Quantcast

Is there any argument valid enough to change the second amendment?

Bali 2013/01/21 07:14:34
You!
Add Photos & Videos
HELL NO!!!!
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • cddjmikey 2013/01/25 05:10:56
    Hell NO!!!!!!!!!
    cddjmikey
    +1
    Couldn't have said it better if I tried !!
  • ghostrider 2013/01/23 22:42:28
    Hell NO!!!!!!!!!
    ghostrider
    There really is no need to change it ... but, just as other provisions of the document, apply it in terms of 'today's' culture, mores and majority viewpoint(s).
  • monkeyking908 2013/01/22 21:02:24
    Well, umm, if our above the law politicians think so then yes.
    monkeyking908
    first politicians are morons and going at this the wrong way. second when you can get a gun capable of killing large groups of people in seconds in the same day with out background cheeks then yes we need gun laws. time to use that elastic clause
  • Dave**G... monkeyk... 2013/01/22 21:16:30
  • monkeyk... Dave**G... 2013/01/22 21:27:15
    monkeyking908
    from what i have read they can change it as long as they dont get rid of it or restrict it to the point where criminal(i cant think of the word that goes here if you know it please tell me it will help me in the future) but just like the first amendment there needs to be limits on what people can own and who can own them(such as the mentally ill or violent drunks) or do you think having bazookas in every house hold is a good idea
  • cddjmikey monkeyk... 2013/01/25 05:13:01
    cddjmikey
    +1
    HELL YEAH, I WANT A BAZOOKA !!
  • Bali monkeyk... 2013/01/26 05:29:03
    Bali
    wrong. any gun is capable of killing large groups in minutes, and any gun pointed at someone is an "assault weapon"
  • monkeyk... Bali 2013/01/26 16:24:37
    monkeyking908
    sorry im not arguing with trolls for a while have fun with your beliefs
  • Bali monkeyk... 2013/01/28 05:22:22
    Bali
    you just can't fix stupid, stupid
  • eyeballz 2013/01/22 16:15:54
    Hell NO!!!!!!!!!
    eyeballz
    +1
    In reality, the world would be a better place if there were no guns on the planet , but that is not going to happen anytime soon ! If guns were banned tomorrow, and all the good, honest and law abiding citizens turned their guns in , the bad guys would still have guns ,
    because they don't obey any laws , it would become open season on unarmed citizens . Just in case anyone doesn't realize it, criminals won't turn in the guns they have, they don't obey the laws .
  • monkeyk... eyeballz 2013/01/22 21:03:23
    monkeyking908
    then how come the criminals in the UK and Japan dont have guns?
  • roxie 2013/01/22 07:47:07
    Well, umm, if our above the law politicians think so then yes.
    roxie
    +1
    Who Said Change!
    Improvement and Commen Sense are at issue!
  • James 2013/01/22 04:14:01
    Hell NO!!!!!!!!!
    James
    +1
    We have 2 Supreme Court rulings that protect the 2nd Amendment the way it is.
  • MichaelDillon 2013/01/22 02:08:39
    Hell NO!!!!!!!!!
    MichaelDillon
    No.
  • rusty shackelferd 2013/01/21 23:12:48
  • whitewulf--the unruly mobster 2013/01/21 20:17:31
  • Technotrucker_exposingthetruth 2013/01/21 19:33:31
    Hell NO!!!!!!!!!
    Technotrucker_exposingthetruth
    +1
    No interpretation needed, just as it is written. No size, no purpose, no limit is implied.
  • monkeyk... Technot... 2013/01/22 21:04:49
    monkeyking908
    +1
    these was back when it took like 5 min to reload a gun besides the founding fathers put in the elastic clause so things could change
  • Technot... monkeyk... 2013/01/22 21:09:28
  • monkeyk... Technot... 2013/01/22 21:18:32
    monkeyking908
    omg are you for real every one learns about the Elastic clause when they are in high school if not middle
    http://www.socialstudieshelp....
  • Technot... monkeyk... 2013/01/23 01:45:12 (edited)
    Technotrucker_exposingthetruth
    The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its consent, shall be deprived of it's equal suffrage in the Senate.

    The above is directly from the link you supplied.

    That means without a Constitutional Convention and a 2/3 states majority, the Constitution remains as is. Your clause is not in writing. The rules are quite clear. You can interpret it anyway you wish. The writing is quite clear. Perhaps you are the one that needs to retake your social studies class. Executive orders cannot amend the Constitution.
  • monkeyk... Technot... 2013/01/23 12:30:57
    monkeyking908
    what is your point im just saying it can be changed did not say it was easy to change
  • Bali Technot... 2013/01/23 12:05:05
    Bali
    +1
    can i get an AMEN
  • Cn2012 2013/01/21 18:13:12
    Hell NO!!!!!!!!!
    Cn2012
    +2
    Not the 2nd or the 1st or any of them. Just no.
  • Hell NO!!!!!!!!!
    STEELANGEL 凸 Metal Up 凸
    +2
    I think not.
  • Dave**Gay for Girls** 2013/01/21 17:52:58
  • monkeyk... Dave**G... 2013/01/22 21:05:38
    monkeyking908
    it has been changed with use of the elastic clause that the founding fathers put in
  • Amasaman 2013/01/21 17:48:42
    Hell NO!!!!!!!!!
    Amasaman
    +1
    No, but apparently Reid has one not to make any changes to it, and that is to keep Democrats in office.
    http://www.politico.com/blogs...
  • Karlheinz 2013/01/21 17:21:00
    Hell NO!!!!!!!!!
    Karlheinz
    no
  • bob 2013/01/21 16:56:18
    Hell NO!!!!!!!!!
    bob
    +1
    If any part of the Constitution is allowed to be Subverted then the Whole Document has been made meaningless these are Guaranteed rights once anyone of them is deemed no longer valid then the Powers that be can deem any other right Given us by the Constitution invalid as they see fit.
  • monkeyk... bob 2013/01/22 21:06:31
    monkeyking908
    but if it is not meant to be changed why is there the elastic clause
  • 666_Maggots~I'm a female! 2013/01/21 16:28:10
    Hell NO!!!!!!!!!
    666_Maggots~I'm a female!
    +4
    Only a fool would think so.
  • ShadowKat 2013/01/21 16:20:59
    Hell NO!!!!!!!!!
    ShadowKat
    +2
    No one is EVER gonna take my guns. You try, you might just end up with a head full-o-lead.
  • Teri- Oregon 2013/01/21 16:00:53
    Hell NO!!!!!!!!!
    Teri- Oregon
    +4
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    A message to all military and police personnel

    Please watch this.....
    The American people want to know your answer
    Will you imprison your own people?
    Will you march on your own people?
    Will you go against your oath that you took when you joined?
    The American people are looking at you
    The American people are watching!
  • addie 2013/01/21 15:44:38
    Hell NO!!!!!!!!!
    addie
    +1
    That we should not have an armed militia??
  • User Deactivated 2013/01/21 15:36:53
    Hell NO!!!!!!!!!
    User Deactivated
    +2
    Unless it is to clarify that the second amendment is meant to allow us to protect us from our own government.
  • sneekyfoot 2013/01/21 13:34:43
    Hell NO!!!!!!!!!
    sneekyfoot
    +1
    Too many armed people to put up with that BS
  • michael 2013/01/21 11:36:45
    Well, umm, if our above the law politicians think so then yes.
    michael
    +1
    Im sure there is.I live in a Republic and every couple of years or so we change amendments to allow for new ideas and opinion changes from our people ,No changes can be made to our Constitution without a referendum ,whereby,the electorate have the final say and NOT the politicians .
  • monkeyk... michael 2013/01/22 21:10:46
    monkeyking908
    wow a person who knows the law
  • Orsino 2013/01/21 10:57:09
    Well, umm, if our above the law politicians think so then yes.
    Orsino
    I can think of 20 quite compelling reasons

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/09/03 02:26:32

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals