 Comments
TRX · June 15, 2023 at 12:20 pm
> By replacing the convoluted language of the 2nd Amendment with a list of specific rules for gun ownership, gun violence can be reduced.
—
“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.”
27 words, 10 of them being “a, to, the, and, of”.
I assume Nuisance’s proposal would be clean and simple, like the Affordable Care Act.
Big Ruckus D · June 15, 2023 at 12:33 pm
I know the collapse of civilization is not something to be wished for. But damn if I don’t find it awfully compelling to want to demonstrate to these stupid, tiresome, ceaselessly meddlesome authoritarian muthafuckas why we insist on being well armed. We all know it has to happen eventually.
I want to watch watermelons exploding like a Gallagher show, circa 1985.
Olguy · June 15, 2023 at 12:53 pm
Shall Not Be Infringed. Very simple.
Webster isn’t even needed or that fancy sheepskin from some Socialist Ivy League College.
I’m done with all this high school food fight bs. Done.
…lemme know when it’s time to start stacking shit stains.
oldvet50 · June 15, 2023 at 2:19 pm
When I was in junior high school, our history teacher explained what the 2nd amendment means: In order to have a well regulated militia, you must have a population from which to draw members that are familiar and proficient with firearms. That was simple enough for a child to understand! What is WRONG with these libs?
EN2 SS · June 15, 2023 at 4:01 pm
What is WRONG with these libs? EVIL.
Chiquitastan · June 15, 2023 at 2:37 pm
Dominion and SmartMatic get a vote as do all EBT wards of the state.
Skeptic · June 15, 2023 at 4:25 pm
Want a simple law that would drastically reduce gun violence? Here it is.
Black people may not own or possess guns, and should a black person be discovered with a gun, they can be arrested, held without bail, and imprisoned for at least five years. It shall be legal for police to stop and frisk black people for guns at any time they suspect a black person of having a gun.
That would, of course, not stop all black murders – they’re simply too violent for that – but it would radically reduce the amount of blacks carrying on a day to day basis, and walking the street. And it would target the specific demographic causing the majority of “gun violence” in the USA.
SP RN · June 15, 2023 at 5:08 pm
I always viewed it in this simple way: the ‘militia’ is the armed forces of the state, and what best ‘regulates’ those forces (keeps them from doing what the British army did to the colonists pre-Revolution ) is that the people have arms too.
If the 27 words of the Second Amendment aren’t simple enough for them, it could easily be said in two words: molon labe.
Phil B · June 15, 2023 at 7:14 pm
Unfortunately the meaning of words changes over time. Specifically:
Militia – at the time of the compiling of the Constitution, Militia meant all able bodied men under 60. In other words, the general population.
Regulated – this meant trained in arms. if you look up “The Kings Regulations” used to regulate the training of troops, it did not mean the blizzard of petty rules that “regulations” means today. The regulations, at that time, meant the rules and training needed to form a disciplined and skilful soldier. In other words, trained and skilled in the use of arms of the time. There are many manuals available detailing the various Regulations for the training of troops – and you can spend a young fortune on buying the manuals.
So, to put the 2nd Amendment into modern language, “A population well trained in the use of arms and familiar with their usage being necessary to safeguard their freedoms and their country, the possession and use of such arms shall not be interfered with”.
Which was the intent of the original 2nd Amendment.
Aesop · June 15, 2023 at 8:07 pm
The Leftards are demonstrably retarded and illiterate, ever since bungling the common sense of “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed“.
They also overlook that repealing the Second Amendment doesn’t repeal the pre-existing right.
We’re done trying to educate deliberately stupid people pursuing inevitably the disarmament of the populace as a prelude to boxcars.
They want to come for guns? The only reply from here on out has to be “bullets first”.
Jonesy · June 15, 2023 at 9:48 pm
Not another F#@$ing inch.
Shall not be infringed.
Anonymous · June 16, 2023 at 12:31 pm
The real threat is treaties. We should have defanged treaties with the Bricker Amendment ages ago.
Comments are closed.