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.
All you did was make a horrible argument for the state by implying that they know whats best for a human and that our best interest and security lies with them.
so cede to everything they do
Your train of thought is poisonous and everything that is wrong with the modern civilian.
The second amendment has nothing to do with self defense or hunting. The second amendment is a protection against tyrannical government, and it still fulfills that function to this day. Just look at the trouble we're having fighting an insurgency in Afghanistan, there's no way the feds could (or would) engage in a full scale war against one or more states if they left the Union. The second amendment is just as relevant today as it was in 1789, and even if you disagree, there isn't nearly enough people that agree with you to change anything.
Haha. Methinks Rambo is your favorite movie of all time.
The framers of the US Constitution back in the 1780s had their reasons for placing the 2nd Amendment into the Constitution. They were as follows:
1. If the young, vulnerable republic was attacked by a European power (Great Britain, France or Spain), the United States would need to call up militias to defend cities and towns against invasion. Back then, the United States had a small standing army incapable of matching the manpower of the European armies. This was where the militias could be called to back up the professional army. Male citizens were permitted to keep rifles and pistols on their property in case they were called up for active duty. Militiamen were expected to provide of their own weaponry.
2. Protection of property and life against Indian attacks. As more Americans began crossing the Appalachians in search of land, they would no doubt encounter some hostile Indian tribes. Since the US government did not have a large enough military force to remove indigenous threats, the armed citizenry would be a capable alternative. As record numbers of white settlers poured into tribal lands, the Indians were no match from the firepower of the frontiersmen.
3. Use firearms to suppress black slave revolts. Since many of the Founding Fathers were slaveowners themselves, they adopted a strong interest in the 2nd Amendment. White families and the field managers were outnumbered by black slaves by a wide ratio. If the slaves were to rebel against the property master, the odds would favor the slaves in either killing or chasing away the white masters. The great equalizer was the firearm and family members and plantation managers were fully armed in case the slaves became hostile.
4. Hunting game for survival and leisure. In the late 18th century, the United States was a predominately rural society where families had to survive off the land. In addition to growing some crops, animals were hunted for food and clothing in the frontier areas.
So let's move ahead from 1789 to 2012. Do we still need to bear arms in this country if:
1. The United States is under no threat from foreign invasion from powers across the oceans. We are the preeminent global military superpower with the best air and naval defenses on the planet--protected by vast oceans. The all-volunteer military forces of today are infinitely greater in strength with numbers and experience compared to the rag-tag republic forces of 1789.
2. White America committed over 300 years of genocide against Native American tribes. The indigenous cultures have been reduced in population to such a point that they are inconsequential in current American history. There's no more Indian threat to the American population in 2012.
3. Slavery was abolished in 1863 and the 14th Amendment sealed the deal. There are no more black slaves in chains to worry about.
4. No need to hunt for meat and hides. In 2012, we have grocery stores, butcher shops and clothing stores.
The original framers believed in the right to bear arms because they were terrified of a foreign invasion by a European power, attacks by Indian tribes, violent rebellion by black slaves and settlers needed to kill animals for food and clothing. These reasons for arming citizens might have some merit in 1789 but not today.
There will always be men with little willies who want big guns.
2nd Amendment or not, 2013 will be the year that the gun culture club gets the wake up call that it has had coming. Threads like this only make the case for some kind of revisit of the Framer's Document. Tell me something else besides the Bible and the Constitution that resists progress so obsessively.
Haha. Methinks Rambo is your favorite movie of all time.
Haha, methinks you failed U.S. History.
Thomas Jefferson:
" The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure."
James Madison:
"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed – unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
George Mason:
" When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor.."
Alexander Hamilton:
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
Thomas Paine:
"The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside … Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."
Benjamin Franklin:
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Shall I go on? And for the record, I don't particularly care for Rambo.
And what is your solution? Gun control is a total joke. And you know it. Your solution is "gun banning." You want NO guns in the hands of "private persons." For the record here, I am NOT a private person. I am one of the few who would have a gun, as a sworn police officer. However, I shall move on.
So, let us ban ALL guns. As of January 1, 2013. NO private ownership of guns. You and all of the other liberals slap each other on the backs and declare, "victory." Now what? The guns I own, which are actually very few, will be on the earth, when your great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandchildren are dead. They will last 1,000 years plus. That is for the 4 personally owned firearms I have. What about the entire United States? The MILLIONS of guns out there, which will last for the next thousand years. What about them?
Or do you and all the other liberal gun control advocates, advocate sending men/women into peoples homes, searching them, violating the 4th Amendment, et al to confiscate said guns? Are you for that? Do you realize the number of gun fights you would be sending the police into and the number of deaths there would be?
Do you understand, right now, as we speak, THOUSANDS of persons are buying guns, ammunition, etc and placing them in waterproof containers and burying them all over the country? What? Are you going to arrest and incarcerate, ALL of these people because they cannot provide you and your liberal cohorts with those guns? What about the illegal gun trade which will spring up across the Mexican Border? China, and every other country in the world, will make MILLIONS of AK's, etc and send them to Mexico. The drug cartels will smuggle them into the US, just like marijuana and crank.
Oh but the people will turn them in if requested. Yes, SOME will. The majority will not. Then what? What then? Kick in doors and confiscate them? I've already addressed that. Are you going to do that? I won't. I'd refuse. So were back to square one. Gun control is a lie. Its another feel good measure, to make some limp wristed liberals sleep good at night and feel as if they made a difference. They, of course, have not. But hell, it looks good.
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.
