The NRA Myth of Arming the Good Guys
Collapse
X
-
-
A "militia" is not the govt. military. It's the exact opposite.I don't beleive in any gun bans (a short term solution that won't work) but the The Second Amendment states "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"
To me that is more about arming the military than a person's indiviual freedom,
Remember, the constitution was written by a group of revolutionaries whom had just finished rising up against an oppressive govt. and against all odds won their freedom from them.
They envisioned being able to do the same thing anytime the govt. became oppressive. Of course we all know that if you tried that now, the govt. would kill you and all your cohorts and brand you as "terrorists".
I think the 2nd ammendment gives me the right to any arms that I want. Not what I "need" as so many are trying to say. But what I WANT.
Right now all I have is a shotgun just in case someone were to break into my home. My German shepard would attack them while I grabbed my shotgun.
I'd also like to own a nice pistol for my office in my backyard Casita. I work late outside and if somebody were to break into the main house it would be nice to have a pistol out here with me to take in and defend my family.
But if I wanted to have some kind of crazy ass gun that fired a million rounds...I should be able to according to the constitution.
So if you think that is wrong, then we need to get rid of the 2nd ammendment. That's the way it's supposed to be done. Not try to tiptoe around it.-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.ComComment
-
A little research will show that the Second Amendment had more to do with freedom than historical militias. Here is what some of the Founding Fathers actually said about arms:
Laws that forbid the carrying of arms, disarm only those who are neither inclined, nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants. They serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.
-- Thomas Jefferson, 1764
What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.
-- Thomas Jefferson
Those who beat their swords into plowshares usually end up plowing for those who didn't.
-- Ben Franklin
Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property... Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them.
--Thomas Paine
A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.
-- George Washington
Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined?The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.
--Patrick Henry.
Are we at last brought to such an humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense? Where is the difference between having our arms under our own possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?
-- Patrick Henry, 3 Elliot, Debates at 386.
The Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.
--Samuel Adams, debates & Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 86-87.
The right of the people to keep and bear?arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country?
--James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434 (June 8, 1789).
(The Constitution preserves) the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation?(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.
--James Madison.
If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government...
-- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist (#28) .
The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.
--Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-B.
To disarm the people is the best and most effective way to enslave them.
-- George Mason
The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.
--Noah Webster, ?An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (1787) in Pamplets on the Constitution of the United States (P.Ford, 1888)
[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or the state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People.
-- Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.Comment
-
Don't bring up those pesky founding fathers.
You have to understand that they didn't live in 2012 and don't understand how things are now.
It's best just to let those nice and benevolent police officers have guns. They are there to protect us and would never abuse their power.
Just imagine how much nicer they will be when they are the only ones with guns.
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.ComComment
-
This just proves my point. We can spend tens of billions a year on armed guards at schools and it's not going to stop mass murders at schools. Once a madman has a gun in their hands, it's too late and they will kill. At Columbine it was 13 dead and 21 wounded, and the armed guard did nothing to stop the killing, other officers arrived on the scene, and the two killers committed suicide.
If you are twenty years old and get drunk enough in public to start a bar fight, well, clearly your not mature enough to own a firearm.how about this though. say when you're about 20 you get drunk and start a fight in bar, get arrested and spend the night in jail... no big deal happens all the time to kids, life goes on... never get in any more trouble
BUT with 'rigorous mental health laws in effect' you are labeled unstable, prone to violence and assigned a negative mental health profile that follows you the rest of your life. put on medication. you have problems finding work, no bank loans, health ins denied etc... AND your kids will be labeled a genetically unstable, put on a watch list and possible medicated as well
Years ago I had a neighbor who was arrested three times in one year for assaulting his wife. For reasons I cannot understand no one thought to take away his firearms until he was shooting at his wife... Really? Why isn't there a law in place saying "If you are charged with assault, we are searching your house and taking away your firearms". Common fucking sense.Herschel Savage
Brooklyn, NYComment
-
I'm thinking that back in the "wild west" days you were required to check your weapons at the bar to make sure no altercations went crazy and ended up in a bloodbath.
But that's just from watching movies. lol-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.ComComment
-
Congrats on owning nickle plated sissy gun.yeah right. My dad had me shooting guns since I was 5 years old. (my family owned cattle and orange groves...literally thousands of acres of land)
You keep on "training" on how to "handle it"
But if you break into my house, I have a chrome shotgun with 5 shells full of birdshot that will make you wish you were dead. And I don't even have to aim that very well. It's scattershot and will fuck you up BAD.
You just keep on training and waitng for the "shit to hit the fan"Comment
-
-
actually no it was written to mean militia not people. They would of said people like they did how many other times in the document. They didnt have a free standing army and if the country got attacked everyone had to be able to help out. It was protect the gov,they were still getting attacked its not like now. .That's because you're not reading it as intended. The document is not written in modern English. It is written to acknowledge that a well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free nation and that the citizens of that nation have the same right to be armed as the militia.
In other words: A well regulated Military, being necessary to the security of a free Nation, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The 2nd Amendment was written to protect "The People" not the Government.Comment
-
I deleted my reply because I worded it incorrectly. The important thing is that the second amendment was written so that the people were allowed to arm themselves to be protected from a tyrannical Government.actually no it was written to mean militia not people. They would of said people like they did how many other times in the document. They didnt have a free standing army and if the country got attacked everyone had to be able to help out. It was protect the gov,they were still getting attacked its not like now. .Comment
-
That's not really true. It was to written to deter a tyrannical government, suppressing insurrection, and repel invasion. It was meant to protect the government as it was to protect the citizens from the government.Herschel Savage
Brooklyn, NYComment
-
Comment
-
Bullshit. If that were true then it would contradict Article 3 of the Constitution:
U.S. Constitution - Article 3 Section 3
Article 3 - The Judicial Branch
Section 3 - Treason
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.Comment
-
One thing that irritates me is when people say the founding fathers had no idea that people would one day invent modern assault rifles so that means the second amendment is out of date. Really? Most of the founding fathers were men of science, some were actual scientists. They were also very well read, some owned libraries and were well versed in history. I am confident they were well aware that weapons of war would advance over the years. Weapons have always advanced since the most primitive of times, so to think the founding fathers were not capable of knowing that paints them as some sort of cave men. They knew weapons would improve over the time, and they wanted the people's weapons to keep up with that.
My issue with gun control has to do with the distant future. It won't be in the next 100 years, maybe not even the next 200 years. But one day, some asshole is going to try to take over the world again. There will be another Hitler somewhere in the world someday. And as long as Americans are armed, they will never end up in gas chambers or concentration camps. I know that sounds crazy, but it will happen again one day. Some asshole will build an army and try to march over other countries.jim (at) amateursconvert . com Amateurs ConvertComment

Comment