Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Does 2nd Amendment give right to armed revolt?
heraldandnews.com ^ | 13 January, 2013 | Joel Mathis

Posted on 01/14/2013 4:08:51 PM PST by marktwain

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-122 next last
To: Iron Munro

Uuhhh, I like your thinking.

OTH, don’t you realize that you would need to round up all the demoKaRATZ too?

The party of treason needs to be brought to HEEL.

Maybe it needs to be disbanded and those culpable, put on trial and given LONG, LONG jail terms.


51 posted on 01/14/2013 4:54:58 PM PST by ConradofMontferrat (According to mudslimz, my handle is a HATE CRIME. And I HOPE they don't like it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: sand88

Please read my whole post before you tell me I’m wrong. The Founding Fathers knew that they were traitors and dead men if they failed. (Ben Franklin: “We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.”)

Its amazing how we complain about the media turning everything into a sound bite, and we do it right here by cutting a sound bite out of a short post.


52 posted on 01/14/2013 4:55:36 PM PST by Bryanw92 (Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
"Does 2nd Amendment give right to armed revolt?"

I'll answer this question. The answer is no. The right of the people to armed revolt to remove an oppressive government is a pre-existing right, it is a natural right that arises from our human nature and/or God.

The 2nd Amendments purpose is to ensure that the People have to tools necessary to exercise that right.

53 posted on 01/14/2013 4:56:53 PM PST by Jabba the Nutt (.Are they stupid, malicious or evil?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring

H.H. was a lefty gun nut.


54 posted on 01/14/2013 4:58:06 PM PST by DownInFlames
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

It’s instances like these where you realize how far way they are from us, and how thoroughly they’ve influenced the average dope (I, for clarification’s sake, am an unusual dope, is all) through school and the MSM. They haven’t read our books, listened to our conversations, and so on. Justified armed revolt sounds loony to them, no matter how common it’s been in US history and despite the fact that without we wouldn’t have a country.


55 posted on 01/14/2013 4:59:56 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

“Guns are uniquely efficient killing machines.”

[Raspberry!] Guns are difficult to kill with, even for those well trained and who use them every day. Bombs are much, much more efficient. They are indiscriminate and kill or maim everything within a certain area. More people were killed by artillery in every war since at least the Civil War, maybe earlier, in US history.

You give far too much credit to guns.


56 posted on 01/14/2013 5:04:27 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Nope. That you have to take for yourself.
And if you lose, be ready to face the Hangman.


57 posted on 01/14/2013 5:06:40 PM PST by Little Ray (Waiting for the return of the Gods of the Copybook Headings.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DownInFlames

Apparently the satire/sarcasm wasn’t obvious enough.


58 posted on 01/14/2013 5:07:30 PM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: LiveFreeOrDie2001

Because It’s not about the children it’s about Gun control!
The Government has spent Sixty billion dollars since 9/11 on just the TSA alone patting down little old ladies and making more of a effort to NOT profile people than really do their jobs.Then they tell us that it would cost too much to put armed guards at the schools. Lying Socialist Pigs!

Sorry Pigs.


59 posted on 01/14/2013 5:13:23 PM PST by johnny reb (When in the course of human events.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92
If anyone is using the Second Amendment as the basis for a discussion about an armed revolt they are quoting the wrong document.

IMHO the right to revolt against a repressive government is found not in the Constitution but in the Declaration of Independence. The opening sentence, while not as famous as some other sentences, clearly states that the people have the natural right to dissolve an existing political system.

All the Second Amendment does is to give the people the ability to enforce that breakup by giving them the same military capabilities as the stand Federal Army (musket verses musket). If anything, the real impact of the Second Amendment has been severely weakened over the last 200 years.

60 posted on 01/14/2013 5:13:54 PM PST by Nip (BOHEICA and TANSTAAFL - both seem very appropriate today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92
Please read my whole post before you tell me I’m wrong.

Lighten up. I did not say you were wrong at all in what you wrote. I was providing added info on the matter from the Declaration of Independence.

61 posted on 01/14/2013 5:14:40 PM PST by sand88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

I am sure the Founders’ intent regarding armed resistance to tyranny was something like what the DemocRats say is their position on abortion: it should be legal, and rare.

Except that the Founders weren’t lying and the ‘Rats are.

“Rare” comes around pretty often for things that ‘Rats want, and it may be coming around fairly soon on some stuff they will regret.


62 posted on 01/14/2013 5:14:55 PM PST by Cincinnatus.45-70 (What do DemocRats enjoy more than a truckload of dead babies? Unloading them with a pitchfork!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnny reb

Yea, I know it’s about gun control, but DAMMIT, metal detectors or armed guards/teachers would work MUCH better!


63 posted on 01/14/2013 5:17:24 PM PST by LiveFreeOrDie2001 (Elections have consequences - NOW LOOK what we have to deal with...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Renegade

I believe the founding fathers would say we are duty bound to “throw off” our current government. The only debate left is what constitutes a “long train of abuses.”


64 posted on 01/14/2013 5:18:14 PM PST by ConservaTexan (February 6, 1911)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: donmeaker

For at least three of those rebellions there was no right to crush them, I believe. That isn’t a right, anyway, it is a power. Legitimate government gets power through the sovereign people sacrificing liberty for security, ir so the theory goes. But certain things they cannot give up, those being inalienable, and other things they haven’t given up, though government pretends otherwise.

Indirect taxes must be uniform according to the Constitution. The burden if the whiskey tax fell on one region more than others, probably by design, even if it was abstractly neutral. People had a right to resist it, in my opinion, including with violence. Not that everything they did was justified, but certainly Washington’s initial response was tyrannical. The latter response, under Jefferson, was th correct one: repeal.

Slaves had the same natural rights as us, and therefore were not responsible to any laws that would keep them in bondage. They had nit infinitely but unfountably more justification, for instance, than the American colonists revolting against the British.

The Constitution had no perpetual union clause, and the states were not denied the power to secede. Even were they, the people would not be bound by it. Certain of their rights are inalienable, meaning nontransferable, and they canny be forced to live under a government which they feel has become destructive of their liberty, even were the states bound, which they weren’t. The people could use the states as vehicles for their rebellion even if the states were constitutionally bound in union, which again they weren’t.

I don’t know enough about Shays.


65 posted on 01/14/2013 5:22:19 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

There is no “right” to armed revolt. That action is a solemn duty (at least if those who rebel against tyranny succeed), or an act of treason (if the tyrants prevail). The decision between the two depends on whether those who participate pledge their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor . . . or just their posting stance online.


66 posted on 01/14/2013 5:22:53 PM PST by Pollster1 (Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. - Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92

Armed revolt is both a right and a duty. Whether you’re marching on Washington or shooting a home invader, it is the same principle. Your life, your liberty, your gun, your responsibility.


67 posted on 01/14/2013 5:25:39 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92

“Treason doth never prosper; what’s the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason.”

John Harrington


68 posted on 01/14/2013 5:27:17 PM PST by Kozak (The Republic is dead. I do not owe what we have any loyalty, wealth or sympathy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray

And if you lose, be ready to face the Hangman
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Better a hangman or firing squad than sitting with your thumbs firmly planted where the sun don’t shine and allowing yourself to be overrun.

Like other threads have stated -took an oath to protect the Constitution and while the contract may have run out, the Oath hasn’t

Though there is only so much to be gained by a single person with his weapon, the phrase ‘death from a thousand paper cuts’ should be remembered.

The Vietnamese sort of proved what a ‘handful of determined people’ could do in holding off a powerful, better armed force.

They may not have won a major offensive, but they sure raised hell with US and kept us busy with their ‘guerrilla ways’.


69 posted on 01/14/2013 5:28:06 PM PST by xrmusn (6/98 "It is virtually impossible to clean the pond as long as the pigs are still crapping in it")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92

Well, see, that’s superficially true. Certainly the side in power has an advantage. But there are plenty of books defending the Torries, blacks, injuns, women, etc., against the Founders. Entire libraries are filled by Lost Cause books, despite the near monopoly of Lincoln worship within respectable opinion. The “winners write the books” thesis is truer of countries without natural rights traditions like ours.

History gives perspective, and allows us to be hanging judges, in Lord Acton’s formulation. Nevertheless you are free to say it’s bunk and one damn thing after another. Might makes right, and so forth. Just don’t whine when the strong man turns on you.


70 posted on 01/14/2013 5:34:44 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92

“rebellion begins as treason”

I follow Lysander Spooner in declaring that if popular sovereignty is true and natural rights exist there is no such thing as treason.


71 posted on 01/14/2013 5:36:29 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ConservaTexan

In MY lifetime I would say abuses began with the “Great Society” in 1964. A lot of personal freedoms have been lost since then.It is incremental like the frog in a boiling pot of water. I used to ask my students how many laws would be passed in ten years if they passed 10 laws a year.Luckily they knew the answer was 100.Then asked them how many laws were revoked in those 10 years.Gave them something to think about when they realized it was 0.Shades of Atlas Shrugged.This situation we are in now has been years in the making and I think it is coming to a tipping point. Will be interesting to see who will stand up to a Fascist form of government that we are entering with this Kenyan as president.


72 posted on 01/14/2013 5:40:18 PM PST by Renegade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

1776 Fact Check: Declaration of Independence

“...But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, IT IS THEIR RIGHT, IT IS THEIR DUTY, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security...He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.”

These SOBs don’t have ANY respect for us. Their time is coming.


73 posted on 01/14/2013 5:43:09 PM PST by CharlesThe Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92

That may be like a soundbite, but the entire Declaration is a series of bold assertions and aphorisn with a minimum of logical development. Those truths are self-evident? Nit accirding to the vast najority if humankind for recorded histiry. Our lifting the right and duty to revolt out if Jefferson’s question-begging tirade or carefully constructed explication of eternal truth depending on whether you agree, we can selectively quote him. It’s not taken out of context and doesn’t warp the meaning, anyway.

So what if they knew they could be hanged? That has nothing to do with it. Do you know the meaning if the term “right”? Revolters being right doesn’t mean they can’t be killed. It means it would be wrong for the British to do so.


74 posted on 01/14/2013 5:44:09 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

.....”it was actually exercised in the battle of Athens, TN, in 1946.”

Today I got an email containing the 13:32 video of the battle in Athens, TN by returning G.I.’s from WWII. What an eye opener this film is to those not yet convinced that our Founders knew exactly what they were doing when they put the second amendment in the Constitution.

This video can be found prominently on Youtube....just punch in BATTLE OF ATHENS.


75 posted on 01/14/2013 5:48:15 PM PST by Islander2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kozak

True. Excellent reference. These are hard times. We will be called to do hard things. Semper Fi.


76 posted on 01/14/2013 5:50:11 PM PST by CharlesThe Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Nip

The Declaration makes the case better, but if course that was its whole point. A decent respect for other people’s opinions compelled us to list our reasons, and blah, blah, blah. The 2nd amendment was under no such burden to explain itself, since it was merely a legal mechanism.

Nevertheless it does justify itself, much moreso than other amendments. What do you think the security of a free state was about? Either domestic insurrection against legitimate government, foreign invasion, or a central government grown destructive if liberty. All of them, actually.


77 posted on 01/14/2013 5:50:20 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Nip

The Declaration makes the case better, but if course that was its whole point. A decent respect for other people’s opinions compelled us to list our reasons, and blah, blah, blah. The 2nd amendment was under no such burden to explain itself, since it was merely a legal mechanism.

Nevertheless it does justify itself, much moreso than other amendments. What do you think the security of a free state was about? Either domestic insurrection against legitimate government, foreign invasion, or a central government grown destructive of liberty. All of them, actually.


78 posted on 01/14/2013 5:50:44 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring

We got a war on drugs right ?

Use the existing database on the dangerous drugs to monitor those who are taking the psychiatric drugs too. We have controlled substances, break through the HIPPA laws so the bureaucrats track the unstable minds as in those on these drugs.

It’s not the guns, it’s not the metal detectors, IT IS THE MINDS, unstable minds.


79 posted on 01/14/2013 5:52:09 PM PST by George from New England (escaped CT in 2006, now living north of Tampa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Jabba the Nutt

Absolutely correct. I pray that we don’t have to go to this place. That said, “Lock and Load.”

“All enemies foriegn and DOMESTIC!”


80 posted on 01/14/2013 5:52:58 PM PST by CharlesThe Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

Okay, I’ll put you down as in the Might Makes Right camp. Good to know.


81 posted on 01/14/2013 5:54:26 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: George from New England

Metal detectors weren’t my idea.


82 posted on 01/14/2013 5:55:16 PM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: LiveFreeOrDie2001

.”...metal detectors or armed guards/teachers....”

Metal detectors AND armed teachers.

These will be to the schools attempted massacres as reinforced cockpit doors and noncompliance with hijackers were to attempted airline terrorism.

Keep your powder dry.

The voice of the people HAS been heard, there are now in the hands of law abiding citizens enough weapons to supply the armies of china and India COMBINED.

and they are EVERYWHERE.


83 posted on 01/14/2013 5:57:45 PM PST by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57 returning after lurking since 2000))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Pitiful that any journalist today would ask such a question. The Constitution does not "give" us any rights whatsoever. It recognizes and acknowledges rights that accrue to us by virtue of our Divine origin; we were created in God's image.

Let no man, or group of men -- and certainly no entity of man's making such as government -- oppress or enslave those whom God has created in His own image. It would be a sin. It would be just as great a sin for those who are enslaved to allow it to happen and thus allow a living image of the Almighty to be defiled.

So we have a Divine right, indeed a Divine duty, to throw off any such shackles. The Framers spoke of it in great specificity and referred to it in the Declaration of Independence, as lots of others have pointed here.

The Constitution doesn't give us the right or duty to throw off the chains of tyranny (that emerges from our special relationship with God). The 2nd Amendment merely attempts to guarantee that we'll have the means to do it if it ever becomes necessary. (just my two-cent opinion)

84 posted on 01/14/2013 5:58:02 PM PST by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

have the right to revolt by force.

Actually, you have the “obligation” to protect that right.


85 posted on 01/14/2013 6:00:27 PM PST by RetiredTexasVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WildHighlander57

Time to stand up.

We have a permit on the Mn Capitol steps at Noon this Saturday.


86 posted on 01/14/2013 6:00:51 PM PST by LiveFreeOrDie2001 (Elections have consequences - NOW LOOK what we have to deal with...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: WildHighlander57

Add reinforced doors to the school also


87 posted on 01/14/2013 6:03:37 PM PST by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57 returning after lurking since 2000))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Dan Cooper
"The second amendment doesn’t give any rights. It forbids the federal government from infringing on the natural right to keep and bear arms. "

Can't be repeated enough!

88 posted on 01/14/2013 6:04:05 PM PST by zzeeman ("We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the consequences of evading reality.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: LiveFreeOrDie2001

I am in Texas.

Austin is 5 hours away.

Will try to get there.


89 posted on 01/14/2013 6:11:06 PM PST by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57 returning after lurking since 2000))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
If government goes too far, the argument goes, Americans have the right to revolt by force.

An argument made by none other than Alexander Hamilton.

In Federalist 29, Hamilton says:


"But though the scheme of disciplining the whole nation must be abandoned as mischievous or impracticable; yet it is a matter of the utmost importance that a well-digested plan should, as soon as possible, be adopted for the proper establishment of the militia. The attention of the government ought particularly to be directed to the formation of a select corps of moderate extent, upon such principles as will really fit them for service in case of need. By thus circumscribing the plan, it will be possible to have an excellent body of well-trained militia, ready to take the field whenever the defense of the State shall require it. This will not only lessen the call for military establishments, but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist."

Hamilton says that the armed militia is a protection against a despotic government using the army to enslave the people.


If there should be an army to be made use of as the engine of despotism, what need of the militia? If there should be no army, whither would the militia, irritated by being called upon to undertake a distant and hopeless expedition, for the purpose of riveting the chains of slavery upon a part of their countrymen, direct their course, but to the seat of the tyrants, who had meditated so foolish as well as so wicked a project, to crush them in their imagined intrenchments of power, and to make them an example of the just vengeance of an abused and incensed people? Is this the way in which usurpers stride to dominion over a numerous and enlightened nation? Do they begin by exciting the detestation of the very instruments of their intended usurpations? Do they usually commence their career by wanton and disgustful acts of power, calculated to answer no end, but to draw upon themselves universal hatred and execration? Are suppositions of this sort the sober admonitions of discerning patriots to a discerning people? Or are they the inflammatory ravings of incendiaries or distempered enthusiasts? If we were even to suppose the national rulers actuated by the most ungovernable ambition, it is impossible to believe that they would employ such preposterous means to accomplish their designs.

I'd argue that we're seeing today the very "wanton and disgustful acts of power, calculated to answer no end, but to draw upon themselves universal hatred and execration." Obama has been itching for a fight, and he's calculated his actions to specifically spite Republicans and prosperous Americans.

Hamilton said, "If we were even to suppose the national rulers actuated by the most ungovernable ambition, it is impossible to believe that they would employ such preposterous means to accomplish their designs."

It's not impossible to believe anymore.

-PJ

90 posted on 01/14/2013 6:25:36 PM PST by Political Junkie Too (If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LiveFreeOrDie2001
The kid who did the murders shot out a window and came in that way, IIRC. A metal detector wouldn't have helped in that case.

Also, as I've pointed out before on this forum - remember what happened after Arnold said "I'll be back" in the first Terminator movie. Metal detectors and locked doors won't help against a car.

91 posted on 01/14/2013 6:29:38 PM PST by Hardastarboard (The Liberal ruling class hates me. The feeling is mutual.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

There are some underlying considerations to this, which have been hashed out by the Supreme Court over many years, leading to some interesting conclusions.

First, the SCOTUS has determined that the US congress has supremacy over the state legislatures, and that federal courts have supremacy over state courts. But they have *never* found that the president has supremacy over state governors.

In practical terms, this means that if a governor *defies* the order of the POTUS, the *only* means the POTUS has to overcome the governor is the “force of arms”.

Most recently, president Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne Division to Little Rock, Arkansas, to force integration of the high school, though Bill Clinton’s mentor, governor Orval Faubus, had ordered the state guard to prevent it.

Translate this to today. If Obama ordered unconstitutional gun control by executive order, Republican governors could just reject it, and refuse to allow it to be carried out in their states.

Likewise, the governor could order the arrest of federals who tried to enforce that executive order (which was recently done in Wisconsin, for a different reason.)

Second, county Sheriffs have a unique ability in the law, to invoke posse comitatus, in effect deputizing “every adult person” in the county who can legally be armed.

In effect, Obama would have to order the army to “disarm all law enforcement officers in the county (or state)”, in order to confiscate guns. Not happening.

Likewise, a county Sheriff could also order the arrest of federals who tried to carry out such an executive order.

Which brings up the most important point: since the only way Obama could accomplish his scheme would be to invoke the US Armed Forces, would they obey his commands?


92 posted on 01/14/2013 6:34:13 PM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy (Best WoT news at rantburg.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

The short answer is no, the 2nd Amendment doesn’t give a right to armed revolt. That right is more fundamental than the 2nd Amendment, because if we didn’t have that right, then we could not make a legitimate constitution, or any legitimate amendments to one. The 2nd Amendment doesn’t actually confer any rights at all, it only compels the government not to trample on some of our pre-existing rights.


93 posted on 01/14/2013 6:50:41 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2
It would be wiser still for those in favor of limiting my right to keep and bear to just keep that to themselves. That approach is accompanied by a very favorable prognosis.

Any other approach might could get... messy. IMHO

94 posted on 01/14/2013 7:00:43 PM PST by Gargantua ("Barbie O'Bunga ~ America's First Fly-Strewn, Maggot-Gagging Fag President")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Comment #95 Removed by Moderator

To: marktwain
"Your enemy is never a villain in his own eyes. Keep this in mind. It may offer a way to make him your friend. And if not you can kill him without hate, and quickly." -- Robert Heinlein
96 posted on 01/14/2013 7:16:11 PM PST by DNME (Without the Constitution, there is no legitimate U.S. government. Period.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Does 2nd Amendment give right to armed revolt?

LOL! The 2nd Amendment doesn't 'give' us anything, it acknowledges a Natural Law Right we already possess.

Mr. Madison has introduced his long expected amendments... The rights of conscience, of bearing arms, of changing the government, are declared to be inherent in the people.
- Fisher Ames, Letter to F.R. Minoe, June 12, 1789

97 posted on 01/14/2013 7:22:20 PM PST by MamaTexan (To follow Original Constitutional Intent, one MUST acknowledge the Right of secession)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
The Second Amendment and the Preamble to the Bill of Rights
By Robert Greenslade and Claude Ellsworth © Nitwit Press
98 posted on 01/14/2013 7:44:56 PM PST by Svartalfiar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

The Second Amendment is there to give the Declaration of Independence a chance to be used again.


99 posted on 01/14/2013 7:46:39 PM PST by EricT. (The GOP's sole purpose is to serve as an ineffective alternative to the Democrat Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

Rope then?


100 posted on 01/14/2013 7:49:52 PM PST by EricT. (The GOP's sole purpose is to serve as an ineffective alternative to the Democrat Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-122 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson