I gave you fair warning. Here and elsewhere.

Look up my OP on INFRINGE, it doesn't mean what you think it means.

 

I already know what it means. I'm not going to listen to your biased leftist definitions of words that have been understood for centuries.

act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on.
"his legal rights were being infringed"

 

in terms of the second amendment combined with the tenth amendment-it means NO GOVERNMENT actions at all

- - - Updated - - -

I have seen some hard core banners claim that "shall not be infringed" was actually designed to allow "infringements"

 

It seems that they will say anything. I wonder if they feel the same about any other rights?

 

they tend to despise rights they see as mainly being exercised by conservatives or libertarians

not all left-wingers are gun banners but almost every single gun banner is a left-winger

 

Not quite anything. The truth, MAYBE.

to wrongly limit or restrict (something, such as another person's rights)


transitive verb

2
1
: to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another <infringe a patent>

: to wrongly limit or restrict (something, such as another person's rights)

Full Definition of infringe


infringed

infringing

1
transitive verb

2
1
: to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another <infringe a patent>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/infringe

All your MEMEs are belong to me.

 

its not even disputed that the founders were not intent on creating a NEW right with the second but rather merely RECOGNIZING one that already existed. SO tell me, what was the right the founders thought they were merely recognizing with the second amendment?

 

The "MERELY recognizing one that came from the CREATOR"ish, is poetic license {rhetorical device}. Putting the right that Gov would soon create, outside of the grubby hands of authoritarians, and the power hungry. If the rights that were creator endowed, were from GOD, then why weren't they included on the ten commandments? At what exact moment did the creator see fit to endow man?

 

The right to self defense is a "natural" right. Just as wild animals who are prey use their horns or anything they can to defend themselves against predators.

- - - Updated - - -

Exactly, and your trying to limit law abiding citizen's rights is an infringement.

 

that's avoidance and a non answer. what was the scope of the right the founders sought to recognize with the second?

 

They keep claiming that they are concerned about death, but I"m not buying it. They ignore other causes of death, like backyard pools which are not even a right. There is no constitutional guarantee that we all get a pool in our backyard.

 

" or anything they can to defend themselves against predators."

Why is there a line drawn on weaponry? If shall not infringe means what YOU think it does?

You don't get a LARS rocket. WHY?

 

Now you are above my pay grade.

 

Because arms had a particular meaning in the constitution. It meant side arms. You really need to read the federalist papers. Then maybe you would understand your RIGHTS better. This is why I say that these things need to be taught in school. Silly children don't even understand their own rights.

 

So we are stuck with muskets? Or we advance our taste in death machines?

 

No we are allowed to have side arms. If you are confused by that term, then I suggest you look it up in your dictionary, or perhaps another dictionary since yours seems to give you the wrong definitions. Lol

 

Good, we have hit paydirt.

A side arm[1] or sidearm[2][3] is a weapon, usually a handgun but sometimes a dagger, knife or other mêlée weapon, which is worn on the body in a holster or sheath (in the case of a knife or dagger) to permit immediate access and use.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Side_arm
http://previewcf.turbosquid.com/Pre...2a75ed3-70fe-4ede-acc1-d080977ddc88Larger.jpg
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, you have unconstitutionally been denied some melee weapons. And I don't know about you, but most assault rifles are not in a holster, in a sheath.

Who do I sue about not allowing me a switchblade?

 

That doesn't matter. It means small arms. I think you should do some educating of yourself before you continue to look foolish on these threads. Not only do you know nothing about guns or the people who own them legally, but you don't even know anything about our Constitution.

 

Doesn't matter? Rifles weren't mentioned, and knives were? Doesn't matter? I think you guys are seeing clearly for the first time, and you don't like the view.

With my defining of terms, we have debunked all your claims.

All your MEMES are belong to ME!

 

Like I told you, read the federalist papers. Have you even read the Constitution ever? Do you understand it and understand why our rights are important? I honestly don't think you do. All you do here is spew left wing (lackey) talking points. A disgusting thing. Just disgusting.

 

You can wriggle, but you know I am correct. I am spewing MIRRIAM WEBSTER. Your arguments have painted you into a blind alley.

But remember, I am pro second, pro concealed.

 

No you are not-the second amendment was designed to prevent the federal government from acting in an area it was never given any authority to act in

 

I am not sure I disagree with that, can you cite?

 

Since you don't understand your own rights, I would say that you can't even paint at a first grade level. Lol.

 

what part of Article One Section 8 contains even the slightest whiff of a federal gun control power?