The Constitution was never Absolute (Page 3): Wrong see my previous post.

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

chikid68 wrote:

None of which are done by the federal government
Each state has their own rules.

Wrong see my previous post.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

DennyT wrote:

Full auto Yes and they have to have a license “ issued by the federal government. Federal law

2A
Has been incorporated which means it applies to states also

Federal government law requires back ground check on all guns sold by ffl’s.. federal law

Federal govt criminals and certain can not own a gun by federal law not just state law

So don’t try to say federal govt has not worked 2A.

Take a good look at my post. Show me where I pointed out Federal law does not work. Do you ever open your mind to really pay attention? Seems NOT.

YES I KNOW felons, with rare exceptions may NOT own a firearm. I have known that most of my life.

Yes guns sold by dealers do require a background check. As I recall this is because of the GCA 1968. But not all firearms sold must entail a background check. You continue trying to point things out that almost all of us know already such as owning machine guns. You are wasting our time trying to point out what significant knowledge you have. YAWN…….

Now go back to praising your daddy, POS Biden.

Dennis

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

dennis2146 wrote:

Take a good look at my post. Show me where I poin... (show quote)

I never made any claim on what you said or didn’t say.
My point is the federal government has been all over 2A from the beginning in -1934. So to say it is absolute is plain bs

If it were absolute there would be no background check no licensing people could own automatics felons could own guns

By the way you must have missed this when I posted this earlier:

“”” Listen I am not a biden fan. He is doddering old man that belong a beach or in a bingo parlor somewhere but I am a fan of honesty.
“””

Or you’re calling me a liar

LDB415 Loc: Houston south suburb

Every gun sale by a licensed dealer requires a background check or a valid CHL which is issued after a background check. Every sale. Gun show? Mostly all dealers and mostly all doing background checks. And felons are not supposed to own a firearm but most felons don't follow laws.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

DennyT wrote:

I never made any claim on what you said or didn’t ... (show quote)

Once again look at my post. I never said the 2nd Amendment was absolute, did I? Many changes have taken place. But many changes the Left tried have been overruled by SCOTUS and/or Sheriffs and Chiefs of Police have refused to allow their officers to arrest violators because they deemed the law unconstitutional. High cap magazines are one example.

You need to get off your high horse and pay attention.

Dennis

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

dennis2146 wrote:

Once again look at my post. I never said the 2nd Amendment was absolute, did I? Many changes have taken place. But many changes the Left tried have been overruled by SCOTUS and/or Sheriffs and Chiefs of Police have refused to allow their officers to arrest violators because they deemed the law unconstitutional. High cap magazines are one example.

You need to get off your high horse and pay attention.

Dennis

“”” I never said the 2nd Amendment was absolute, did I?
“”””

Thank you I hope the others on the thread understand

Old Coot

mwalsh wrote:

Straw man or fallacious argument. br br If the do... (show quote)

That's why we have the Supreme Court.

chikid68 Loc: Tennesse USA

DennyT wrote:

I never made any claim on what you said or didn’t ... (show quote)

I'm calling you a liar if you want to keep insisting that people can't own automatic weapons because they can although it takes quite a while to get the tax stamp for one.

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

chikid68 wrote:

I'm calling you a liar if you want to keep insisting that people can't own automatic weapons because they can although it takes quite a while to get the tax stamp for one.

Read what I said .

“”” Full auto Yes and they have to have a license “ issued by the federal government. Federal law
“”””

pendennis

mwalsh wrote:

Straw man or fallacious argument. br br If the do... (show quote)

I think that most of these morons who argue "living document" and that no rights are absolute, would be happy if they could just "fill in the blank" for any article or amendment they chose.

mwalsh Loc: Houston

pendennis wrote:

I think that most of these morons who argue "living document" and that no rights are absolute, would be happy if they could just "fill in the blank" for any article or amendment they chose.

That is likely their dream state...its just a document filled with suggestions.

chikid68 Loc: Tennesse USA

DennyT wrote:

Read what I said .

“”” Full auto Yes and they have to have a license “ issued by the federal government. Federal law
“”””

it were absolute there would be no background check no licensing people could own automatics felons could own guns
Right here you imply that people can't own automatic weapons.
This is what the ATF says about it which is that they can.
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firearms-guide-identification-firearms-within-purview-national-firearms-act

jcboy3

mwalsh wrote:

Our President's words.

The rights expressed in the Constitution are not Absolute.

What are they then...mere suggestions.

Does POTUS not take an oath to defend the Constitution?

How do you defend a document, the founding document of our nation...if you do not believe it means much? It is just an idea framework that does not really mean what it says.

One of Brandon's most ignorant statements yet.

Clearly the rights expressed in the Constitution are not Absolute. The examples are easy to come by:

1. Free speech is limited; you cannot yell fire in a theater or libel another person.

2. The 2nd Amendment has been reinterpreted to provide an individual right to guns, yet that ownership can be denied to children or felons.

3. Public gatherings can be denied or require permits and payments. Hardly "free" assembly.

And there actually are very few "rights" given to individuals by the Constitution. States are able to limit individual freedom in nearly any way.

bob44044 Loc: Ohio

DennyT wrote:

It isn’t absolute . That’s why it can be amended. He told the truth.

If it were absolute we would will have slavery allowed wouldn’t we ? And women would not be allowed to vote .

He did not tell the truth. What Biden meant was that if the Constitution doesn't conform to him or his party's beliefs then they can ignore or interpit it the way they want to. However, what the statement was meant to mean, is that the Constitution can be amended according to law.

jcboy3

mwalsh wrote:

If the 2nd is not absolute, then neither is the 1st, or 3rd, or 5th...etc.

His comments reflect an attitude that the Constitution is just a bunch of suggestions.

The 2nd amendment says "bear arms" and "shall not be infringed". If this is a personal, absolute right, then you should be able to own and carry any weapons you want without limitation or restriction. Doesn't seem to be the case, so either (1) it's not a personal, absolute right, or (2) no one can read.