Skip to comments.
Massachusetts Moves Step Closer to Confiscating Private Firearms
Massachusetts Legislature ^
| 11/26/05
Posted on 11/26/2005 12:43:07 PM PST by pabianice
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 201-215 next last
To: freedumb2003
Using that logic, we would have been two countries come around 1860 and black people wouldn't be voting in the South.
The lines are murkey, granted, and you shouldn't decide lightly, but you can't merely say all laws are absolute at all times. There are times where they become subordinate to other things.
To: 04-Bravo
"Isn't this the same type of governmental intrusion that led to some problems in Massachusetts in 1775?"
Actually, very similar. General Gage had sent British troops to Lexington and Concord to confiscate cannon held by the colonists.
You know, Mass could really go for symbolism by publically confiscating firearms at Concord, just to show that tyranny wasn't defeated.
To: rottndog
I don't see where the 2nd amendment is carved out by the 14thThats because it's not, the second stands on it's own and incorporation by the 14th is neither necessary nor desirable.
"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."
Massachustees is infringing, not regualting. Good case for SCOTUS when Alito gets there.
43
posted on
11/26/2005 1:27:22 PM PST
by
jwalsh07
To: Monitor
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.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
44
posted on
11/26/2005 1:27:51 PM PST
by
beltfed308
(Cloth or link. Happiness is a perfect trunnion.)
To: Mrs Mark
yeah??? they'll risk more than their pension at some houses...
45
posted on
11/26/2005 1:28:54 PM PST
by
Chode
(American Hedonist ©®)
To: rottndog
Considering how much immigration laws are ignored, I would have to say that we are more towards the side of nothing. OUch! I can't do anything about our leaders ignoring laws and I agree yours is a great example of what happens when we ignore them.
46
posted on
11/26/2005 1:29:09 PM PST
by
freedumb2003
(Let's tear down the observatory so we never get hit by a meteor again!)
To: beltfed308
Well, the U.S. Constitution may not be perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than what we're living under now.
To: William Creel
"I have half-harted support for anarchy to be honest."
I kinda that logic.
Look at what the LA riots did for 2nd. Amend rights when the Koreans store owners banded together to protect their lives and livelihood.
48
posted on
11/26/2005 1:29:44 PM PST
by
RedMonqey
(Life is hard. It's even harder when you're stupid.)
To: pabianice
MASSACHUSETTS Declaration of Rights, Article 17 The people have a right to keep and bear arms for the common defense. And as, in time of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be maintained without the consent of the legislature; and the military shall always be held in an exact subordination to the civil authority, and be governed by it.
49
posted on
11/26/2005 1:30:40 PM PST
by
jwalsh07
To: pabianice
Everyone who is eligible should buy a gun and learn how to use it. This would protect us against criminals, terrorists,and socialists (same as Democrats).
To: jwalsh07
That is why I said "technically".
I agree with the "right of the people" unfortunately throughout the Supreme Court's history, the court does not agree with yours or mine assessment of the 2nd Amend.
51
posted on
11/26/2005 1:31:53 PM PST
by
rollo tomasi
(Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
To: beltfed308
They don't care about constitution stuff in Massachusetts...they're to busy bending each other over in that state...
52
posted on
11/26/2005 1:32:04 PM PST
by
sit-rep
(If you acquire, hit it again to verify...)
To: rollo tomasi
Technically the 2nd Amend. has not been incorporated via the 14th Amend. which means local and State governments can put all kinds of restrictions on firearms. "Incorporation" only matters when the amendment says "Congress shall not" do something since it refers to Congress only -- unless "incorporated" via the 14th Amendment to mean state legislatures as well. Since the Second Amendment nowhere mentions "Congress" at all, the phrase "shall not be infringed" places a restriction on all levels of government subordinate to the Constitution.
53
posted on
11/26/2005 1:32:57 PM PST
by
FreedomCalls
(It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
To: basil; dbwz; spitter; songbird51
54
posted on
11/26/2005 1:34:19 PM PST
by
2nd amendment mama
( www.2asisters.org • Self defense is a basic human right!)
To: zbigreddogz
Using that logic, we would have been two countries come around 1860 and black people wouldn't be voting in the South. No, the laws caught up with the needs of justice eventually. Or are you ready to let gays get married under the same premise as blacks not being able to vote?
55
posted on
11/26/2005 1:34:24 PM PST
by
freedumb2003
(Let's tear down the observatory so we never get hit by a meteor again!)
To: bjcintennessee
56
posted on
11/26/2005 1:35:41 PM PST
by
ImaTexan
To: FreedomCalls
57
posted on
11/26/2005 1:41:44 PM PST
by
djf
(Government wants the same things I do - MY guns, MY property, MY freedoms!)
To: William Creel
If wyou all stopped paying taxes, the Massahusetts governament would gleefully expropriate all your property, bringing the Socialist Utopia one BIG step closer. Somehow, I don't think these things will be changed by any election in that state. It is the only state in the Union with a recognized and adored Royal Family, after all. The descenđants of the men of the Boston Tea Party have come to that.
58
posted on
11/26/2005 1:42:01 PM PST
by
ThanhPhero
(di hanh huong den La Vang)
To: Gabz; Texan5; RikaStrom
Cold Dead Hands ping......what next?
59
posted on
11/26/2005 1:43:33 PM PST
by
tioga
To: FreedomCalls
I agree, but does the courts?
No, which is why State and local governments have been infrindging without remorse. Is it wrong to point out reality?
60
posted on
11/26/2005 1:43:55 PM PST
by
rollo tomasi
(Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 201-215 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson