Do Illegal Immigrants Have The Constitutional Right To Bear Arms In The United States?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 мар 2024
- ▶ FREE "Pew Pew" Giveaway Entry: uscca.co/wVZX
▶ FREE Gun Law Map: uscca.co/ZVkw
This video is for educational purposes.
-------------
Must-Watch Interviews With USCCA Members Who Used A Firearm In Self-Defense:
(Raw Video) Lyft Driver Destroys 2 Armed Robbers Trying To Steal His Car...
Watch it here ▶ • (Raw Video) Lyft Drive...
Gun Owner Loses Everything Because...
Watch it here ▶ • Gun Owner Loses Everyt...
Gun Owner Protects Loved Ones And Gets Locked Up (Self Defense Story)
Watch it here ▶ • Gun Owner Protects Lov...
He Was FORCED To Shoot 2 Armed Robbers To Save His Kids...
Watch it here ▶ • He Was FORCED To Shoot...
What are your thoughts about this question?
▶ FREE "Pew Pew" Giveaway Entry: uscca.co/wVZX
▶ FREE Gun Law Map: uscca.co/ZVkw
If they can freely carry a gun I need a refund of all the fees I paid to carry LEGALLY as a legal born citizen.
Oh, don't you know that criminal aliens have been granted God-tier rights by the Harris-Biden Administration?
ruling was on possession in a home (as in Heller) nothing about 'bearing' arms or outside the home.
THANK YOU!!!
ANYONE carrying is exercising Constituional Carry then!!!
Why are citizens paying these fees for Carry permits???
This guy was shooting at cars, sir. The gun was illegal and purchased on the street. What he did was felonious.
I see NOTHING legal about this guy l's case being dismissed.
if you pay a carry permit . move to a free state@@rosmickens7568
@@jeffhays1968Hey commie, why did I pay for a back ground check and have to wait 16 days? You commies just keep making excuses to break laws. We need a 1776 redo to end your corruption.
No. Crazy how they’re willing to strip law abiding citizens rights but are willing to allow non citizens free reign
HELL NO, THEIR REALLY DANGEROUS COUNTRY WONT LET US HAVE A GUN AND THEY CAN MAKE UP A NAME AND ANY BACK GROUND. MANY BORN HERE ON THE OTHER HAND ARE DENIED"LEGAL" GUN RIGHTS FOR SMALL OR KANGAROO MISDEMEANORS. 31 STATES ALLOW UNDER BOYFRIEND LOOPHOLE FROM CONGRESS BUT NOT ALL STATES .........
Im not willing to accept the right comes from government
That should tell you the plan of the Demo..craps.
@@jeffreystarits2783 It doesn't. They are trying to gaslight people into thinking this way though.
That is the goal of the liberals to destroy this country flooding our GREAT NATION with illegal alien criminals giving them full benefits that America Citizens that have served in the military can't get and guess who is paying for all this???? If we "conservative Americans" don't take back the Whitehouse "TRUMP 2024" / Senate & House of Representatives, we will wake up one morning to find out American Citizenship has been terminated and the liberals will declare us as "citizens of the world" !!!! America will officially not exist and will be reduced to being north america.
These are legitimate questions I have: If you are in the United States illegally are you committing a crime? If so, is it then unlawful to carry a gun while committing a crime? One last question, how are illegals obtaining guns legally?
Yes.
Yes.
They are not.
I do not agree with the court. They are over here illegally.
Deport them, don't prosecuting them for exercising a natural right.
Someone doesn't understand that 2A is a natural right that government can't remove.
Illegal crossers will have guns and dirty Americans will be ban from owning guns.
@@RashiimAllen someone is being wrong and condescending at the same time. SELF DEFENSE is YOUR inalienable right. Not the gun dude. THATS AMERICAN CONSTITUTION.
Loud and wrong, they always are😂
@@user-su1sl8ml8s Its the right to bear Arms. Not guns, not knifes, not long sticks, not self defense. The right for people to arm themselves to secure their freedom is what the government is restricted from taking away. You can disagree and be a tyrant but you'd still be wrong.
How can you have constitutional rights if you are not a citizen of the USA.
Because the Constitution applies to everyone inside our border equally.
@@Saanonymous80 NOT NO ,BUT HELL NO ! FOOLS
Because they are God given rights they were not rights given to us by our fellow humans they are given. God gave these rights to every human being not just Americans or Christians
@ForestTre So does this apply to Germany or Canada as well. Does it apply to you being just in the country? What's the point of being a citizen? Can you vote as an illegal immigrant? Do we not need 4473s now since I as a legal citizen must provide ID? This ruling opens up a lot of questions
Can I take my noise makers to other countries and carry. If no then you must be a US citizen for those rights in the US
Can't believe we are having this debate 🇺🇸
Our government is just mind blowing. Pretty sure when you are filling out paperwork, one of the questions is "Are you a legal citizens?"
if your state does not allow you to buy a firearm in a private sale "no background check" move to a free state and shut up !!!!!!!
That is a 1968 invention. Before from 1777- 1968 that question was not asked.
@@jason200912 Remember when taxes were just a "temporary" thing too? Now we are taxed to death.
@@rollinggordo9945 yes before taxes were only in the form of import tariffs
Brother you’re completely wrong. This is a right, yes, but if you are not part of THE PEOPLE you don’t get to exercise that RIGHT on OUR LAND.
NO!!!
Absurd.
Absolutely NOT.
They're not even supposed to be walking in America in the first place let alone armed smh
FUD
We're rewarding lawbreakers even further than we already are? JUST SAY NO!
A right is not a “reward”. It’s our natural right as humans to be able to protect ourselves.
wise up..... the law is the crime... not migrating. rights are not rewards.
no one needs your permission to move....nor to defend themselves.
@@ZOMBIEHEADSHOTKILLER No, not enforcing our existing laws is the foundational crime.
The Constitution does NOT give rights, it protects them from government overreach. The constitution ASSUMES the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE to be true, which says our rights are endowed to us by our creator. Like it or not, this was talking about every human being. Our constitution MAY or MAY NOT protect their right to bear arms, but they still have the God given right to defend from tyranny.
FUD
I don’t understand why we are even being asked this question they should be taken back and processed correctly. That’s a ridiculous question.
The right of self-defense is an inherent right of being a human
I will not repeat myself again. They need to go back and be processed after being a US citizen that’s different. I don’t have my shotgun just because I went to the store and bought it. They do a background check right now stop search foolish talk.@@chrissauter7501
Take a self-defense class@@chrissauter7501
"processed correctly" ????
that would be the way they did it... on their own terms.... they dont need your, or any ones permission to move, nor do they need your permission to defend themselves. your lack of ability to think is "ridiculous"
If this case can be finalized in the favor of humanity, then that is a huge brick in wall to protect the 2A as an inherent right!
No.
This issue SHOULD NOT even be a question. Non citizens should not enjoy a "2nd Amendment" right. The second point non citizens crossing our borders is a criminal, thus the term illegal. Making them prohibited possessors.
Wrong, the Constitution is for Americans. Rules/Rights of Americans. Constitution of the the United States of America. If someone is here ILLEGALLY,,,,,not applicable.
It doesn't say "We, the Americans", it says "We the People". People is a group of persons of different race and origin. Is it fair that criminals have guns, but a tourist coming to US can't have one, even if he/she doesn't have a criminal record? What about tourists that have firearms licences in their respective countries that require clean criminal record, medical and psychiatric evaluations and passing an exam - why can't they possess firearms for self-defense?
@@PiotrBaczek87 _THE_ people, implies the U.S. Americans, otherwise you would make the case that the constitution is _global_ , which it isn't.
Criminals are citizens of the U.S., so yes.
Tourists are visitors and not citizens, so no, regardless of their "licensure".
The constitution is given to us from the govt, it’s to protect our God-given rights as a PEOPLE. The govt doesn’t give us these rights. Therefore the people have these rights from God and the constitution protects those rights. Therefore they have the same rights we do. This will also help us down the line as it also shows nics and 4473’s aren’t constitutional.
nope, not given to us by the Gov't. It's for the LEGAL residents /Citizens of the USofA. Otherwise we wouldn't have a country.@@KendrasEdge757
@@DTreatz Of course US government can't make a global constitution, however the constitution applies equally to PEOPLE on the US territory. Argument that 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to foreign nationals, would affect also other amendments. That would mean that due process of 14th amendment would not apply aswell to tourists/foreign nationals. An argument could be made that since bill of rights doesn't apply to foreigners, neither should penalty code.
So why do we still need gun permits in many states still ? Also, if you live upstate New york, why do you need an additional gun permit for NYC which is in the same state ? NEW YORK STATE permits are not recognized in NYC, and arrest is possible.
The reason we still have many states that require gun permits is because of people who believe this BS that the right should only be granted to law-abiding citizens. When we get rid of this notion and we stopped believing we get people to stop believing this idiotic notion that only citizens have rights. Until we stop letting people believe this idiotic notion you're going to continue having a government that infringes on our rights because these people giving keep giving the government that right to do
because youre dumb enough to believe you need some one elses permission to live your own life or protect it
HINT.... you dont!
I'm in Upstate NY, it's not can, it's WILL.
Because unconstitutional laws abound.
here in Iowa the constitution is my permit. you need to move to a free state!!!!!!!! blame your state not this man
NO
I’m not a lawyer or even pretend to know a lot about law but in Illinois you must have a FOID card to possess a firearm and a concealed carry permit to carry a gun. You have to be a legal resident of Illinois to obtain a FOID CARD so how this made it this far in this state I don’t understand.
Definitely not if they're not here legally they have no American rights
They will have more rights than us dirty Americans.
Already Felons !
illegal entry is not a felony BTW.
@@jeffhays1968 Really ? Your ignorance is Marxist backed ?
@@grantacoatneysr9657Patriot backed.
@@jeffhays1968 its A federal Law idiot !
Really ? Your ignorance is FUD backed ?@@grantacoatneysr9657
That’s a hard NO
They are illegal. No rights at all?
Yep. Speedy trial, then speedy deportation.
As long as the government allows them to stay here until their court hearing, then technically, they're here legally weather we like it or not.
there is no wuch thing as an illegal person.
rights apply to all people, in all places, at all times, no exception.
@@serafinsilva1055speedy trial is a right. By most peoples thinking, they cant have that either.
@@silvermine2033No, the government is breaking the law, and democraps do it weekly.
Invaders were not recognized as The People.
Absolutely not. WTF is going on?
They are teaching us dirty Americans a lesson.
NO!
Are you kidding me no way no how they should be able to carry or have a gun maybe once they have gone through the legal procedure to become a citizen
Then what value does being a "citizen" have ? Except to work for others.
And pay taxes
It is well past time to have a legal definition of "the people"
and god given
NO... shouldn't even BE CONSIDERED 😮
I’ve NEVER thought of it this way, but I’m open to my mind being changed whenever I get new arguments. You definitely changed my mind on how I thought about this question, and I think there are a lot of moral and legal questions that need to be talked about in congress.
Hell no. They shouldn’t even be here.
Nope
No
NAH... this has gone way too far...
So, if I understand correctly, we send that person and his firearm back to their country of origin. And if that country doesn't like his firearm, they can deal with it.
No only to us citizens
@00.08.... NO! Hell no!!! No, no no!!!! They also don't have the other 9 Biil of Rights. This is just stupid
Courts have for decades ruled that the bill of rights applies to illegals.
No, they do not have 2A protection
Is it a felony or a misdemeanor treated as a felony? At a minimum, it is a non-violent crime. Would this crime of illegally entering the country remove you from "the people"? Are non-citizens part of "the people"?
With those questions posed, the right of self-defense is an inherent right as a human being.
You have no right to self defense when you illegally enter it.
@@lonniebeal6032 it is an inherent human right!!!!!!
He'll no..
Think about it people, this is a door opening with the possibility of repealing the NFA.
Too many knee jerk reactions in here. I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees the potential 🤘
No !
Thank you for clarifying that because I have been arguing with people that the second amendment is a universal right it is not just limited to Americans and have been called a fool for saying that. And I reply to them that the framers themselves said that these rights are god-given to all of humanity, not just Americans and not just Christians.
As a permanent resident, I Two have the legal right to own firearms. However, I have always had question marks on the whole "owning a firearm is a God given right". Not really. For one, I am not religious. I am not going to pretend to know the whole history of the untied states, so correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't the constitution set by the four fathers???, which are man, not God.
Now, if people want to believe that owning firearms is a "god" given right, ok fair enough, then what this gentleman is saying, makes sense.
Am I agreeing that illegal immigrants should be able to own firearms, no. There is a reason they didn't come in the front door like I did. Just want to make that clear.
FOR ILLEAGAL FELONS IN OUR COUNTRY ?? YOU FOOLS
And you'd be right...
Except the constitution provides protections against the U.S. government from stepping on those rights of *U.S. citizens* , because the constitution is not a *global* one, it's a U.S. one.
@@damienheaton7571 the founders did not give us our rights God gave us those rights. The Constitution is just a piece of paper that makes sure that the government the understands they cannot infringe upon those rights.
@@damienheaton7571a competing theory is that they are inherent as a consequence of natural law. Specifically "Lex Taleonis"- The law of the claw. In nature animals will use whatever tools they can to defend themselves. Either those in hand, in the case of monkeys, or those bodily present, in the case of lions, tigers and bears. (Lack of opposable thumbs) In short, you don't have to believe in a God to believe the right to bear, and defend thyself transcends any governments ability to regulate.
Excellent analysis, sir!
Thank you for watching!
Absolutely not. They are not beneficiary to our rights
Only God can decide who has these rights and don't have these rights that's what you're missing. God gave these rights to everyone not just Americans. These rights existed long before the United States was even dreamed of
"our rights"??? you mean human rights???
cuz right apply to all humans, in all places, at all times, no exception.
they are not exclusive to people on one side of a line in the dirt.
@@ZOMBIEHEADSHOTKILLERYes there is, it's called _laws_ and countries make and define them. You cannot do as you please when you please, otherwise maybe I have the right to take your life since there is nothing stopping me other than "man made" rules, right? but like you said those don't count.
@@ForestTreAnd what if you don't believe in God then?
What if _your_ God is wrong?
Keep religion out of it.
soooo lets let government decide ? Hell no i'll stick with god @@DTreatz
So... there is no sense in them becoming a citizen... if they receive the same rights without being one.
they do not receive rights as they are god given "they already had them"
You nailed it! The Constitution does not GRANT the right, it PROTECTS the right. I'm so glad you got it right because several other commentators, that I trust for the most part, have gotten this exactly backwards.
The Constitution applies to US CITIZENS, not illegals.
but not for people who aren't of the U.S., unless of course the constitution is a _global_ one, and last I checked it wasn't and countries have _their own_
@@DTreatzread again or watch the video, he explains it pretty well -- natural rights have nothing to do with being a citizen.... of any country. they exist because you are a human being.
Cheers 🍻
This guy obtained a firearm off the street and was shooting at cars in Illinois.
No WAY!!!
@SplashOfOrange Wow you're ignorant. You're a criminal when you crossed the border, you have the right to be put in prison or shipped back.
Basically, everyone can pack = sticks, rocks, hammet, knife, stungun, tazer, handgun, rifle, shotgun, ect..."A GOD given right " that no man can restrict even with one's consent. Is this what I'm understanding?
Well spoken, Steven. The rights aren't granted by the government, but bestowed by a creator, or inherent as a consequence of natural law. Therefore, they can't be taken, nor subject to a "citizenship requirement" as you put it. The mere possession of a firearm alone does not constitute any infringement on anyone else's rights, so it stands to reason that one cannot criminalize a crime with no victim.
The Constitution makes a very clear delineation by the usage of words in describing people. Reread the constitution and note where "people" is used verses "citizen". As for non-citizens owning firearms, I will say this much. Amendment 2 Right to Bear Arms. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." [Ratified 12/15/1791] By the court decision in United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez -In this case, "the people” refers to those “persons who are part of a national community,” or who have “substantial connections” to the United States. By the court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. -Heller also said that “the people” “refers to all members of the political community.” Unfortunately, these two cases are in tension with one another and have not been resolved. I would take the point of view that "the people" in the Bill of Rights refers to all people regardless of citizenship status. Where the framers wanted specific controls, they switched the language to "citizen". In the Bill of Rights: Amendments 1-10 refer to "the people". Amendment 11 is the first reference to citizens. Another example would be in article 2, section 1, where the use of "citizen" is pronounced. I would also argue that, "the people", includes all ages. The checks and balances that were built into our system of government are the punishments for abuse, not the use of your God-given rights. I say enjoy your God-given right and use it wisely.
Diplomatic immunity kinda throws a kink in this thought process. If I am doing a crime and I am carrying, I'm getting 7 more years.
Diplomatic immunity, i.e., the "license to kill", is mostly misunderstood.
No! They're here illegally! Constitution doesn't apply to them. Come on, this is not that hard!
of course it applies to them.... the constitution is worthless paper... it only exists to explain your rights, to the government.... it is not a permission slip of rights from the government.................... rights apply to all people, in all places, at all times, no exception.
your fictional beliefs, dont change the rights of others.
the right to self defence is god given ,not given by government . its not that hard, GOD GIVEN ,what dont you understand FUD
While I agree with you, if you want to keep on calling the right to own firearms a "god" given right, then what he is saying is essentially correct.
@@damienheaton7571
So give a bunch of illegal trespassers and squatters guns who have zero respect for this country. Yeah..... hey, here's another great idea! Give them to children, criminals in prison, and the mentally disturbed! It's their _God given_ right! See how "intelligent" that sounds? I think I've made my point.
@@damienheaton7571
If that's the argument though, then literally no one should be deprived of their right to own one or several. That would include children, those in mental wards, and literally any person in America. Even convicted felons. I'm sorry but that just doesn't make sense.
Absolutely NOT!
Citizens have to have background checks from the State and Federal government.
Also, Flores was shooting into cars driving down his street.
The Illinois citizens don't practice Constituional Carry. Ergo, the illegal aliens shouldn't have rights that supercede U S. Citizens.
You nailed it!!!
We need YOU to fight for our constitutional rights in CA sir
This is insanity 😮
Absolutely no
that's a bright Idea . lets let the government decide who can use self defence and when we are allowed to use it ,what can go wrong with that ?
Illinois doesn't even recognize the right of a Licensed Concealed Carry person from another state
Hell to the No !!!! 😡
Here I am born and raised in the US with a None Violent Felony from 1992 and I can’t Bare Arms (Working On A Pardon)
I can't believe you're even asking this question.
Under Heller “the people” has been defined such that there should be no confusion that anyone here illegally is not part of the people.
I would disagree, I look at this as an international law issue. Non-US citizens with firearms should be considered an invasion and handled with appropriate accountability.
Excellent analysis imo
Thanks for watching!
The judge initially found against the guy but had to take the case again in light of the Bruen decision. It's actually in line with similar rulings on the bill of rights but I think it will be overturned on appeal.
HELL NO!
They have already broken federal law by entering the country illegally, so cannot obtain a firearm licence.
Hell no they dont. They shouldnt have a right to vote or bear arms here. Or I'll be able to exercise my 2A in the UK, China, Russia, and Korea
What about the question on the background check. Have you ever denounced your US citizenship? There is also the question that asks if you are going to give the gun to an illegal alien. They are not supposed to have a gun according to the check.
No.... They shouldn't even have the right to u.s. currency or anything else that is in the u.s.
I kind of do.
That’s a tough one… is trespassing a felony?
I think the ruling was strictly a tool to get the 2A community to argue and contradict itself, essentially to cause an uproar. Hoping to get a court ruling to use against us with our own argument against this ruling.
Agreed. It does fail, however, in a rather epic way. Historic precedence exists for different classes of people with different rights under the Constitution: citizens, non-citizen residents, non-citizen visitors, and illegal aliens. Illegal aliens have some rights, but they are very limited and do not include the right to keep and bear arms.
His take is a good one
Wait i hope this isnt really a debate about if these people can have weapons or not. They legally cant even buy a gun since they dont have a drivers license. Like wtf.
Breaking Federal Law.
American citizens who follow the law have rights. Not these Illegals...
The law of the 14th Amendment is clear that the privileges and immunities of the citizens of the United States shall not be abridged and that includes voting and possession of guns. Add it is a violation for an "alien" unlawfully in the United States to possess a firearm under Title 18 U.S.C. of 922(g) and I quote, "(g) It shall be unlawful for any person- (5) who, being an alien- (A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.".
Any judge or court that rules contrary is in violation of Article VI paragraph 2 supremacy clause. By law, judges and courts or the judicial branch do not make or change law by separation of powers. By law only Congress legislative branch can make or change law.
Constitution of the United States
Article VI
Paragraph 2
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Thank you. The communist democraps in our country never seem to want to read .
NO! and HELL NO!
And that is American exceptionalism
Do they? Yes. Should they? NO.
Not according to form 4473. Not to a non citizen of the United States!
When ever have you heard of a country being invaded arming their invaders? Such academic idiocy!
There are three amendments within the Bill of Rights which specifically note that certain protections are for "the people", First, Second and Fourth. The remainder, Ninth and Tenth not withstanding, make no mention of "the people". Who are "the people"? Citizens of the United States. This is easy to discern. No one should want to for non US citizens to be able to amass an arsenal within their enclaves which might be used for insurrection. It should surprise no one that this particular issue is now being "discussed" as every branch of our federal government has abdicated responsibility to enforce the sovereignty of the states along the southern border, where we can verifiably see that 1000's of military aged men are coming, undocumented, into our country. The same people who want that to happen want those men to be able to possess firearms.
The people are mentioned specifically to remind us that they are speaking of all people not just Americans if they meant just Americans then they would have said these rights only are for Americans they did not say that they said the people to clarify that these rights belong to all people not just people who are citizens
The "People" are everyone who is within our borders.
@@ForestTreDude what? The constitution was never written for the whole world. Not was that the founding fathers intention. It was for the colonists of Britain breaking the chains that bound them together.
@@gungnir4076 what you don't understand is that the constitution where is Wheaton so that the government could understand that all people have rights. Not just a select few
@@gungnir4076 no it was not just for the colonists. It was for everybody seeking to get away from oppression and governments run by tyrants
Perhaps what this judge has ruled here helps us. Over the years, the Second Amendment has been sliced and diced by many states to the point where lawful residents of many states can't even carry in their neighboring state. Some states now even regulate the number of firearms a person can buy per month. Maybe this throws all that state 2A regulation garbage out the window? What happens if a particular state passes a law that prohibits illegals from possessing a firearm? Will the federal government intervene?
All Legal Americans have their Rights that they deserve and work hard for. Many have studied and trained, and you have Honorable Military Families. You know that they have served and protected our Constitution too.
You have people that have chosen to move to America and they have worked very hard to educate themselves and become American Citizens. The
People that choose to bypass and illegally enter the United States do not have any rights or
do not seek to be Americans.
No they don't, they committed a felony by sneaking into the country, which bars them from opening a firearm.
They broke the law! If I break the law, I lose my right to have a firearm. You don't get to have it both ways. Either remove all restrictions on firearm or enforce the laws as they stand
Why even have a CONSTITUTION then????
Sick 🤢 sick sick sick
Absolutely Not!
Are aliens visiting on a visa permitted to buy firearms?
illegal means illegal last I known.
The question is, does the Constitution apply to a land mass or a group of people (citizens)?
"We the People of the United States..."
No, the question is if a U.S. citizen is subject to red flag laws forbidding possession of a firearm at the mere suggestion of criminal activity, why the hell should an ILLEGAL alien committing an actual criminal act have the right to possess a firearm?
the constitution applies to the government... not people.
its a permission slip from the people... to the government.
not the other way around.
@@shireguy876 that would be the question after mine is answered, sure…
@@ZOMBIEHEADSHOTKILLER that doesn’t change the question I asked, do I have rights that aren’t enumerated in the Constitution/Bill of rights? No, if I can’t show the right is there, I don’t have it. Example, driving a car on public roads is a privilege, not a right.
Take the useless semantic argument elsewhere.
No. Only citizens are covered by the constitution and its rights.
The Constitution does NOT give rights, it protects them from government overreach. The constitution ASSUMES the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE to be true, which says our rights are endowed to us by our creator. Like it or not, this was talking about every human being. The 2A says "the people" not "the citizens", its a natural right. To
you fail at life............ you dont need some one elses permission, to use your right to self defense.
The consitituion is NOT a permission slip from the government....... its permission slip from the people, for the government to follow............... never make the mistake of getting it backwards.
@@wettoastermanif you're going to copy/paste, at least fix your typos.
@@Saanonymous80 fixed it form you.
No most criminals that break into your house don't automatically get your second amendment rights
It's really a simple answer, NO.
No. Simple as that.
Only a lawyer would argue.....
Hell no