"Do you have a carry permit I can check?"

[lostchild]

 

[reklawd]

View attachment 1569696

I not trolling. I'm new here and have a new found passion for firearms.

 

[crippen]

What’s PT?

 

[reklawd]

What’s PT?

Another online community.

 

[Don231s]

What’s PT?

Another online community.

PT means something else to some of us.

 

[linebacker]

 

[reklawd]

Ok, I just looked up Laufen and Varian. Got the references now.

Well I'm here and I don't do alt accounts. I'll see you guys around, thanks for everything.

 

[aFarewellToKings]

Do you consider yourself an avid constitutionalist? Or do you only care about the strict interpretation of #1 and #2?

This discussion was about the 2nd; I brought up the 1st as an example. Does that somehow mean I'm focused on those two only? No. In fact my example of the 1st was to imply those on the "other side" (of the 2nd "compromise") likely care about that one. Thus, the discussion is strictly about the 2nd. Nothing to do with my opinions on any other topic.

Additional amendments have nothing to do with a discussion of "re-interpreting" the text of the Constitution. They are changes to the text of the Constitution, as provided for by the Constitution. We can agree or disagree with them (as we can about any of the content of the Constitution), but the are now part of the text.

I don't consider Defamation, Libel, or yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater to be a restriction on the 1st amendment. They are simply the result of being responsible for your actions (or speech) and the consequences. Nothing prevents you from any of that "speech", thus you are "free" to say what you wish. But you can't use the Constitution to protect you from the consequences.
That is not equivalent to limiting the 2nd (or owning a SAM - with the growing issues with drones, a small SAM might be a good idea - joking if that's not obvious). The equivalent would be using the 2nd as a defence against a murder charge: "I have a right to keep and bear arms, therefore my shooting him is protected." Same thing - trying to avoid responsibility for you actions.

As a separate topic, yes I believe the same of the entire Constitution. I agree with you about the17th, and would add in the 16th. Get rid of those two (Senate represents the State governments, and Federal revenue is collected from the States) would go a long way to fixing many of the current problems. But it'll never happen; it would take a massive re-assumption of power by the States.

 

[coach482]

Damn, is there an echo in here?

You are an expert ventriloquist, Just like listening to Laufen. It gave me chills I tell ya! The Willies too!~

 

[Janedoedad]

From now on I will only deal with established members with positive feedback. I've done several deals with new members but never again. In this new world we live in you have to question everyones motives.

Without reading through 17 additional pages in the thread;

How do you propose people to get feedback and become 'established members'? Your feedback score was 0 once upon a time.