U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-04-2019, 08:38 AM
 
30,140 posts, read 15,692,591 times
Reputation: 20318

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post
Every country should have a well armed militia, in the form of a national guard or reserve forces to defend the country and I think this was the founding fathers intention, so they weren't wrong. The

What is wrong is using this to defend all weapons ownership imho.

I am all for sensible people enjoying target shooting or engaging in sport, or even the right to defend your home but you can do this without letting nutcases get a hold og rapid centre fire type weapons.
The 2nd was for the right of the INDIVIDUAL.

You need a course on the Constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-04-2019, 08:43 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
12,101 posts, read 4,132,139 times
Reputation: 7474
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
The 2nd was for the right of the INDIVIDUAL.

You need a course on the Constitution.
"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."

A militia is a type of reserve force like that found in Swtzerland where the Home Guard take their guns home and are committed to defending the country, it is very well regulated and is a world away from modern day America.

I suggest the meaning of Militia was this -

The obligation to serve in the militia in England derives from a common law tradition, and dates back to Anglo-Saxon times. The tradition was that all able-bodied males were liable to be called out to serve in one of two organisations. These were the posse comitatus, an ad hoc assembly called together by a law officer to apprehend lawbreakers, and the fyrd a military body intended to preserve internal order or defend the locality against an invader. The latter developed into the militia, and was usually embodied by a royal warrant. Service in each organisation involved different levels of preparednes

So the US is basically using something developed from Anglo Saxon times to justify it's gun laws, indeed it's so ridiculous you couldn't make it up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 08:43 AM
 
37,713 posts, read 16,336,939 times
Reputation: 8557
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeyJude514 View Post
There, I said it.

In their defense, they had no idea what that amendment would result in some 200+ years later, no way to know the kind of advanced weaponry that would be invented and fall into hands they don't belong in, no way of knowing how Americans would misuse and abuse the amendment in ways they never intended.

But here we are.

It's time to consider amending the Constitution again.
"The Founding Fathers Made a Mistake With the Second Amendment"

"It's time to consider amending the Constitution again"


For DECADES all we have heard from the anti-guns nuts is "ban this", "eliminate that", and NEVER tried to pass an amendment. Never even TALKED about it.

So, all I can say is, go for it, IF you have the b...s
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 08:46 AM
 
11,137 posts, read 6,202,423 times
Reputation: 6157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post
"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."

A militia is a type of reserve force like that found in Swtzerland where the Home Guard take their guns home and are committed to defending the country, it is very well regulated and is a world away from modern day America.
Exactly. Please explain to me, someone, how every mentally unbalanced individual having the "right" to own weapons of mass destruction fits the definition of "a well regulated Militia"?

Again, the FF had no way of seeing how this amendment would be misused. It's time we made a correction to deal with the reality today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 08:47 AM
 
30,140 posts, read 15,692,591 times
Reputation: 20318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post
"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."

A militia is a type of reserve force like that found in Swtzerland where the Home Guard take their guns home and are committed to defending the country, it is very well regulated and is a world away from modern day America.
"The right of the people"

The Bill of Rights is where the Second is located.

The Bill of Rights are all rights for the people which the government can't infringe.

If the 2nd was about the rights of soldiers, it would NOT appear in the Bill of Rights.

You also need a course on the Constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 08:49 AM
 
37,713 posts, read 16,336,939 times
Reputation: 8557
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
180 degrees wrong


The founding fathers would be surprised at all the weapons restrictions. The purpose of the 2nd amendment was to put citizens on par with the military in weaponry. Thus, citizens would be able to overthrow an oppressive government that no longer represented the people.


The 2nd Amendment is the ultimate "checks and balances" if peaceful options fail.
"The founding fathers would be surprised at all the weapons restrictions."


The Father's words were VERY clear, "The RIGHT of the PEOPLE to KEEP AND BEAR ARMS, shall NOT be INFRINGED"


Too many liberal court judges do ONT follow the amendment. NOW that many are being replaced, IMO, we will see more challenges to these laws and overturned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 08:50 AM
 
770 posts, read 384,890 times
Reputation: 2450
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeyJude514 View Post
There, I said it.

In their defense, they had no idea what that amendment would result in some 200+ years later, no way to know the kind of advanced weaponry that would be invented and fall into hands they don't belong in, no way of knowing how Americans would misuse and abuse the amendment in ways they never intended.

But here we are.

It's time to consider amending the Constitution again.
Pol Pot, Mao, Hitler, and Stalin all agree with you 100%. Private ownership of firearms is a bad idea.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 08:50 AM
 
Location: Great Britain
12,101 posts, read 4,132,139 times
Reputation: 7474
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
"The right of the people"

The Bill of Rights is where the Second is located.

The Bill of Rights are all rights for the people which the government can't infringe.

If the 2nd was about the rights of soldiers, it would NOT appear in the Bill of Rights.

You also need a course on the Constitution.

I suggest the meaning of Militia was this -

The obligation to serve in the militia in England derives from a common law tradition, and dates back to Anglo-Saxon times. The tradition was that all able-bodied males were liable to be called out to serve in one of two organisations. These were the posse comitatus, an ad hoc assembly called together by a law officer to apprehend lawbreakers, and the fyrd a military body intended to preserve internal order or defend the locality against an invader. The latter developed into the militia, and was usually embodied by a royal warrant. Service in each organisation involved different levels of preparednes

So the US is basically using something developed from Anglo Saxon times to justify it's gun laws, indeed it's so ridiculous you couldn't make it up.

Anglo-Saxons - Wikipedia

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 08:51 AM
 
Location: USA
18,666 posts, read 9,155,529 times
Reputation: 14019
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
180 degrees wrong


The founding fathers would be surprised at all the weapons restrictions. The purpose of the 2nd amendment was to put citizens on par with the military in weaponry. Thus, citizens would be able to overthrow an oppressive government that no longer represented the people.


The 2nd Amendment is the ultimate "checks and balances" if peaceful options fail.
Exactly. These high profile "mass shootings" kill very few people, but get huge coverage due to the LEFT bias of the Media, and the Left's zeal to remove guns from the hands of the LAW ABIDING only. They know criminals and crazies will still get guns illegally, and use them illegally.

The media needs to stop glorifying these nuts!

Also, most of the deaths be people using guns is Black on Black inner city violence. Want to stop mass shootings? START THEIR with the criminals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2019, 08:52 AM
 
37,713 posts, read 16,336,939 times
Reputation: 8557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brave New World View Post
Every country should have a well armed militia, in the form of a national guard or reserve forces to defend the country and I think this was the founding fathers intention, so they weren't wrong. The Territorial Army‎, now known as the Army Reserve does a fantastic job of defending the UK, as indeed did the Home Guard during WW2 and other couyntries have similar reserve forces and militias.

What is wrong is using this to defend all weapon ownership,

I am all for sensible people enjoying target shooting or engaging in sport, or even the right to defend your home but you can do this without letting nutcases get a hold of rapid centre fire type weapons and causing massacre after massacre.
"I think this was the founding fathers intention," Their WORDING says otherwise!

Have you ever read any of their quotes about CITIZEN gun ownership? Apparently NOT!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top