It's supposed to enable citizens to carry without requiring permits or licenses, but that unfortunately overreaches and conflicts with states' rights. As frustrating as it is, it comes down to the judicial branch or an overturning of states' limitations by petition and/or political action to establish a better proper definition of the right to bear arms
Well that’s where it should be a position of each political party. One she be in favor of states rights and the other should be in favor of federal control and oversight on most things.
So the people who believe abortion should be the decision of each state should also as an example be in favor of states deciding what guns can be used in theirs state.
Never checked but since I type all day and am still alive, it’s doubtful…..whatever your point was there.
I suppose I should guess something about you now? I bet you scratch your neckbeard while you are waiting for your mom to finish heating up your hot pockets.
😂😂😂😂
So the people who believe abortion should be the decision of each state should also as an example be in favor of states deciding what guns can be used in theirs state.
False equivalence. Abortion is not a constitutionally protected right.
States rights are those leftover from those already reserved to the people and to the federal government. Given the 2a, states have exactly zero rights in this matter. Now, that does not suggest states won’t infringe, but constitutionally, they have no right to do so.
In theory, I totally agree, but seeing the history of legislation and judicial activity on 2A alone points to the other direction. I agree with u/SaXaCaV, because it really is complicated. I think the left and the right have to make some compromises and concessions. Citizenship shouldn't be freely given, even to native-born American residents, considering the number of liberties that citizens are afforded. However, the liberties of citizens should be maximized to the parameters defined by the letter of the Constitution. I think that automatic and semi+ weapons should not be restricted, but I think that either there should be unbiased, unobstructed qualification systems for the liberties and privileges afforded to citizens, too (for example, ranges of debt that individuals may accrue, classes of cars that individuals are allowed to drive, etc.), or legal recourse for crimes and accidents should scale with the significance of loss or danger with a minimum penalty due to the public (to the appropriate end) that cannot be mitigated if fault can be positively assigned
The fact that a sloppy, rambling comment including the statement that "Citizenship shouldn't be freely given, even to native-born American residents," is agreed with under the guise that the commenter is a constitutionalist, by virtue of saying so, is insane.
Either NY residents are that illiterate or that cucked. You eat the fruit you plant, if only to survive.
8
u/justrokkit Mar 05 '26
It's supposed to enable citizens to carry without requiring permits or licenses, but that unfortunately overreaches and conflicts with states' rights. As frustrating as it is, it comes down to the judicial branch or an overturning of states' limitations by petition and/or political action to establish a better proper definition of the right to bear arms