[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"Victor Davis Hanson to Newsmax: Kirk Slaying Crosses Rubicon"

Rest In Peace Charlie Kirk

Charlotte train murder: Graphic video captures random fatal stabbing of young Ukrainian refugee

Berlin in July 1945 - Probably the best restored film material you'll watch from that time!

Ok this is Funny

Walking Through 1980s Los Angeles: The City That Reinvented Cool

THE ZOMBIES OF AMERICA

THE OLDEST PHOTOS OF NEW YORK YOU'VE NEVER SEEN

John Rich – Calling Out P. Diddy, TVA Scandal, and Joel Osteen | SRS #232

Capablanca Teaches Us The ONLY Chess Opening You'll Ever Need

"How Bruce Springsteen Fooled America"

How ancient Rome was excavated in Italy in the 1920s. Unique rare videos and photos.

Reagan JOKE On The Homeless

The Deleted Wisdom (1776 Report)

Sicko Transfaggots video

The Englund Gambit Checkmate

20 Minutes Of Black DC Residents Supporting Trump's Federal Takeover!

"Virginia Public Schools Deserve This Reckoning"

"'Pack the Bags, We're Going on a Guilt Trip'—the Secret to the Democrats' Success"

"Washington, D.C., Is a Disgrace"

"Trump Orders New 'Highly Accurate' Census Excluding Illegals"

what a freakin' insane asylum

Sorry, CNN, We're Not Going to Stop Talking About the Russian Collusion Hoax

"No Autopsy Can Restore the Democratic Party’s Viability"

RIP Ozzy

"Trump floats 'restriction' for Commanders if they fail to ditch nickname in favor of Redskins return"

"Virginia Governor’s Race Heats Up As Republican Winsome Sears Does a Hard Reboot of Her Campaign"

"We Hate Communism!!"

"Mamdani and the Democratic Schism"

"The 2nd Impeachment: Trump’s Popularity Still Scares Them to Death"

"President Badass"

"Jasmine Crockett's Train Wreck Interview Was a Disaster"

"How Israel Used Spies, Smuggled Drones and AI to Stun and Hobble Iran"

There hasn’T been ... a single updaTe To This siTe --- since I joined.

"This Is Not What Authoritarianism Looks Like"

America Erupts… ICE Raids Takeover The Streets

AC/DC- Riff Raff + Go Down [VH1 Uncut, July 5, 1996]

Why is Peter Schiff calling Bitcoin a ‘giant cult’ and how does this impact market sentiment?

Esso Your Butt Buddy Horseshit jacks off to that shit

"The Addled Activist Mind"

"Don’t Stop with Harvard"

"Does the Biden Cover-Up Have Two Layers?"

"Pete Rose, 'Shoeless' Joe Reinstated by MLB, Eligible for HOF"

"'Major Breakthrough': Here Are the Details on the China Trade Deal"

Freepers Still Love war

Parody ... Jump / Trump --- van Halen jump

"The Democrat Meltdown Continues"

"Yes, We Need Deportations Without Due Process"

"Trump's Tariff Play Smart, Strategic, Working"

"Leftists Make Desperate Attempt to Discredit Photo of Abrego Garcia's MS-13 Tattoos. Here Are Receipts"


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

U.S. Constitution
See other U.S. Constitution Articles

Title: nolu chan contends an amendment to repeal the 2nd Amdt could be passed
Source: LF
URL Source: [None]
Published: Jul 9, 2015
Author: tpaine
Post Date: 2015-07-09 10:39:45 by tpaine
Keywords: None
Views: 91491
Comments: 255

The Congress proposes, and three-fourths of the states ratify the following amendment

AMENDMENT 28.

Section 1. The second article of amendment is hereby repealed.

Section 2. The individual right to keep and bear, buy, make, and use arms is limited to .22 caliber handguns only.

Section 3. All non-conforming guns must be surrendered to government authorities or destroyed within 30 days of ratification of this amendment.

Section 4. The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


Poster Comment: During a discussion with Nolu Chan, he asserted that an amendment repealing the 2nd could be ratified, and become a valid part of our Constitution. I contend such an amendment would be unconstitutional. Comments?

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 171.

#9. To: tpaine, nolu chan (#0)

During a discussion with Nolu Chan, he asserted that an amendment repealing the 2nd could be ratified, and become a valid part of our Constitution.

I contend such an amendment would be unconstitutional. Comments?

Yes, I have a comment (or two.)

Chan is only the bearer of bad (obvious) news. Don't kill the messenger.

"Unconstitutional" is now in the eye of the beholder of nine justices of SCOTUS.

We now have a "living breathing" Constitution. Just five tyrants of SCOTUS have already interpreted the Founders intent any way they want (emotionally), and changed federal law (without Congressional or State consent.)

What exactly would stop SCOTUS from repealing the 2A? Congress?? "Public outrage? HA! Precedence has been set.

Paine, I admire your commitment to the Fairy Tale that is the "US Constitution," but recent Presidents have ignored it; Congress has ignored it; And SCOTUS ignores it....In other words: "It's dead, Jim." that SCOTUS

Liberator  posted on  2015-07-09   12:57:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#87. To: Liberator, tpaine (#9)

Chan is only the bearer of bad (obvious) news. Don't kill the messenger.

He asked, "Does this mean you would contend that an amendment could be passed that prohibited our inalienable rights to buy, make, or use guns?" [emphasis added]

I replied with an example of such an Amendment and asked how it could be struck down.

I did not advocate for such an Amendment, but only observed that the people, as the sovereigns, have the power to do it. I would advocate for an amendment strengthening the RKBA and 2nd Amdt.

What would prevent an amendment taking away the RKBA today would be the requirement of getting 38 states to ratify it.

nolu chan  posted on  2015-07-09   22:03:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#94. To: nolu chan (#87)

I asked, "Does this mean you would contend that an amendment could be passed that prohibited our inalienable rights to buy, make, or use guns?" [emphasis added]

I replied with an example of such an Amendment and asked how it could be struck down. ---- I did not advocate for such an Amendment, but only observed that the people, as the sovereigns, have the power to do it.

And I read your example, and observed that it seemed you advocated the power of the people to pass such an unconstitutional act..

I would advocate for an amendment strengthening the RKBA and 2nd Amdt. -- What would prevent an amendment taking away the RKBA today would be the requirement of getting 38 states to ratify it.

It's unfortunate you didn't revise your comments over on the other thread, isn't it..

tpaine  posted on  2015-07-09   22:19:56 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#98. To: tpaine (#94)

It's unfortunate you didn't revise your comments over on the other thread, isn't it..

No. It led you to make an ass of yourself.

nolu chan  posted on  2015-07-09   22:53:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#101. To: nolu chan (#98)

It's unfortunate you didn't revise your comments over on the other thread, isn't it..

No. It led you to make an ass of yourself.

Sigh, another silly, uncalled for pejorative flame.. -- Very unprofessional for a guy trying to pass himself off as one..

tpaine  posted on  2015-07-09   23:01:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#109. To: tpaine (#101)

It's unfortunate you didn't revise your comments over on the other thread, isn't it..

Of course, I have no need to revise my comments. You asked "Does this mean you would contend that an amendment could be passed that prohibited our inalienable rights to buy, make, or use guns? " I correctly affirmed that such an amendment could be passed. I answered the question you asked.

Your arguments, if tried in court, would result in Rule 11 sanctions.

"There is no room for a pure heart, empty head defense under Rule 11." First Nat. Bank and Trust Co. of Vinita v. Kissee (1993), 1993 OK 96, 859 P.2d 502

Does Obama enjoy the power you espouse to ignore the Court and the laws? Does his interpretation of the Constitution and the laws supplant that of the Court for the Executive branch?

Can Barack Obama lawfully deem that he is not required to comply with the immigration laws and can permit open borders, and take no action on illegal immigration?

Can Obama lawfully deem 12-million illegal aliens to be citizens?

Can Obama lawfully deem he can authorize the naturalization of an illegal alien?

nolu chan  posted on  2015-07-10   2:16:24 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#117. To: nolu chan, gatlin, Y'ALL (#109)

I asked, "Does this mean you would contend that an amendment could be passed that prohibited our inalienable rights to buy, make, or use guns?"

I replied with an example of such an Amendment and asked how it could be struck down. ---- I did not advocate for such an Amendment, but only observed that the people, as the sovereigns, have the power to do it.

And I read your example, and observed that it seemed you advocated the power of the people to pass such an unconstitutional act..

I would advocate for an amendment strengthening the RKBA and 2nd Amdt. -- What would prevent an amendment taking away the RKBA today would be the requirement of getting 38 states to ratify it.

It's unfortunate you didn't revise your comments over on the other thread, isn't it..

Of course, I have no need to revise my comments. You asked "Does this mean you would contend that an amendment could be passed that prohibited our inalienable rights to buy, make, or use guns? " I correctly affirmed that such an amendment could be passed. I answered the question you asked.

You affirmed such a power, and provided an example of how such an amendment could be worded. You did not indicate that you would not advocate the power to so amend. It's unfortunate you didn't post that revision.

Your arguments, if tried in court, would result in Rule 11 sanctions. --- "There is no room for a pure heart, empty head defense under Rule 11." First Nat. Bank and Trust Co. of Vinita v. Kissee (1993), 1993 OK 96, 859 P.2d 502>>

Well, we're not in court, but I do have a pure heart. As for empty heads, I suggest you address gatlin, our empty head expert..

tpaine  posted on  2015-07-10   11:41:56 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#119. To: tpaine, nolu chan, ALL (#117) (Edited)

I suggest you address gatlin, our empty head expert..

No need to address this, chan.

It is quite obvious that everyone showed tpaine to be wrong.

And tpaine will never man up to admit he was wrong.

It is now quite evident that tpaine is no Constitutional expert.

He is what he is....just an opinionated, bullheaded idiot.

Gatlin  posted on  2015-07-10   12:51:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#120. To: Gatlin, Nolu Chan, Y'ALL (#119)

It is now quite evident that tpaine is no Constitutional expert.

He is what he is..

Yep, I'm a retired building contractor, who has never claimed to be a constitutional expert, -- but it's an easy to read document, and our common sense tell us that it did NOT give a moral super majority the power to amend away our inalienable rights, outlined in the Bill of Rights.

tpaine  posted on  2015-07-10   14:02:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#121. To: tpaine, Gatlin, Nolu Chan (#120)

but it's an easy to read document, and our common sense tell us that it did NOT give a moral super majority the power to amend away our inalienable rights, outlined in the Bill of Rights.

It most certainly did.

SOSO  posted on  2015-07-10   14:09:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#123. To: SOSO, gatlin, nolu chan, Y'ALL (#121)

--- it's an easy to read document, and our common sense tell us that it did NOT give a moralistic super majority the power to amend away our inalienable rights, as outlined in the Bill of Rights.

It most certainly did. --- SOSO

Thanks for your fiat opinion. - You've made big brownie points with gatlin and chan.

tpaine  posted on  2015-07-10   14:26:55 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#125. To: tpaine, gatlin, nolu chan, Y'ALL (#123)

You've made big brownie points with gatlin and chan.

Don't care. You may chose to continue to live in your fantasy world but most of us do understand what the Constitution means and fully understand that even the Bill of Rights can be modified or nullified if there are enough votes for that to happen. And there is not thing one that SOCTUS can do about it.

SOSO  posted on  2015-07-10   15:26:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#126. To: SOSO, gatlin, nolu chan, Y'ALL (#125)

--- most of us do understand what the Constitution means and fully understand that even the Bill of Rights can be modified or nullified if there are enough votes for that to happen.

Why do 'most' of you WANT to give that power to a moralistic super majority, -- like the tea-totaling idiots that prohibited booze?

To date, no one on this forum, LP, or FR, has ever been able to explain why such majority rule would be desirable.

And I'd bet you can't either...

tpaine  posted on  2015-07-10   15:56:54 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#129. To: tpaine (#126)

Why do 'most' of you WANT to give that power to a moralistic super majority, -- like the tea-totaling idiots that prohibited booze?

To date, no one on this forum, LP, or FR, has ever been able to explain why such majority rule would be desirable.

I don't think some folks understand that they shouldn't just be accepting what is going on, that they should be fighting it instead.

Oh wait never mind PC has taken over and they just want to "get along" so some dumbasses will like them. "SPIT"!!!

CZ82  posted on  2015-07-10   17:38:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#134. To: CZ82, gatlin, grandisland, y'all (#129)

Why do 'most' of you WANT to give that power to a moralistic super majority, -- like the tea-totaling idiots that prohibited booze?

To date, no one on this forum, LP, or FR, has ever been able to explain why such majority rule would be desirable. (In a Constitutional sense)

I don't think some folks understand that they shouldn't just be accepting what is going on, that they should be fighting it instead.

And typically, like gatlin and grandisland, they quit when challenged. - Pitiful little people..

tpaine  posted on  2015-07-10   18:33:41 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#136. To: tpaine, CZ82 (#134)

I don't think

I've noted over the months I've been lurking that there are quite a few of you who too often don't.

Kluane  posted on  2015-07-10   19:02:11 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#165. To: Kluane, aka yu-klown, tpaine, CZ82, Deckard (#136)

(I don't think)

I've noted over the months I've been lurking that there are quite a few of you who too often don't.

Don't you mean...years, yu-klown? Are you out of rehab already?

Your boring style is unmistakable. The partial excerpt...the insult -- trademark yu-klown. I guess you ditched the old-new scriptural citing :-(

Kluane National Park and Reserve are two units of Canada's national park system, located in the extreme southwestern corner of Yukon, Canada.

Lol...

Liberator  posted on  2015-07-11   15:28:47 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#171. To: Liberator (#165)

is unmistakable.

Yea he's as unmistakeable as a dose of the screaming schitts.

CZ82  posted on  2015-07-11   16:41:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 171.

        There are no replies to Comment # 171.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 171.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com