Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire I'm Worried - Can The Second Amendment Survive?

I believe you are correct. The evidence of so many foolish and baseless people in this country now screams it.

I think that ultimately the big problem is that the populace no longer supports the original intent for the 2nd amendment. Even 2nd amendment absolutists have subsumed the original intent under the far more marketable "sporting use" and "self defense" and, to a lesser degree these days, "hunting". Characterize the 2nd closer to the original intent, to allow resistance to tyranny (especially that of your fellow citizens), and I'll bet support for the 2nd plummets.

I think this argument needs to be parsed a bit. Regarding the actual RKBA as an actual established Right even before the Constitution we need only look at Heller.

This meaning is strongly confirmed by the historical background of the Second Amendment.We look to this because it has always been widely under­stood that the Second Amendment, like the First and Fourth Amendments, codified a pre-existing right. The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it “shall not be infringed.” As we said in United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 553 (1876), “[t]his is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence.

So with that out of the way the only option to simply render that moot is Constitutional amendment and for the foreseeable future that looks extremely unlikely. The much more likely approach would be to push whatever restrictive laws believed to be able to pass legal scrutiny. Outside all the national level screeching the real crunch will be in the States. Multiple states have various degrees of "assault weapons" bans already on the books including CA, CT, HI, MD, MA, NJ & NY. Variations of these laws can spread, become even more restrictive or both. More restrictive, at some time or another assuming that ball really got rolling, could include not only all semi-auto rifles but pistols as well.

At some point the onus is going to fall on SCOTUS which will make for an enormous decision. Heller clearly states what has been seen as being "protected" are those weapons "in common use at the time". There are lots and LOTS of semi-auto rifles, pistols and shotguns out there. To call such weapons "common" would be a vast understatement. This will then run directly into this: (also from Heller)

Thus, any attempt in theory to apply strict scru-tiny to gun regulations will in practice turn into an inter-est-balancing inquiry, with the interests protected by the Second Amendment on one side and the governmental public-safety concerns on the other, the only question being whether the regulation at issue impermissibly bur-dens the former in the course of advancing the latter.

The 2A in and of itself seems to be on pretty solid ground. What becomes of it from a regulatory standpoint is much more up in the air going forward.

Anyone remember High School civics class and exactly what it takes to alter the constitution?

Do they actually teach civics anymore?

It's all laid out in Article V.

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Exactly as I remember it, VG can put away his tin
foil dunce hat.

Callnum: You are not making sense!
What would lead you to believe anything I have posted warrants your infantile description?
I am not advocating doing away with the Second Amendment!
I am foretelling that our Second Amendment Rights will be further ERODED with this latest leftist frenzy over the recent tragedies!
Do you disagree?
And if so what do you base your disagreement on?
Our Second Amendment Rights have been "eroded" in so many "little" ways over the last 50 years on the city, county, state and federal levels - are you denying that?
Try and make a sensible statement please.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Exactly tin foil dunce hat.

Callinum: Just as I expected you are proven foolish and wrong and you go hide!
Typical coward!
Please answer the question(s) I posed to you in my last post - or go hide like a cowardly punk (of which I am certain YOU have had much practice.
Perhaps you are not paying attention to the myriad of "plans" to further erode our Second Amendment Rights that have been proposed and recommended by our politicians (including our President!) in the last two days?
That, is what I am posting about!
And I have been proven correct in my fear and predictions.
You refer to this as "tin hat" something - again you are proving yourself and your contention IDIOTIC.
Perhaps you should keep your head firmly ensconced up your ass where it has obviously been of recent!
You are doing no one any good - especially yourself.
We proponents of the Second Amendment have serious concerns - if you are not concerned then again you are an idiot!
Suffer in silence you idiot - that is the best advice I can give you.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

You aren't very bright are you VG? I owe you no response, at least not until you ask an intelligent question. Its real simple even for a guy like you to google exactly what the process is to change a constitutional amendment. Do your own research, I won't spoon feed you your mush.

You spewed this crap for 8 years of Obama, and my guns in my safe kept multiplying, and will will continue to multiply in the future. Double up on the tin foil maybe?

The 9th amendment says you cant fugg with the other amendments for self serving purpose,s to disparage others of those rights.
That's it in a nutshell....

I dont know why they dont throw this in the mutha fugga,s faces .
And just say STFU and go lay by your bowl.

Callnum: As a proven idiot maybe you will have trouble understanding this headline paragraph from the nations largest newspaper, TODAY:

"WASHINGTON — Congressional Republicans, under intense pressure to respond to this weekend’s massacres, are coalescing around legislation to help law enforcement take guns from those who pose an imminent danger — a measure that, if signed into law, would be the most significant gun control legislation enacted in 20 years".

Or perhaps in keeping with your proven idiocy you refuse to understand or comprehend this?
Go ahead live your life with your head up YOUR ass - it makes no nevermind to me.
But if you think you are doing yourself any favors by publicly proving yourself to be an idiot then I sincerely feel sorry for you.
Please remove your head from your ass and take in some relaity.
The Second Amendment is under siege like never before!or don't - just live in your ignorance is bliss state of stupification.
Sad.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

That's because he had a Republican House and Senate ready to block his ON THE RECORD desires and views (as he's done again this week) to institute extremely restrictive gun control and confiscation. And when he did have both sides of Congress, he was too busy socializing and ruining our healthcare system along with trying to destroy industry to worry about it.

To VG, pot calling the kettle black.

Callnum: As a proven idiot maybe you will have trouble understanding this headline paragraph from the nations largest newspaper, TODAY:

USA Today isn’t credible it is as left wing as CNN and The NY Times. Besides Butt Fu*k Chuck as already said he won’t vote for anything Trump.

All: Sadly it has been reported that the ongoing shooting in Philadelphia today (August 14th) is being done by a criminal shooting an AR-15 "style" Rifle and this criminal has shot 6 (six) police officers, so far, and has expended more than 100 rounds of ammunition in his ongoing criminal acts!
This latest "mass shooting" type criminal is now barricaded and the rest of the responding officers (the ones not wounded and in hospitals already) are still dodging bullets and trying to contain the criminal.
None of this is good for those of us law abiding citizens who endorse our Second Amendment Rights.
This incident will add impetus to the current clarion call to "infringe" on the Second Amendment.
The lame stream media are now referring to "assault rifles" as "weapons of war"!
Apparently to trump up fear and hatred of firearms?
I am up for the coming fight (and have been for well more than half a century now!) but I fear further infringement of the Second Amendment via congressional legislation (not repeal of the Second Amendment) is on the horizon!
The ignoramus kamala harris (demonrat contestant for their Presidential candidate) is now (as of 8/14) calling for more A.T.F. agents to be hired to close down certain F.F.L. dealers.
Ghetto dwelling crack dealer goes rogue criminal and law abiding citizens will be penalized!
Like I said in my original post in this thread - this has become a perfect storm to aid those wishing to infringe on the Second Amendment.
Sad.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

Never needed an amendment to remind me of my rights. It’s cool and all, but whether it is there or not changes nothing, for me. For the people who need it to feel legitimate in exercising their rights, well, they are in for a rough time. In fact, we are all likely in for a rough time. With what is coming, simply knowing your rights will not be enough. Defending them may require a more committed effort than sending money to the NRA or calling your congresscritter....

Pre-dating the Bill of Rights (and the Constitution) were the Federalist Papers (these 85 papers formed the basis of the Constitution). Read the Federalist Paper #29 by Alexander Hamilton. see: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed29.asp

It seems the framers of he Constitution wanted a regularly practicing (and organized) militia who needed arms to protect the nation, thus the 2nd Amendment ("“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.").

If you do not regularly meet and drill with your legally-recognized militia, can we assume you are a deserter?

OldGrayWolf: I agree with your statement "we are all in for a rough time"!
The "we" being legal gun owners.
I fear "things" are going to change and change fairly soon.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy