Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As I'm sure you know, the precise meaning and intent of the 2nd amendment has been debated for almost as long as the Bill of Rights has been in place.
Most, perhaps all, of the remaining amendments are less specific and principally based, so they are timeless. The 2nd is not, and badly needs clarification and update for the times we live in.
OK, since you asked. The meaning of the 2nd amendment, in today's language, is:
Since an armed and capable populace is necessary for security and freedom, the right of ordinary people to own and carry guns and other such weapons cannot be taken away or restricted.
No, no need to thank me. Happy to help out.
As you can see, the 2nd amendment is perhaps even MORE "timeless" than the others, not less as you tried to pretend. Freedom of Speech didn't need to be protected until humans learned to talk. Freedom of the Press came even later, when he learned to write, and later invented the printing press etc. But the right to defend yourself existed from the first day some primitive, hairy caveman got jumped on by a sabertoothed tiger... or by another caveman.
The 2nd amendment defends a right far older than many of the others listed in the Bill of Rights.
And if people lose that right, they soon lose all the rest.
Of course we all have a right to self-defense. What offenses do we have a right to? Murder? No? OK, what about the most deadly and widely used tool of murder? A tool that serves no other purpose.
I'm going to assume you were high when you wrote this last part.
And I know people who would be 6 feet under right now had they not "used" their guns.
Same thing, different probability. The obvious implication here is that the probability of needing a gun is so small that someone who "makes wise choices" is somehow foolish for owning a gun. Which I contend is bull.
this is what it boils down to for me. this entire thread is pretty much based off of a false dichotomy. choosing to live without guns does not make you any more wise or ignorant than choosing to live with guns. they are tools, used responsibly and without incident by most.
this is what it boils down to for me. this entire thread is pretty much based off of a false dichotomy. choosing to live without guns does not make you any more wise or ignorant than choosing to live with guns. they are tools, used responsibly and without incident by most.
This is true, but you can't give any kind of safety to your family without one. What are you going to do? Fart or scream real loud? You don't scare me says the burgler.
I can "disarm" nearly every one. Walking around oblivious to danger and your surroundings gives most away!
Walking around oblivious to danger and your surroundings is precisely what gets people killed in Alaska. Every bear, moose, and wolf attack against a human can be directly linked to the victim not paying attention to their surroundings, oblivious to the danger, until it is too late.
Cities are more forgiving than nature. You can ride a bike or jog through most areas of any city without fear of being attacked. If you try those activities in the Alaskan bush you will end up as some critter's lunch. Especially if you are unarmed. Without tools (e.g., firearms) humans are prey, not predators. Particularly if we do not apply our vastly superior intelligence and pay attention to our surroundings.
Walking around oblivious to danger and your surroundings is precisely what gets people killed in Alaska. Every bear, moose, and wolf attack against a human can be directly linked to the victim not paying attention to their surroundings,
Mountain lions too. Predators attack from behind. Wood cutters in India wear masks on the back of their head painted with a face to protect them from tigers.
Mountain lions too. Predators attack from behind. Wood cutters in India wear masks on the back of their head painted with a face to protect them from tigers.
That depends on the predator and the prey. Moose and bear are big enough not to care from which angle they attack, and wolves will only take down a bigger critter if they are in a pack.
Wearing masks may work with tigers, but there is no substitute for not paying attention to your surroundings. Especially when the cost for not paying attention may be your life. People put too much confidence in "safety" measures, as if it were an excuse to not pay attention. Like the use of "bear-bells."
You can always tell the difference between black bear and grizzly bear scat. Black bear scat smells like berries, and will have vegetation and possibly bits of fur in it. Grizzly bear scat smells like pepper spray, and will have bear-bells mixed in it.
Even when I am armed to the teeth, I try to pay close attention to my surroundings and my dogs. My dogs have a much better sense of smell than I, so I take advantage of that when I can. I really like bears, and I would really hate to be in a position where I have to shoot one in self-defense. Not to mention all the paperwork. So I try to pay attention for the bear's sake as well as mine.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
