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

Should the new Iraq Gov have a 2nd Amendment?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Rembrandt, Mar 20, 2003.

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

    Rembrandt Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2003
    Messages:
    3,368
    ...It's only a matter of time before Iraq will have a new government. If you were in charge of laying the ground work for a Constitution would it include a "2nd Amemendment"? Remember how the new constitutions of Japan and Germany were set up after WWII by the allies?....
     
  2. Al Thompson

    Al Thompson Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    8,847
    Location:
    South Carolina
    If you believe in the one we have, it should appy to "all men".... Or all people....
     
  3. DeltaElite

    DeltaElite Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,339
    Location:
    Next to my Delta Gold Cup
    It absloutely should.
    The real question is will it?
     
  4. beckrodgers

    beckrodgers Guest

    Yes. It will whether it is written or not. Thanks
     
  5. MAKOwner

    MAKOwner Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    682
    First order of business in Afghanistan after the taliban was overthrown was to sieze personal weapons...
     
  6. Raymond VanDerLinden

    Raymond VanDerLinden Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    66
    Location:
    Southern Iowa
    Second Amendment

    Beck is right, Goverment don't grant Rights God Grants rights to all men. Goverments the wise ones at least don't violate those right, even if they don't enumerate them.

    How ever the NWO types say that for the peace and safety of the Sheeple, weapons should only be held by the Goverment.

    We know the the safety of the Sheeple means nothing to the Goverment only the safety and peace of the Goverment agents.
     
  7. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    I believe each member of Homo sapiens is born with the right to fight back against tyrants, criminals, and terrorists.

    If I were to write a constitution for Iraq, the right to keep and bear arms would be the first defined civil right; such a document would also include immediate, mandatory hanging for any crime committed with a firearm. Rights include responsibilities.
     
  8. WonderNine

    WonderNine member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    4,331
    Location:
    always offline!
    :rolleyes:
     
  9. larry_minn

    larry_minn Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    1,455
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Standing Wolf

    "If I were to write a constitution for Iraq, the right to keep and bear arms would be the first defined civil right; such a document would also include immediate, mandatory hanging for any crime committed with a firearm. Rights include responsibilities"

    So if driving a car and you speed while carrying a gun you get hung by neck until dead? How about person who sneaks in can of pop/candy to movie and carrys a gun? Dead?
    Say a person actually forgets to pay for gas after filling car with gas. Hang him high?
     
  10. Triad

    Triad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    810
    Location:
    Texas
    It should but I really don't think it will.
     
  11. Ian

    Ian Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,857
    Well, we'll have to write it such that they aren't allowed to have the arms that we're invading to take away...:rolleyes:
     
  12. Blackhawk

    Blackhawk Member In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,882
    Yes, indeedy!
     
  13. QKRTHNU

    QKRTHNU Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    171
    Location:
    CCW-Impaired Locale
    Because murder committed with a knife just isn't THAT bad?
    :rolleyes:
     
  14. Bruce H

    Bruce H Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,624
    Location:
    North Mo.
    Well it really should but since the United States doesn't seem to understand it's own 2nd I doubt it.
     
  15. Vladimir Berkov

    Vladimir Berkov Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    200
    Location:
    Texas
    Don't count on it. We are already taking the personal arms from our "liberated" peoples of Afghanistan. I doubt we are going to allow the "liberated" Iraqis to possess weapons either.

    What is truly ironic, is that both Afghanistan under the Taliban and Saddam's Iraq both allowed citizens to own military weaponry which is strictly forbidden for Americans to own.
     
  16. fallingblock

    fallingblock Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    1,574
    Location:
    Between Georgia and Antarctica
    Not all of the people, Vlad....

    only the 'approved' ones. Kurds caught with weapons by Saddam were executed. As were any members of the militias which opposed the Taliban in Afghanistan:rolleyes:
     
  17. WilderBill

    WilderBill Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    544
    Location:
    Texas
    If we truely beleive that we are in the right and somehow have managed to have a better government, then we should set them up with what we started with; the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. If they want to make changes, it can be done. They could add universal sufferage, the IRS, etc if they really want to.
    I doubt it will happen. If the UN is involved, I know it won't happen.
     
  18. Vladimir Berkov

    Vladimir Berkov Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    200
    Location:
    Texas
    I never said the system was perfect, but for the vast majority of the countries, they can possess weapons we can only dream about.

    Now, when the people are "liberated" we are disarming ALL of them, not just the anti-government forces.
     
  19. fallingblock

    fallingblock Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    1,574
    Location:
    Between Georgia and Antarctica
    Vlad....

    The 'approved' ones did not/do not form a 'vast majority' in either Afghanistan or Iraq. Saddam's Baath party is comprised of the minority Sunni population centered around Baghdad- the Shiites in the south and Kurds in the north are forbidden military arms, at least in areas still under Baath's control (shrinking momentarily, I believe). The Afghans were in a situation of near anarchy outside the warlords groups. It would be a good idea to rearm them, I think, otherwise we would be destroying a valid means of protection in an area of the world known for 'higk risk' personal encounters.:)
     
  20. Vladimir Berkov

    Vladimir Berkov Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    200
    Location:
    Texas
    Unless I am mistaken, Baghdad contains most of the population, and I know at least that arms are available to civilians in Baghdad.
     
  21. labgrade

    labgrade Member In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    1,289
    Location:
    west of Loveland, CO
    Interesting posit & one which we'd be wise to take a real hard, close look at how we do it.

    We will attempt to "establish a democracy," right?

    Why is it we won't attempt to establsih a "constitutional form of democratic representatives?" & that with a solid constitutional basis for basic human rights?

    Any takers on how we'd set up a new constitution, if at all?

    May be that that would remind too many of our own of of history - maybe to rekindle some sort of .... nah! nevermind.

    In every instance we yak the talk about "reconstituting anything," we yammer about "democracy."

    Too many astute quotes why democracy can never work.

    What we will attempt to do is emplace an acceptable "puppet" who will be "acceptable enough" for our current means.

    Likely, "our puppet" will turn on us later unless we are now more astute than in the past.

    If no other time, we have an absolute "time-in-place" to ensure a possitive wedge in the middle-east.

    We will blow the chance.
     
  22. Vladimir Berkov

    Vladimir Berkov Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    200
    Location:
    Texas
    True. In many of the middle eastern countries democracy would harm us more than certain despotic regimes.

    For example, Saddam's rather secular regime could be replaced with a theocratic government which supports militant Islam.

    Simple majority rule in many areas, means majority anti-American rule, as most of the people are either anti-American or at best, apathetic towards American interests.

    Thus I believe the puppet state will be what we ultimately have, much like in Afghanistan. And of course, US troops will be needed to stabilize and protect this new state from both domestic and foreign threats..
     
  23. labgrade

    labgrade Member In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    1,289
    Location:
    west of Loveland, CO
    Vlad,

    To segue, or to debut - I am that sleepy now (two months of insomnia plays its own games ... ) .... but.

    There is absolutely NO reason we would want anything other than our own established form of government (i.e. - a constitutional form of democratically respresentative government), unless we have some idea of a play on what we'd want it to become down the road.

    Setting any country up for a democratic form of government is a known entity for failure. We knew it 00+ years ago, no?

    "Failure" is a perfect excuse to beome entwined with that country's "furtherance."

    ****!

    We could have done it straight off & bailed, watched them do as we have not, with zero interference.

    Nope. We'll meddle, we'll play, & we'll get to eat it later on - just as we here will get to eat to make sure we are all "safe for democracy."

    "Welcome, my friends, to T... the Machine."
     
  24. labgrade

    labgrade Member In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    1,289
    Location:
    west of Loveland, CO
    In any event, I'd betcha that one of the first things The USA - Oops. "coaltion-folk" does, is deprive the "besetted-folk" their right to possess arms.

    Read my lips!

    One of their first edicts will be to deprive the Irqui citizen their roght to "keep & bear arms."

    & this to "preserve their right to ... " ?

    Yeah, I know, they aren't "capabe to govern" ... yet.

    (sigh)

    The same excuse they will (have) used against us - here.
     
  25. Jim March

    Jim March Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,732
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    First off:

    WE ARE NOT TAKING AWAY PERSONAL WEAPONS FROM AFGHANIS! :scrutiny:

    Absolutely not. We've been leaving them personal rifles, including the AKs that are as common as fleas, and handguns, unless they're proven ONGOING enemy combatants or the hardline "Tourists" (Afghani mocking term for the various Arabs/Checkens/etc maniacs that followed Osama Yo Mama to Afghanistan). We're even leaving former Taliban native Afghanis their personal arms.

    Our guys *have* been running around grabbing mines, rocket launchers/RPGs and the like, and any crew-served weapons. But not personal arms! If we were stupid enough to try and apply NYC-level gun control to Afghanistan, it would mean an immediate mass uprising by ALL parties!

    Second, re Iraq:

    If we disarmed any Iraqis, we'd have to disarm all. And we *can't* disarm the Kurds or Shi'ites because in both cases, they have cousins/buddies right across the border in Iran and will sneak in whatever the hell they want.

    I suspect we'll see the Afghani policy (loosely similar to the policies of the better US states) replicated in Iraq.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page