It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Senate adjourned Thursday, without quite mustering enough votes (but that is due at least in part to the absence of some anti-gun senators), and will apparently wait until Tuesday (when the anti-gunners return) to try again.
The idea is to take a bill that has already passed in the House, gut it with an amendment so that it (for example) instead of making Illinois' nuclear power plants safer, it sends people to prison for owning an 11-round magazine.
Now, the House is trying the reverse method. With rabidly anti-gun Representative Edward Acevedo (Chicago Democrat, of course) gutting SB 2899 with House Amendment #1, banning so-called "assault weapons," "high-capacity" magazines, and .50 caliber firearms and ammunition.
The House Judiciary 1 Committee will hold a hearing at 2 PM (Central Time) Sunday, to decide on whether or not the amendment goes on to be voted on by the entire House.
Originally posted by lolita64
Try to change it the lawful wayedit on 6-1-2013 by lolita64 because: (no reason given)
That's exactly the lawful way. To propose bills in the state House and Senate.
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
I call them traitors because that's what they are. Don't like the constitution? Try to change it the lawful way or move to a country where the constitution suits you more, a country in Europe or wherever.
Originally posted by lolita64
reply to post by DaTroof
That's exactly the lawful way. To propose bills in the state House and Senate.
It's not lawful.
Read the second amendment again.
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Meaning : Don't touch it! AT ALL.
Any ``gun control law`` is an infringment, therefore UNCONSTITUTIONAL therefore, NOT LAWFUL.
The only lawful way is to amend the constitution to remove the second amendment. Anything else is unlawful and unconstitutional.
And don't tell me... but but but... back in the founders day, people had CANNONS and armed ships, all legal and in private hands.edit on 6-1-2013 by lolita64 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by DaTroof
You are quite correct in that the US Constitution can be changed.
Slavery, women's voting rights, presidential term limits are just a few examples of how a maturing country adapts and grows.
The 2nd Amendment is no exception.
Like many issues, however, it'll become very polarized. One side will want freedom, the other side will embrace cowardice and hide behind the coat-tails of the government.
That issue will polarize the nation.
Living documents are susceptible to change, and if the Legislative branch wants to change it, the Supreme Court has a say, as does the President/Governor. The Constitution was written for land-owning white men. That population no longer reflects the average American, and is a shrinking minority.
Originally posted by beezzer
One side will want freedom, the other side will embrace cowardice and hide behind the coat-tails of the government.
Originally posted by kaylaluv
Originally posted by beezzer
One side will want freedom, the other side will embrace cowardice and hide behind the coat-tails of the government.
Hiding behind a big gun can be seen as cowardice too.
Hiding behind a big gun can be seen as cowardice too.