Looks nice from the front, but those are pretty much all the windows there are.
Posted on 02/19/2018 7:50:38 AM PST by gopmike.com
How many people in this country have ACTUALLY read and UNDERSTAND the purpose of our 2nd Amendment??? Try reading the whole thing and understand why it was written. It is ONE sentence but Critically IMPORTANT to our liberty!
It wasn't written so we can hunt!!!
It was written to preserve our right to form a MILITIA to fight back against a tyrannical government.
I know it's not a likely scenario, but it is essential element of our freedom and liberty and the founding fathers knew it was critical to keep government in check.
It may not
(Excerpt) Read more at gopmike.com ...
Thank youfor thereminder. You are indeed right.
The 1st Amendment is First for a reason. It is the hallmark of our democracy (OK, I know, I know... but it’s still a stellar word).
The 2nd Amendment is the ONLY guarantor of the First.
That makes the 2nd Amendment sacrosanct.
If they want to repeal it, let them try. Otherwise, they should go peddle papers, fly kites, pound sand, pee up a rope, screw a stump, play in traffic, or kiss my ass.
Less likely now than for eight of the last nine years, but the future may change that.
Even worse here. In New Jersey, it's a felony to transport a slingshot. It's also a felony to possess without an "explainable lawful purpose".
Yeah just had my cousin spouting that it was an anachronism and we didn’t need to worry about a tyrannical govt. He caught quite a bit of flak then I posted about recent govt overreaches and past abuses. He responded well but basically is looking for action NOW.
My reply to that was we need to take the kids off the psychotropic drugs and I’d be ok with additional security, but think it will lead to a prison mentality and abuses by the security personnel who will treat the kids like prisoners instead of protected charges.
The liberals make the militia argument all the time. I point out to them that the first part of the amendment acknowledges the need for and desirability of a citizen militia and the second part acknowledges the right to keep and bear arms. In no part does it restrict that right to the militia.
Looks nice from the front, but those are pretty much all the windows there are.
So then if the congregates of the local Mosque somehow pool their money and expertise to create and build a dirty bomb.... no problem, right?
What about nerve gas? Thats a weapon. Are you literally stating that any weapon should be allowed to be owned by private citizens under the Second Amendment? With zero exception? And you see no down side to this?
Kind of an extreme example don’t you think?
that is correct.... we MUST have the means to counteract ANY act of aggression on the part of the government..... we have an FBI, CIA, ATF, etc. to investigate and root out the evil in the system... but they must also be kept in check..... henceforth, the second amendment... if they can have it, then so should I...
Sure its an extreme example. But i want to know where some people think the Second Amendment line actually is... or if there isn’t one at all.
In the hypothetical world you are portraying, of course I would want and use any and all weapons to preserve life and freedom.
“Well regulated”, in the common parlance of the time the term was written into the Second Amendment, means “well trained.”
I’ve read others that responded to you, citing such weapons as country to country defense. I guess I can buy that.
I’m really simply pointing out that many efforts have been made to disarm americans. I suppose I don’t trust others having a rocket launcher considering what they may use them for. However, if I happened to need one to combat them, it sure would be nice.
The moment you accept that there is a line, then you have lost. They will keep hammering at that line until you are totally disarmed. The only way to win decisively is to never accept a line.
Hitler registered then confiscated guns. It works when you want absolute control. Progressive ideology is based on that principle along with "the end justifies the means." We are seeing this today in our FBI and DOJ!
Nikita Khrushchev warned us in the 50's. "We will get you through your schools." He was spot on.
A couple of months ago at work some employees were talking about how the First Amendment gave you the right to say what ever you want. I said "No it doesn't. Free speech is an inalienable right." Saw dear in the headlights.
Asked them if they knew the first 5 words of the 1st Amendment. "Congress shall pass no laws." Saw dear in the headlights. Explained to them that the purpose of the Constitution was to restrain the ruling elite. They didn't have a clue.
Sadly, I don't think it will be 100 years from now. The next gen will usher it in sooner.
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.”
Alexander Fraser Tytler
One hopeful note, 4 of the 8 millennials I work with are pro-2nd Amendment.
Pray.
You would use a nuclear weapon, as a private citizen, within the United States, to “preserve life and freedom.” Hooookay.....
There’s a line right now! You can’t own hand grenades. Or rocket launchers. Or a working tank. Have we already lost?
Of course I see a down side to it (risk), but life is risky and this is a Constitutional right. Where do YOU draw the line? What firearms/weapons are you comfortable with the public owning? If you say anything less than what I’ve offered, then you are one of the “sensible gun control crowd”...And don’t give me the “but what about the jihadi/ISIS/local Mosque” nonsense...the same can be said about a handgun, vehicle, rocks, chlorine/ammonia mixtures, etc....where do you want to start restricting? Anyone who sets their mind to it can inflict all kinds of damage if they really want to and work at it.
Yes, and back in the day it meant the citizens having the same weaponry as the government. So......that means....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.