longeyes
member
What I've been saying is that they do, unequivocally, have the right. They're human beings, they do have the right to be armed just like everyone else. I'm saying as a matter of principle that all humans everywhere have the right to be armed.
Now just because they have that right doesn't mean we will or should recognize it in our country. They have the right, even and especially here, but whether we recognize it or not is a totally different question, and one that most of the people who are saying "no" to the question are considering as the only question.
And as far as need goes, an illegal immigrant with a family is much more likely to need a weapon than I am. He's the one living in the sh*tty neighborhoods making less than minimum wage.
And aside from that, an illegal immigrant, apparently, is not a felon, because what they've done is a misdemeanor. So they haven't exactly lost RKBA because to do that, you'd need to commit a felony. On the other hand, they don't fall under the protection of the constitution as far as RKBA goes, that I recognize.
Maybe your illegal immigrants in Wisconsin are exemplary wannabe-citizens; ours are not. We need protection from them, not the other way around, and I'm not really that concerned about illegal-on-illegal crime.
What's the point of saying they have the right to be armed but agreeing with me, apparently, that they don't have the right HERE? Okay, fine, let them go back to Mexico, Guatemala, and El Salvador and proclaim their right to be armed for all to hear. I'm sure that will fall on deaf ears but, as you aver, The Right Will Remain.