• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Illegal Immigrants Don't Have the Constitutional Right to Own Firearms

Like many posters before me have said. Become legal and follow the proper protocol like the rest of us have to
 
Interesting thread. I am happy to see the broad support for the idea that bearing arms is a natural right and not defined by geographical borders.

I suspect there is a lot of oversimplification and generalization here regarding illegal immigration, but the one thing that seems certain is that the political parts of the system for "dealing" with illegal immigration we have now is basically pandering to both sides and not really working very well at all.
 
JRyan said:
Interesting thread. I am happy to see the broad support for the idea that bearing arms is a natural right and not defined by geographical borders.

I suspect there is a lot of oversimplification and generalization here regarding illegal immigration, but the one thing that seems certain is that the political parts of the system for "dealing" with illegal immigration we have now is basically pandering to both sides and not really working very well at all.
Click to expand...

Exactly. We have the worst of both worlds. This is a classic way that governments gain power and manipulate the people. First government fails at a basic task (border control). Then, once a crises results (tons of illegals), we get all sorts of excess from government allegedly aimed at the secondary problems. Everything from that thug sheriff Joe Arpaio to putting the task of policing illegals on employers, and in between we have calls from all over government for "papers please" in order to weed out the illegals among us. Just as in the effort to keep guns from ex-cons, we all give up liberty to address the failures of government to perform basic tasks. And it works perfectly. As we can see here, there are more than enough Americans who can't see past the source of the problem and are more than willing to accept the myriad alleged cures, all while government grows and freedom dies.
 
Mark is right. The government has no business telling anyone that is not imprisoned, that they cannot exercise that very natural right which the government recognizes in its constitution.

The thing is, illegals should not get to exercise that right. Not because the government has the power to tell people that they cannot exercise natural rights within its borders. But, because illegals should be deported and then hanged if they ever return.

Thats all I have to say.
 
joeendris said:
Tell that to the schmucks in Mass, DC, Chicago, etc. Those nazis don't believe their citizens have that right.
Click to expand...

Which is really the whole point here.

When you combine cases like this - with the fact that "progressives" think that rights come from the GOVERNMENT - and not from nature or god ....... what you've got is the perfect setup for a legal basis to deny us (the rest of us who are not illegal immigrants) - the right to own - and USE - firearms.

It's not too many legal steps away from saying that an illegal immigrant has no constitutional right to bear arms - and justifying that decision with all sorts of legal mumbo jumbo - and then being able to say that everybody else doesn't have the right to own firearms.

The inherent right to self defense is a separate issue than being an illegal and leaching off the system for free health care and welfare payment and so forth.

The NRA was setup in part as an organization to defend the rights of freed slaves to defend themselves WITH FIREARMS. Because back then there was still a sizable amount of people that understood that a HUMAN has the inherent right of self defense.

Slaves were considered less than human. Legal rulings that take away fundamental rights - have their basis in legalizing the view that YOU are less than human.

People who don't understand this need to immerse themselves a little bit deeper into communist political theory so they can see how deep the rabbit hole goes. It's not pretty.
 
Imagine having the progressives fighting to extend 2A rights to illegal aliens? This is clearly one area under the law where they’re second class citizens. Or non citizens. Setting aside the hilarious trolling aspect of it, the end result might actually be less restrictive gun laws.
 
I have no problem with an illegal as a gun owner IF

They can be identified positively
They have a background check like all us gringos

Then they can take it with them back to their home country.
 
Illegals deserve NOTHING.

Not a Gun, not a Car, not Health Care, not Shelter, not Food.

NOTHING BUT A QUICK RIDE HOME.

And I don't care if they are 100 years old, or a 100 seconds old.

Goodbye and Good Riddance.
 
Last edited:
"Illegal immigrants have only limited protection under the Constitution"???? They are not citizen's of the US they are criminals just by the fact that they are illegally in the country THEY SHOULD HAVE NO RIGHTS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION and should be sent back to what ever country they came from.
 
Mike Stanton said:
Illegals deserve NOTHING. Not a Gun, not a Car, not Health Care, not Shelter, not Food. NOTHING BUT A QUICK RIDE HOME.
And I don't care if they are 100 years old, or a 100 seconds old.

Goodbye and Good Riddance.
Click to expand...

Exactly!!!

JDL said:
"Illegal immigrants have only limited protection under the Constitution"???? They are not citizen's of the US they are criminals just by the fact that they are illegally in the country THEY SHOULD HAVE NO RIGHTS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION and should be sent back to what ever country they came from.
Click to expand...

Amen!!!
 
My concern is not the direct effect of not allowing an illegal to legally own a gun, but where it leads.

If you agree that an illegal has a right not to have the government gouge his eyes out with a grapefruit spoon as punishment for a crime (8th amendment), you are not taking the position that constitutional rights do not apply to illegal immigrants, but rather, where the line is.

Absent due process, denying any constitutional right to one group of persons while preserving the rest of the bill of rights for members of that group is treating the denied right as a "right of the second class". This decision reinforces the concept that the 2A is not like the other 9As, but rather sits on the sidelines offering a lower form of protection than provided by the other enumerated rights. It is doubtful that this court would deny the illegal alien the right to a jury trial, or to be protected against warrantless searches absent the exigent circumstances exceptions that apply to legal citizens and immigrants.

Coming out in favor of this is conceptually no different than supporting the government denying persons in this country illegally the right to worship as they choose or to speak freely.
 
I’m less interested in the legal issue than I am in seeing the left forced into taking a position on extending this particular constitutional right to illegals. Make them either support gun rights or deny illegals rights that are held by citizens.
 
The 2nd. is Our right You want it get inline like our parents grandparents did. Illegal is illegal no two ways about it.
 
Just for argument's sake: Is 1A a right afforded to illegals? I mean, besides arresting them for illegality, could you arrest them for standing on a soapbox in Times Square preaching about whatever? Arrest them for writing newspaper articles?

Where do rights begin?


I'm not saying I have the answers. I find this whole thing fascinating. Especially those that want illegals to "get a permit." Wait. WHAT??? A 2A supporter who wants permits??????
 
JDL said:
"Illegal immigrants have only limited protection under the Constitution"???? They are not citizen's of the US they are criminals just by the fact that they are illegally in the country THEY SHOULD HAVE NO RIGHTS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION and should be sent back to what ever country they came from.
Click to expand...
Yes. It's been said here that they have "God given rights". If so, then I, as a citizen should have the same right to keep and carry arms without any license or permission slip, No? Jack.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
My concern is not the direct effect of not allowing an illegal to legally own a gun, but where it leads.

If you agree that an illegal has a right not to have the government gouge his eyes out with a grapefruit spoon as punishment for a crime (8th amendment), you are not taking the position that constitutional rights do not apply to illegal immigrants, but rather, where the line is.

Absent due process, denying any constitutional right to one group of persons while preserving the rest of the bill of rights for members of that group is treating the denied right as a "right of the second class". This decision reinforces the concept that the 2A is not like the other 9As, but rather sits on the sidelines offering a lower form of protection than provided by the other enumerated rights. It is doubtful that this court would deny the illegal alien the right to a jury trial, or to be protected against warrantless searches absent the exigent circumstances exceptions that apply to legal citizens and immigrants.

Coming out in favor of this is conceptually no different than supporting the government denying persons in this country illegally the right to worship as they choose or to speak freely.
Click to expand...

The happy fun ball thing here is what cop out is the courts going to choose? The "problem" for them is if they concur that this guy has RKBA rights, then by proxy, quite obviously, everyone else in that similar circumstance also has similar gun rights, and potentially, it could invalidate a whole bunch of stupid gun laws, likely wider than the narrow conditions set forth in Heller.

There's also a possibility that they figure out a way to half ass it. They could concur that yes, the illegal does have RKBA rights, but those rights do not supercede "reasonable
restrictions" set forth by government etc.

-Mike
 
I stand by that only citizens have rights.

Citizenship is not a right.

If convicted felons or other people can be considered "prohibited persons" then there should be a default bucket that says if you're here in the country illegally, you're a federally prohibited person. Period. Full stop.

Want the RKBA? Become a citizen.

If someone wants to allow illegal aliens to have guns, then the whole notion of "prohibited people" needs to go away.

I'm sure there are a million reasons why this is wrong. I don't care.
 
i guess i always thought that the Constitution of the United States of America was for citizens of The United States of America? Become a citizen and you get the rights, benefits and protections of our country. i would not expect anything if i went to another country and stayed illegally......
 
1919FAN said:
The 2nd. is Our right You want it get inline like our parents grandparents did. Illegal is illegal no two ways about it.
Click to expand...
Please explain the constitutional basis for this, and why it is consistent with that document to extend one element of the bill of rights only to a subset of those protected by the other 9.

I am not interested in arguments why something is a good idea, why you want it, etc. but rather what argument you would offer if you had to explain to SCOTUS why the 2nd provides protection to only some of the people protected by #1 and #3-#10.

i guess i always thought that the Constitution of the United States of America was for citizens of The United States of America? Become a citizen and you get the rights, benefits and protections of our country. i would not expect anything if i went to another country and stayed illegally......
Click to expand...
Would you expect the right to a trial, to see the evidence used against you, and to be represented by counsel?
 
Very good point, i would expect civilized treatment.......But, I would not go to another country and carry a gun, break their laws and disrespect the system,
but if i did, i would not expect to get the same rights as citizens of another country; short of a capital crime, i would expect to be kicked out.
its hard enough to get fair, for Americans, here in America. I feel First, we need to concentrate on keeping all Americans equal and protect our rights, that is hard enough.
 
I am sorry, i think i may have gave to much of my opinion before i actually know. I may sound like an idiot.
Is there an actual clause or precident, that our Constitution is for everyone who is physically in America? Not only citizens? I do get the basic rights/fair treatment, but I feel a few are/should be for the people who actually are proud to call themselves Americans
We lose some of our rights when we do something wrong.
 
Last edited:
Context context context! God given rights are obviously universal. With that said most nations reject them and have ulterior motives with respect to coming here. Our Founders created this nation based on these rights and passed restrictionist immigration policies in order to protect them from the foreign hordes and influence.
 
Glocklike tendencies said:
I am sorry, i think i may have gave to much of my opinion before i actually know. I may sound like an idiot.
Is there an actual clause or precident, that our Constitution is for everyone who is physically in America? Not only citizens? I do get the basic rights/fair treatment, but I feel a few are/should be for the people who actually are proud to call themselves Americans
We lose some of our rights when we do something wrong.
Click to expand...
I would start by examining the definition of "The People" as expressed in "US vs. Verdugo-Uruquidez".
 

Similar threads

Maine Gov. Mills Pushes to Make it Easier to Have Firearms Confiscated
Replies
3
Views
273
Uzi2
U
Guess the kids running the WSJ have gone to the dark side.
Replies
6
Views
479
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Maine gets close to implementing 3 Day Wait Period and makes it illegal to do Paramilitary Training in the State
2 3
Replies
81
Views
2K
murf4321
murf4321
Interesting Article on the "Notching" of Firearms to Keep Track of "Kills"
Replies
8
Views
347
clampett
clampett
Washington Transfers Seized Firearms to Ukraine as House GOP Continues Opposition to More Funding
Replies
7
Views
128
Animal357
A
Back
Top Bottom