Second Amendment rights of Americans

[Lissauer]

I found this quote to be very thought provoking.

"Do you believe the Second Amendment rights of Americans should depend on where they happen to live? If you do, which other individual rights enshrined in the constitution do you believe are limited by municipal borders?"
--Jim Shepherd--

[Dr Rockso]

Yeah, it's freaking crazy that someone could be a perfectly legal gun-owner in Reno, but move them and their property a few miles west and they could become serious felons. I can't think of any other area of law where that sort of thing happens.

[IceMan711]

Well, there are plenty of laws that vary from state to state, as such is the way that Federalism has granted the individual states law making powers as well as the federal government.

::However::

I agree 100% that the right to bear arms is an essential and fundamental right, and it is clearly unconstitutional to be compromised at the state level.

Luckily it seems the tables are turning in the constitutions favor as of late.

[bohoki]

yea if we apply the second as we apply the first

every gun should be legal it should only be illegal to use them to harm

like the first amendment it doesnt ban high capacity automated printing presses
but its illegal to print liable and slander

but as with shooting in self defense the best defence to slanderous and liableous speach is if it is truth

you are allowed to have a machine capable of printing money the crime is priniting counterfeit

the use should be controlled not the possesion
but i know i am preaching to the choir

anybody know of any other analogous first amendment and second amendment paralells that can be made

like yelling fire in a crowded theater could harm people

as would firing into a crowded theater

[dfletcher]

An interesting anology when considering the 1st Amendment, the 5th, the 4th and so on. Who would accept that The New York Times could have certain minor restrictions in New York and greater restrictions if they moved to Alabama or Vermont or CA?

Or to take a page from Bloomberg's playbook, that the Times can operate legally in NY, but be sued by VA because VA doesn't like what the Times prints?

Or that CA could compel you to be a witness against yourself, but MA may not? And so on - but this is acceptable regarding the 2nd? Even with incorporation, aren't the most optimistic here resigned to the fact that CA, MA & NY will be more restrictive than AK, NV and others?

I think it's fairly obvious that when you remove a person's visceral dislike for guns, or that guns are identified with certain groups they dislike, the anti - gun group's reasons for gun control are intellectually incomplete.