Are you sure you want to delete this post?
Chet Ruminski Wrote: If as much scrutiny and responsibility and interpretation for the betterment and safety of life was applied to the 1st amendment as the 2nd amendment we wouldn't even be talking about the 2nd amendment.
There's been plenty of scrutiny and interpretation of the 1st Amendment. There have been hundreds of Supreme Court rulings regarding how the 1st Amendment is supposed to be interpreted. The most memorable recent interpretation of the 1st Amendment by the Supreme Court was in Citizens United vs FEC. Would you say that case received a lot of scrutiny?
And I have a hard time understanding how you believe the 2nd Amendment faces as much scrutiny as the 1st. Second Amendment cases that reached their way to the Supreme Court are a minuscule fraction of 1st Amendment cases. We're talking 100:1 here.
Chet Ruminski Wrote: The right wing talk stars have abused the 1st amendment so much that all we have is hate and discontent. Totally destroying "united we stand" it is now every man for himself.
It is their right to abuse the 1st Amendment as much as they want. That is why we have the 1st Amendment. It's called "freedom of speech" and not "freedom from speech" for a reason.
Now, if someone owns a business and wants to discriminate against a certain sect of the population then the Constitution prevents them from doing so because their business is in the public sphere. Discrimination is not speech.
"United we stand" is a great saying, but this country has never been united. Different people have always had different opinions. Hell--we fought a Civil War not that long ago for Christ's sake.
Chet Ruminski Wrote: Why does the 1st amendment get a free ride from the same people that would abolish the 2nd. Some people use the 1st to criticize and destroy our way of living while totally opposite viewpoint people defend the right of the abusers to speak.
What does this even mean? I've never come across any rational person who has called for the 2nd Amendment to be abolished, but it is still their 1st Amendment right to say it if that's what they believe.
Gun control advocates, myself included, tend to want to make it harder for someone to get their hands on weapons of war. If you want to go hunting. Great. Have fun shooting that deer with your rifle. But if you want to go shoot up a school full of elementary school children then you shouldn't be able to go to a gun store and buy an arsenal of weapons.
Most gun control advocates also want guns to move into the 21st Century. We have the technology, now, to disable guns when they are in the public sphere. It's difficult for me to understand why some people find that controversial.