Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Mexico's "2nd Amendment"

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Yoda, Aug 14, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Yoda

    Yoda Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Messages:
    602
    Location:
    Florida, bouncing between Hurlburt Fld and MacDill
    Mexico (the "old" one, not out "new" one), provides an excellent example of how "common sense" gun laws can completely invalidate a constitutional guarantee. Here's what the 1917 Mexican Constitution says:

    "Article 10. The inhabitants of the United Mexican States are entitled to have arms of any kind in their possession for their protection and legitimate defense, except such as are expressly forbidden by law, or which the nation may reserve for the exclusive use of the army, navy, or national guard; but they may not carry arms within inhabited places without complying with police regulations."

    Sounds like every common citizen can pretty much own whatever they think they need, with the only restrictions being "police regulations" and a general prohibition against private ownership of guns reserved for the exclusive use of the military... oh, yes, and those "common sense" prohibitions contained in the catch phrase, "...expressly forbidden by law...".

    It is the natural, universal tendancy of government to erode the rights of the people.

    - - - Yoda

    When the government outlaws guns, only the government will have guns. Do you trust the government?

    =======================
     
  2. luft97

    luft97 Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    30
    Location:
    South East Texas
    Hey if we are not careful we could end up with something similar here. :(
     
  3. Anotherguy

    Anotherguy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2007
    Messages:
    152
    It's already here in certain states.
    From Article 1 of the Bill of Rights of Illinois:

    SECTION 22. RIGHT TO ARMS

    Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)

    (Emphasis mine)
     
  4. Picard

    Picard Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    Messages:
    974
    Location:
    Illinois
    Now why'd you have to remind me about how crummy my home state is. :barf:
     
  5. Alexey931

    Alexey931 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Messages:
    202
    Location:
    St.-Petersburg, Russia
    The so called "Brezhnev Constitution" of 1977 (USSR) made the same provision concerning the right of association: "unless contrary to the public good", of something like that. Curiously, the Stalin Constitution of 1937 declared the freedom of speech, press and association unconditionally. FWIW.
     
  6. XDKingslayer

    XDKingslayer member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,811
    Location:
    Port Charlotte, Fl.
    They have bastardized the laws to fit their agenda just as our politicians have.

    While in print it looks like they can own anything they want except military weapons the last time I checked they couldn't own military CALIBERS.

    That means they couldn't own a 9mm XD or even a .45ACP 1911.

    Unless I'm completely way off base here, which has happened from time to time...
     
  7. The Lone Haranguer

    The Lone Haranguer Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,717
    Location:
    Johnson City, TN
    :rolleyes:

    When you make exceptions to a right, it is not a right.
     
  8. Soybomb

    Soybomb Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Messages:
    3,959
    I've always wondered a bit of the history behind that provision in the illinois constitution. Was it written to be as pointless as it is?
     
  9. tigre

    tigre Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    Messages:
    209
    Location:
    Tampa
    The part that starts with the word "except" pretty well invalidates the part that comes before it. The purpose of our Bill of Rights is to protect the rights of the people against encroachment by the government. So saying we have a right except in any case where the government decides we don't would be pointless. Mexico's "2nd Amendment" only gives them the rights that their current government allows them to have.
     
  10. 230RN
    • Contributing Member

    230RN Marines raising the left-leaning Pisa tower.

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Messages:
    6,632
    Location:
    Calirado
    The older I get, the more I think I'd prefer the handshake method of making agreements:

    "Hey, you can have any gun you want."

    "Okay, thanks."

    <shake hands>

    No more freakin' around with thisa word meaning thata and thata word meaning thisa and "but that was yesterday and today's today" crap.

    230RN said that.
     
  11. Rugerlvr

    Rugerlvr Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,145
    Location:
    Utah
    I think .38 Super is very popular in Mexico because the military don't use it. Anything bigger, and they do, and it's strictly illegal for citizens to own.
     
  12. crebralfix

    crebralfix member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,356
    This sentence very clearly states that it's not a right.

    Translation:

    You can have weapons, except for the ones we don't want you to have and you have to follow police regulation if you wish to carry weapons.

    Why in the world would anyone believe the Mexicans have a right to arms?
     
  13. Snapping Twig

    Snapping Twig Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
    Messages:
    655
    What the big print giveth, the small print taketh away.
     
  14. pappy

    pappy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2006
    Messages:
    131
    Location:
    Mentone, AL
    Anything left to interpretation of politicians WILL be mis-construed.
     
  15. ants

    ants Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2007
    Messages:
    3,710
    Just for clarification, the meaning of "police power" in a state constitution doesn't mean power given to the cops.

    Police Power stems from the 10th Amendment to the Constitution, which reserves to the states the rights and powers "not delegated to the United States" which include protection of the welfare, safety, health and even morals of the public. Police powers include licensing, inspection, zoning, safety regulations (which cover a lot of territory), quarantines, and working conditions as well as law enforcement. In short, police powers are the basis of a host of state regulatory statutes.

    This is the legal definition of Police Power from a law dictionary, I'm not smart enough to make it up myself.
     
  16. Larry E

    Larry E Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2005
    Messages:
    327
    Location:
    Billings, MT
    And the anti-gun people here figure that the only guns we might need are the ones in the possession of the police and military because civilians aren't qualified to or capable of using guns safely, sensibly, and for our own defense. Hunting is obviously not nice, so guns for hunting aren't needed either. :eek: :barf::barf:
     
  17. Nate C.

    Nate C. Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    408
    Location:
    Tejas
    On a tangent, but:

    Has anyone else noticed the recent flurry of mainstream broadcast media 'news' articles about "United States is source for Mexican crime guns;" or "Most illegal guns in Mexico originate in U.S."

    Can you even purchase a gun legally in Mexico? I am told it's a major hassle to go hunting down there with your own weapons.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page