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.
No, there is not a single word about an individual right to a gun for self-defense in the notes from the Constitutional Convention. Nor with scattered exceptions in the records of the ratification debates in the states. Nor on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives as it marked up the Second Amendment.
The Second Amendment protected protected the individual right to a gun… to fulfill the dutyto serve in a militia.
Quote:
If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair. The usurpers, clothed with the forms of legal authority, can too often crush the opposition in embryo. The smaller the extent of the territory, the more difficult will it be for the people to form a regular or systematic plan of opposition, and the more easy will it be to defeat their early efforts. Intelligence can be more speedily obtained of their preparations and movements, and the military force in the possession of the usurpers can be more rapidly directed against the part where the opposition has begun. In this situation there must be a peculiar coincidence of circumstances to insure success to the popular resistance.
Not at all, that's something you gun lovers have to rationalize in order to believe you're own rhetoric. Cute but sad. But please...explain how armed citizens are holding our government back.... Please, I'm interested.
Quote:
The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing.
Any engineer worth a damn could build one of these in their garage with objects they can purchase legally... and they wouldn't be worried about legality if they were openly revolting....
Maybe one reasonable liberal can explain to me -- why are liberals afraid of people's right to bear arms? Would be nice if the response isn't "for the sake of people."
Maybe one reasonable liberal can explain to me -- why are liberals afraid of people's right to bear arms. Would be nice if the response isn't "for the sake of people."
It's simple Liberal logic, duhh... Crime is dropping, and we have a police force that will come to the rescue after, for example, someone's wife, mother, sister, daughter, friend has already been raped and beaten. You must understand that, for example, in 2011 only 83,425 women were raped instead of the 84,767 in 2010, so with the dropping crime rate and all the police protection that's afforded to us, any idiot could see that there's no need for women to carry a firearm for protection.
We've always had this "open border", and it was a lot more "open" in the past when the worst thing facing an America tourist was having to bribe a cop. Not to derail this topic, but our southern border is several thousands of miles of either mostly a combination of desert, mountains, or coastal prairie. Not exactly an easy area to monitor and intercept illegal immigrants.
Quote:
I have fears, you said runs on feels, and opinions nothing more.
Kay bro.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
When you cant make a point make a joke.
Since the end of the Civil War on party has been trying to disarm Americans..
Since the Civil War and shortly after, America has begun to industrialize and push it's boundaries from coast to coast. The "native American" problem would be begin wind down post Civil War as America pushed westward and begin to grow at an increasing population and increasing urbanized rate. Our army became more powerful, our country became more powerful economically, and politically. Law enforcement and social services grew pushing down crime overall until present day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunlover
Google the Battle of Athens Tennessee 1946.
A rebellion against the local government in 1946 against local corruption, most mid to major cities (aka local governments) present day have would be an entirely different story.
I guess you have something new to think about don't you?
I said OUR government. Throwing Hitler in the mix is really reaching....
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.
This is all that needs to be said. Girlie gun grabbers who willingly fall for a false sense of security will run to you for protection. 
