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.
Anyone think that today the 2nd Amendment is outdated? Honestly, seems like it has more to do with militia needed in old days to fight for the country. Today, there is already the military, national guard, police, etc which replaced this militia long ago.
Seems like the right to bear arms just might out of touch with modern day USA.
Anyone think that today the 2nd Amendment is outdated? Honestly, seems like it has more to do with militia needed in old days to fight for the country. Today, there is already the military, national guard, police, etc which replaced this militia long ago.
Seems like the right to bear arms just might out of touch with modern day USA.
When thug gangbangers are raping your wife, stealing valuables, and laughing in your face do you think the cops will be there to save you?
You do realize that self defense is a natural right.
Anyone think that today the 2nd Amendment is outdated? Honestly, seems like it has more to do with militia needed in old days to fight for the country. Today, there is already the military, national guard, police, etc which replaced this militia long ago.
Seems like the right to bear arms just might out of touch with modern day USA.
You are uninformed. In the first place, when the founders spoke of "a well regulated militia," they were not referring to a standing army, or local police, etc.
I think you need to do some serious study to learn why the founders thought it necessary to protect the right to bear arms. If you read the words that follow the above quote, "being necessary to the security of a free State," you can begin to understand what they had in mind. They feared a "standing army" which could be employed against the people of the free State ("free State" meaning, non-tyrannical, or non-despotic state).
Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority in the case, District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), remarked that the term "and it's close variations" were "terms of art in 18th-century political discourse, meaning a free country or free polity."
Additionally, the principle constitutional debate leading up to Heller decision was about whether the right to bear arms was an individual or collective right, conditioned upon service in the militia. However, the idea of collective rights was unknown to the Framers of the Constitution.
James Madison's own testimony was that the provisions of the Bill of Rights "relate [first] ... to private rights." The notion of collective rights is an invention of Progressivism.
I will not cede my rights willingly to the whims of an uneducated claque who have divorced themselves from the past, and think themselves wiser than those great and wise men who founded this free country; a country like no other in the history of mankind. The founders understood that a government which held unrestricted power and authority over "the people" (citizens) would quickly become tyrannical. The Constitution, therefore, limits the power of the Federal government, and separates those powers among three branches.
The Second Amendment secures the right (the natural right) of the people to self defense, either against individuals who would threaten their property and person, or a despotic, tyrannical government.
Without the right to bear arms, we would no longer be free.
I dont advocate, amending the 2nd amendment, or disarming Americans...
But if It were ever to come to disarming the populace, I dont think there would be a "civil war" type resistance. Most Americans would comply.
I cant see a Father of three, risking everthing that he loves for a gun. So this large army of opposition is most likely an army in theory only.
Lol, yeah right. First of all if the government banned guns, people would just buy them on the black market. Second of all you have heavily armed militias out there, who are not going to give up there guns without a fight, it would make Waco and the branch davidians look like a walk in the park. Third of all, good luck with trying to get this passed. Any politician attempting to change the second amendment, is pretty much committing career suicide.
Anyone think that today the 2nd Amendment is outdated? Honestly, seems like it has more to do with militia needed in old days to fight for the country. Today, there is already the military, national guard, police, etc which replaced this militia long ago.
Seems like the right to bear arms just might out of touch with modern day USA.
Unless the British are comming, I fail to see relevance to 250 years ago...
Which means you are clueless.
I suggest you do some serious study to find out why the founders thought it necessary to specifically protect the right to bear arms before offering an opinion as to why you think it is no longer relevant.
The British may not be comming, but Barack Obama and his minions might be. We have in Barack Obama a man who would love to tear up the entire Constitution. He sees it as "a document of negative liberties," because it says what the governmnet "can't do to you," but not what the "government should do on your behalf." That is a scary thought, when you think that this man is sitting in the Oval Office!
Anyone think that today the 2nd Amendment is outdated? Honestly, seems like it has more to do with militia needed in old days to fight for the country. Today, there is already the military, national guard, police, etc which replaced this militia long ago.
Seems like the right to bear arms just might out of touch with modern day USA.
Start an Amendment drive. You cannot repeal the 2nd amendment, You can only add another amendment that nullifies or modifies the 2nd. You cannot change our rights by laws, only an amendment does that.
The Constitution is not our, the peoples laws. It is the laws, WE THE PEOPLE, placed on Government, to not touch our freedom.
Anyone think that today the 2nd Amendment is outdated? Honestly, seems like it has more to do with militia needed in old days to fight for the country. Today, there is already the military, national guard, police, etc which replaced this militia long ago.
Seems like the right to bear arms just might out of touch with modern day USA.
Do you liberal gun grabber never get tired of trying to take away the rights of the American people? If you don't like guns, don't get one. If you want to give up your rights then I suggest you go find a country that will oblige you.
Shouldn't this be moved to the joke forum? Because OP can't be serious.
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.
