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 08-06-2019, 12:07 AM
 
9,539 posts, read 4,365,562 times
Reputation: 11126

Advertisements

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.
Blah, blah, blah.
Every time there is a mass shooting tragedy across the globe, anti-gun tyrants have tried to use it as a means to disarm the law abiding populace. In most countries this infringement has been successful because their founding fathers and principles do not protect them from the emotional whims of the day.

So this thread is the same tune, different day from those who want to see the end of our constitutional republic.
The 2nd Amendment protects all the others when you get to the very basics of reality.
The right to bare arms is primarily not for hunting, self defense, sport, collecting etc.
Instead it is mainly for the purpose to prevent enemies BOTH foreign AND domestic from trying to become tyrannical masters by taking away our God given right to freedom.

Rest assured if the FF's could be brought back from the dead and asked if the occasional tragedy could be averted by disarming the law abiding populace, they would emphatically be against it.

As one of them famously said;

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”


`
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-06-2019, 02:56 AM
 
Location: Richmond
1,628 posts, read 844,930 times
Reputation: 1744
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.
I have not read all 34 pages of this thread, but the 2nd Amendment is not only just as needed today as it was 200+ year's ago. It is not wrong in any way.

The 2nd Amendment is not there to protect any one person, it is not there to protect a city full of children. The 2nd Amendment protects society itself.

The 2nd Amendment gives the people of society the ability to be able to protect themselves in the way that best suits their needs if they choose to. A gun can be a great equalizer, it would allow a 100 pound woman to successfully defend themselves against a 260 pound attacker.

The 2nd Amendment gives the people of a society, the right to be able to defend themselves against an aggressor, weather that aggressor be internal to the country or external to the county.

The reasons for the 2nd Amendment are just are viable today, as they were 200+ years ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2019, 04:38 AM
 
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
690 posts, read 184,588 times
Reputation: 1110
Quote:
Originally Posted by censusdata View Post
The Founding Fathers were well versed in Ancient Roman history. 2A and all it entails made a ton of sense back then. How could they have foreseen that technology in under 200 years could produced enough bombs to destroy the whole world? They also didn't want a strong federal army so a well armed militia could realistically overthrow a tyrant.

In today's world the whole premise is different. The govt has aerial fighter planes and nukes. No militia is going to overthrow that. Allowing citizens to have same weapons as military would be huge safety hazard. It would be insane to allow an 18 yr old to buy a nuclear bomb at Wal Mart. We also can't have a weak federal army, we'd be invaded tomorrow. The world is very different from 1790.
The phrase 'to bear arms' has been interpreted by the courts to mean what one man can carry and operate, man-portable. The 2nd Amendment did not give the right to a cannon, a warship, or other large weapons of its day. Therefore it can be extrapolated that we, today, do not have a right to a tank, aircraft carrier, or nuclear weapon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2019, 04:44 AM
 
30,331 posts, read 15,738,249 times
Reputation: 20379
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumann Koch View Post
The phrase 'to bear arms' has been interpreted by the courts to mean what one man can carry and operate, man-portable. The 2nd Amendment did not give the right to a cannon, a warship, or other large weapons of its day. Therefore it can be extrapolated that we, today, do not have a right to a tank, aircraft carrier, or nuclear weapon.
So, you're stating that at the time the Constitution was written, or in the years following, private citizens didn't legally own ships armed with cannon?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2019, 04:50 AM
 
Location: DFW - Coppell / Las Colinas
32,313 posts, read 36,982,744 times
Reputation: 39129
So anyone watching the unarmed Democratic civilians in Hong Kong try to resist the heavily armed Communist Chinese military?
They are fighting for their lives, their future and whether they can be deported to Chinese Concentration Camps.

At some point I'll bet they wish they had a 2nd amendment, a well armed Militia and the ability to defend themselves against the boot of the Communist.

Could that ever happen here? Yes, yes it could. And that's why we need the 2nd and our guns.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2019, 04:52 AM
 
30,331 posts, read 15,738,249 times
Reputation: 20379
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakin View Post
So anyone watching the unarmed Democratic civilians in Hong Kong try to resist the heavily armed Communist Chinese military?

They are fighting for their lives, their future and whether they can be deported to Chinese Concentration Camps.

At some point I'll bet they wish they had a 2nd amendment, a well armed Militia and the ability to defend themselves against the boot of Communist.
Most liberals believe government has the right to ship you off to a concentration camp. It's inbthe interest of the government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2019, 04:57 AM
 
30,331 posts, read 15,738,249 times
Reputation: 20379
Quote:
Originally Posted by waffleiron1968 View Post
A2 was written in a different time and in a different context. It needs to be abrogated. The senseless gun violence is making the US a failed state. If you can't assure safety, you are a failing state.
So, you will trade rights for safety.

Shocker.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2019, 06:47 AM
 
Location: A safe distance from San Francisco
8,728 posts, read 6,231,170 times
Reputation: 8752
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike1003 View Post
The Founding Fathers knew exactly what they were doing


The 2nd Amendment protects all of the other Amendments!!
Ahhh......another round of The Internet's most popular dogma. Some genius wrote it and posted it some years back and since then gun zealots are piled on top of each other trying to out-do their peers in total number of repetitions. Because they think it's so cool.

The only problem is that it is complete and utter nonsense in the environment in which we live today....and have lived for more than a century.

In my post #303, I invited another poster to tell us of his (or anyone else's, for that matter) successes in evading or invalidating laws or any government authority using his gun. I haven't seen a response yet. I can't imagine why not.

Perhaps you'd be willing to share some stories of when you've used your gun to subdue and prevail over government action you don't like?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2019, 06:57 AM
 
2,627 posts, read 895,056 times
Reputation: 1826
Well, I agree the Founders made a mistake with the 2nd amendment. The mistake was that it is very poorly worded.

"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."

That is not even a coherent sentence. Grammatically incorrect. If they intended for the right to arms to be universal, they should have left out the first part. If they wanted the right to be reserved to members of the militia, they should have clearly stated that.

Instead we have this contradictory wording that allows us now to have these endless debates about what they really meant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2019, 07:12 AM
 
360 posts, read 38,378 times
Reputation: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo58 View Post
Well, I agree the Founders made a mistake with the 2nd amendment. The mistake was that it is very poorly worded.

"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."

That is not even a coherent sentence. Grammatically incorrect. If they intended for the right to arms to be universal, they should have left out the first part. If they wanted the right to be reserved to members of the militia, they should have clearly stated that.

Instead we have this contradictory wording that allows us now to have these endless debates about what they really meant.
It's as clear as ever. No one had problems interpreting this amendment until progressives began trying to ban guns using everything short of a constitutional amendment (what it requires, but what they realize is futile).

{purpose}, {right}. The first part of the sentence is the purpose for the right. But the right is clear, it's "the right of the people" not the "right of the people in a well regulated militia."

Back then, the 2nd amendment applied to the federal government and militias were controlled by state governments. It's basically saying, the federal government cannot pass any gun laws because that will interfere with the sovereignty of the state to manage its militia.

Now a lot of things have changed since the founding fathers wrote the bill of rights. For one, states no longer manage their militias and no longer have that level of sovereignty. But the amendment is there and in effect until it's amended away.

So instead of trying playing disingenuous word-games that only a person illiterate in the English language could swallow - push for gun regulation the proper way, a new amendment. What you're doing now undermines the constitution. If you can pass an amendment and then skirt around it by playing word-games and saying things like "well, the founding fathers couldn't possibly know" undermines rule of law in this country. It's dangerous and it needs to stop.
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