Quote:
Originally Posted by Number 10 GI
A driver's license is a privilege, not a right guaranteed under the constitution. The 2d Amendment bestows a right for all citizens to keep and bear arms. Jim Crow laws were held unconstitutional and that is what you are advocating, requiring a test to exercise a constitutional right.
|
Actually no, it bestows those rights on a well-regulated Militia.
Are you a member of the Militia? No? Then it's not a "right," for you. Are you wanting to be a member of the Militia? Then great. You pass. If you want to possess a firearm but are not willing to be a member of a well-regulated Militia, willing and able and prepared to fight against a tyrannical government, then you are asking for a privilege and not a constitutional right.
So prove that you a) know the law, b) can see your target with or without glasses. c) know how to use the weapon properly.
Are you saying you shouldn't have to prove any of those three things? If that's the case, let's just arm every man, woman, and child - if they're capable of holding a weapon, then they get to have one. Don't bother teaching them how to use it - because knowing how isn't required by the Constitution. Of course - ammunition is also not a Constitutional right. They can have firearms - but nowhere in the Constitution does it say those firearms can be loaded.
You want to pick nits? I can pick them all day.
Edited because I had a brain-poop and swapped out "well-armed" with what should've been "well-regulated." And by regulated - they meant "controls." It meant that even the constitution agrees that there should be some CONTROLS over how and who and under what circumstances a person gets to enjoy that right to bear arms.