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

To: flashbunny
Oh, and I meant to add,

When we, in our time, in a debate about gun rights, start to talk about overthrowing the government, we come off like a bunch of nut-cases, and thereby play into the hands of the gun-grabbing enemy.

That's what I meant by that.
225 posted on 02/24/2007 9:17:53 PM PST by Liberty Rattler (Don't tread on me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies ]


To: Liberty Rattler

"When we, in our time, in a debate about gun rights, start to talk about overthrowing the government, we come off like a bunch of nut-cases, and thereby play into the hands of the gun-grabbing enemy."

So we cede a basic truth about the founding of the country to appease to people who are going to think we are nuts for caring about 'icky guns' in the first place?

It never should be dropped as a point of argument. There are better arguments to start out with to win people over, but once you're educating them, throwing out that fact will open their minds.

Thanks to a public school edumacation, no teachers ever explained the 2nd amendment or BOR as a listing of basic human rights. It wasn't until I heard Walter E Williams reciting the true purpose of the 2nd Amendment (the radical one) that my eyes were opened to everything.


233 posted on 02/24/2007 9:26:44 PM PST by flashbunny (<----- Click here if you hate RINOs! 2008 GOP RINO cards!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies ]

To: Liberty Rattler

You know I used to think the same thing you do. But I have been on law blogs where highly educated constitutional lawyers say that it is to overthrow or protect the nation from a tyranny overtaking WE the PEOPLE. There are even Federal Judges who has said the same. So I will be a nut like them.


234 posted on 02/24/2007 9:26:54 PM PST by therut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies ]

To: Liberty Rattler
"When we, in our time, in a debate about gun rights, start to talk about overthrowing the government, we come off like a bunch of nut-cases, and thereby play into the hands of the gun-grabbing enemy."

The right of armed force against tyrannical governments goes back to Locke. It should always be the last option, but if SCOTUS suddenly said one day "That keep and bear arms thing really means you can't have them", what would you have Americans do? In my view, ignoring the plain meaning of the Constitution is ample justification for picking up arms and starting over. Part of the problem is that too many Americans don't realize that this is our right should things go badly.
235 posted on 02/24/2007 9:29:09 PM PST by DesScorp (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies ]

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