Hillcrest High School has error in American History textbook (Greenville: crime rate, felony)

[USNRET04]

Originally Posted by Art123

Exactly.

The phrase "the right to bear arms" has been used to describe the second amendment since...the second amendment was being written. Patrick Henry ("Give me Liberty or give me death") used the phrase even back then.

It's not like they're teaching creationism in science class or anything. It's one appropriate use of a phrase in a textbook - and a trumped up controversy preying on people's ignorance.

Are you referring to this quote by Henry during his "Give me Liberty..." speech:

"The great object is, that every man be armed.... Every one who is able may have a gun."

Or maybe we can look at other founding father's quotes after the Constitution was written. Here a just a few of many, maybe you will recognize a few of these folks:

"... of the liberty of conscience in matters of religious faith, of speech and of the press; of the trail by jury of the vicinage in civil and criminal cases; of the benefit of the writ of habeas corpus; of the right to keep and bear arms.... If these rights are well defined, and secured against encroachment, it is impossible that government should ever degenerate into tyranny." - James Monroe

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." - Thomas Jefferson

"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the right of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms... - Sam Adams

[Art123]

Originally Posted by USNRET04

Are you referring to this quote by Henry during his "Give me Liberty..." speech:



Or maybe we can look at other founding father's quotes after the Constitution was written. Here a just a few of many, maybe you will recognize a few of these folks:

Yeah, a lot of people have used the whole phrase. A TON also truncate it to the shorter one, including many conservatives and current tea party folk. It's on bumper stickers, across the top of websites, and yes, was used by Patrick Henry.

The real story here is not the semantical one of what phrase to use.

The real story is that some people seem to think that this is evidence of some sort of larger conspiracy to take away your guns. That using a commonly used phrase is evidence of government brainwashing of children with the ultimate goal of taking away your guns. That omitting two words in a textbook is evidence that the Federal Government is plotting some long-term plan to take away your rights.

It's a ludicrous bit of fear-mongering preying on weak minds.

The real tragedy here is that a local high school student believes this nonsense, and that local adults also believe this and think it's important enough to share when there are actual problems with actual consequences on people's lives that we should be working on, not trumped-up conspiracy theories of an idiot.

[Moab1]

There are Democrats who do want to ban guns. They say so. It isn't a conspiracy theory on the part of "stupid" people. Many Democrats argue that the 2nd amendment doesn't mean citizens can have firearms, it is only about a militia or military having firearms.

The writers of the textbook may just be lazy but it is interesting they combined the 2nd and 3rd amendments into one summary, especially given the 3rd amendment doesn't have much relevance in modern times.

I don't see why it is difficult for them to list each amendment in full and on its own rather than do summaries of them.

[Moab1]

This is on Glenn Beck's website The Blaze:



The South Carolina school district currently utilizing a U.S. history textbook with a disputed interpretation of the Second and Third Amendments responded to TheBlaze’s exclusive report in great detail on Wednesday.
In an emailed statement, a spokesman for Greenville County Schools confirmed that Hillcrest High School in Simpsonville, S.C., has received “several emails and phone calls” expressing concern over how the textbook, “The Americans,” defines the Second Amendment.
Oby G. Lyles, Sr., the director of communications at Greenville County Schools, told TheBlaze that the district has “looked into the matter and found that page 149 of the state-adopted textbook does not accurately present the Second Amendment.”
“It states that citizens have the right to bear arms as members of a militia of citizen-soldiers,” he added. “This is not accurate. We will inform our high school social studies teachers that they should refer to page 166 of the textbook which accurately presents the Amendment (as originally ratified).”


Teachers in the Greenville County school district will be instructed that page 149 of the textbook, which includes the faulty information, is entirely “incorrect,” and that they should direct students to a different page that he says contains the accurate definitions.


Lyles said officials at Greenville County Schools are also working to determine if any of its schools use the aforementioned AP history book.
“If so, we will also notify high schools,” he told TheBlaze.

[Art123]

Originally Posted by Moab1

There are Democrats who do want to ban guns. They say so. It isn't a conspiracy theory on the part of "stupid" people. Many Democrats argue that the 2nd amendment doesn't mean citizens can have firearms, it is only about a militia or military having firearms.

I'd like you to direct me to any elected person in the Federal government who says this. Or any elected official anywhere in this country. How many are there? Any? More than 5?

Seriously, if a vote to ban all guns for citizens made it to the Senate floor, it would lose 100-0, maybe 99-1.

There is absolutely no chance in hell that guns are ever going to be banned in this country.

None.

There are a million times more Democrats (elected and otherwise) that realize that we have the obvious right to own guns in this country, than there are who think otherwise.

BTW, our founding fathers didn't think that EVERY ADULT should have the right to own a gun. But now, of course, we do let
'the women" and "the blacks" participate in the Constitution.

[JoeP]

There are Democrats who do want to ban guns.

Nope, sorry try again. You need to clarify yourself or are you intentionally being misleading?

Some weapons have been banned (and it wasn't just Democrats) but "guns" - that is overall has never been part of it.

And it's very interesting that this is brought up in SC, where strong gun support influenced the writing of the Amendment to begin with... that is slave owners wanted protection in case, well you know... the people that they owned got all uppity and wanted freedom n' stuff.

[Moab1]

Democrats would ban guns, if they could. They've been talking about banning "assault weapons" for years. See Diane Fienstein. That's hardly a group of people who care much about 2nd amendment.

Here's some info about Obama's positions on firearms, which he distorted in his two campaigns for president:

ABC New’s local Washington, D.C. anchor, Leon Harris, asked Mr. Obama: “One other issue that’s of great importance here in the district as well is gun control … but you support the D.C. handgun ban.” Mr. Obama’s simple response: “Right.” When Mr. Harris said “And you’ve said that it’s constitutional,” Mr. Obama again says “right” and is clearly seen on tape nodding his head “yes.”
But this is not new. Mr. Obama has a long history of supporting city gun bans. The Associated Press described his 2004 vote on a gun control bill: “He also opposed letting people use a self-defense argument if charged with violating local handgun bans by using weapons in their homes. The bill was a reaction to a Chicago-area man who, after shooting an intruder, was charged with a handgun violation.”
A candidate questionnaire shows that Mr. Obama supported a ban on handguns in 1996. In 1998, he backed a ban on the sale of all semiautomatic guns (a ban that would encompass the vast majority of guns sold in the U.S.) In 2004, he advocated banning gun sales within five miles of a school or park (essentially a ban on all guns sold in almost all the states). Possibly, even more importantly, he served on the board of the Joyce Foundation, probably the largest private funder of anti-gun and pro-ban groups and research in the country.
The Obama campaign “flatly denied” the 1996 statement supporting a ban on handguns, blaming it instead on a staffer from his state senate race who they said had incorrectly filled out the candidate questionnaire. But the Politico obtained a copy of the statement and found Mr. Obama’s own handwritten notes on it indicating that he had personally checked and corrected answers.
[LEFT]
Read more: LOTT: Obama's gun ban rhetoric - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
[/LEFT]

[Moab1]

I'm pretty sure nobody wants everybody to own guns, like crazy people and felons. Gun laws aren't going to do anything about that though. DC has the toughest gun laws in the nation and there is a lot of gun crime there, regardless.

It's funny how people on here say Democrats don't want to ban guns but then imply guns would be illegal if the slaveowners were not worried about slave uprisings. Sounds like they are suggesting 2nd amendment is not valid because of this, while ensuring us that Democrats would never try to ban firearms. Seems like a disconnect.

Why did those two Democrat politicians in Colorado get recalled recently after they supported gun control measures if they do support 2nd amendment?
Just more stupid voters out there?

[Art123]

Originally Posted by Moab1

I'm pretty sure nobody wants everybody to own guns, like crazy people and felons. Gun laws aren't going to do anything about that though. DC has the toughest gun laws in the nation and there is a lot of gun crime there, regardless.

It's funny how people on here say Democrats don't want to ban guns but then imply guns would be illegal if the slaveowners were not worried about slave uprisings. Sounds like they are suggesting 2nd amendment is not valid because of this, while ensuring us that Democrats would never try to ban firearms. Seems like a disconnect.

What? No one is implying guns would be illegal at any point. I was just saying the Founding Fathers weren't Gods. They weren't infallible. They made HUGE mistakes.

Guns are, and always will be, a part of this country. To think otherwise is ludicrous. You have to ignore 99% of the facts out in the real world, and focus on a very few, narrowly thought out, fear-mongering conspiracy theories to believe otherwise. You have to focus on a head nod here, a scribble there, an omitted two words in a textbook...while completely ignoring the other 99.999% of the information out there most people refer to as reality.

And the reality is that no one (with any actual power) is plotting to take away your guns.

Originally Posted by Moab1

Why did those two Democrat politicians in Colorado get recalled recently after they supported gun control measures if they do support 2nd amendment?
Just more stupid voters out there?

Errr...this is just more of evidence of why guns will never be banned in this country. Just a rather modest restriction on the size of gun clips gets you booted. Of course "they support the 2nd amendment." Where in the second amendment does it say you can have a 21, or 30 round clip? BTW, how many people voted in that recall? Were the voting rules changed (just for that recall election) to suppress voter turnout?

[bikeoid]

LOL - they'll have to ban people from entering gun shows who have omitted the 'keep' from their T-shirts and belt buckles.