Mark Cuban wants to change the Second Amendment to protect the rights of gun owners?

Somehow in 200 years the grabbers would manage to twist that language. Shall not be infringed seemed pretty straight forward and to the point too.

Gee, let's see a super rich guy who runs with folks that I find questionable at best... proposes a change to the second amendment...

Why am I not impressed?

Nope, I do not trust any of them.

The government knows what shall not be infringed means, they just don't care. Changing the wording will not help, leave the 2nd alone.

All that states is it can't be confiscated.

Doesn't mean they won't take it from you, and pay you a dime in exchange.

The word pandering come to mind.

Mmmmm, it said he backed Hillary in 2016. Hard to trust some one like that.

If he really believes it, lets see him put up some money for Pro-2A candidates. Or, better yet, run for office and use his name recognition to unseat an Anti.

And they he states:

“States have the right to manage the ownership—the purchase, ownership, and management—of guns owned and held within their borders,” says Cuban, a host of the television show “Shark Tank.”

“If you live in a state like Texas, if the law in Texas is open carry, so be it,” he adds. “If you live in Pennsylvania where they are more stringent and they don't want you to be able to have a gun other than in your own premises or under lock and key or you have to do a background check, then that's up to them to decide.”

Heck might as well change a whole bunch of other amendments while he's at it.

And there it is. He still wants to take guns, it's just that he wants to use a state-by-state approach.

Much easier.

Nothing new here. He and Justice Stevens are on the same page for changing the Second Amendment,

He wants the Second Amendment changed so Americans can own firearms without the risk the government will seize their weapons,

"One, every American citizen has the right to own a gun ... Two, the federal government will never be allowed to ever confiscate that gun from an individual.”

Only confiscate not ban. Read the rest of his comments below.

“States have the right to manage the ownership—the purchase, ownership, and management—of guns owned and held within their borders.”

“If you live in a state like Texas, if the law in Texas is open carry, so be it,” he adds. “If you live in Pennsylvania where they are more stringent and they don't want you to be able to have a gun other than in your own premises or under lock and key or you have to do a background check, then that's up to them to decide.”

He wants the Bill of Rights not to apply to the States. The States will be free to impose as strict of gun laws as the powers in charge want them to be. Heller gives the right to own a gun in the home but by changing the Second Amendment Heller will no longer apply. Without Heller a State could impose British type gun laws such as keeping the gun under lock and key at a gun club.

No thanks.

Also worth noting that the 2nd Amendment protects the right to both keep and carry/use ARMS, not just GUNS. So we are allowed to keep knives, bows and arrows, and even hand grenades etc (even though highly regulated under current law). Cubans idea could allow us to own guns but not knives, or own guns but not be able to shoot them at a range or at a home intruder.
Also, apparently he is ok with big time drug dealers and gun runners and human traffickers having guns, since many of the crimes that are prosecuted on the federal level would not be able to be enforced by the feds any longer.
Bet he'd still have a problem with TX saying that anyone can go down to Wal-Mart and buy a machine gun with cash and no background check...

The American Constitution is probably the most brilliantly written legislative document in history. It has survived the test of time & is as applicable today as it was the day it was written over 200 years ago. Anyone that claims they can "improve" the Constitution is more than likely delusional or a liar. Most are liars.

The Second Amendment already say what Mark Cuban says he wants to add to the wording.
The word of the Second Amendment are clear and concise already. If one does not get that
then better go back to school and learn how to read.

I dinno

Sounds kinda like exactly what we already have....

States already have the right to make laws that exceed fed.....

This proposal is not friendly to gun rights. It would give free rein to the states to ban whatever they wanted. The "right to have a gun" and the "no confiscation" pledge would apply only at the federal level. Notice also that he says a gun -- as in one gun (a shotgun or revolver only?). Somebody would have to be pretty naive to fall for this.

The issue I have with this is, if mark is able to change the constitution for the better, then grabbers also will be able to change it for the worse. And quickly the constitution will be insignificant as a firm law if it’s able to be altered like that

He's not offering anything to the gun owners. No federal level CCW. No federal level stand your ground. Nothing. Just cut every citizen down to one gun that each state can heavily regulate.

Basically, he's an anti-Trumper with Democrat leanings testing the waters to run as an independent to help take down Trump. He's buddies with Bloomberg, the guy bankrolling gun control in every state.

Deeds, not words. What has he done ?

On February 8, 2008, Cuban voiced his support for the draft Bloomberg movement attempting to convince New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg to run in the U.S. presidential election of 2008 on his blog. Cuban concluded a post lamenting the current state of U.S. politics: "Are you listening, Mayor Bloomberg? For less than the cost of opening a tent pole movie, you can change the status quo."[141] He eventually voted for Barack Obama in the 2008 election.[142]

Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Cuban

Another wealthy egomaniac who thinks because he's made a lot of money, he knows what's best for everybody else. Politicians, actors, and corporate wealth accumulators always seem to think we, in the immortal words of Leona Helmsley, "little people" should all mindlessly follow their brilliant philosophies.

Thanks, but no thanks.

StationOps said:

Just cut every citizen down to one gun that each state can heavily regulate.

Click to expand...

Depending on the state, it could be no gun.

This guy has obviously given no thought to the issue. He's just mouthing a few words to placate some unsophisticated middle-of-the-roaders on guns.

At least some of the candidates already in the race are putting forth gun proposals that can be parsed in detail. This isn't even that.