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

To: dagogo redux; epow; Gaffer

dagogo - who has a more subtle tagline than I – views it correctly:
“…seeming for far too long to focus on our right to hunt and sport shoot, as opposed to our right to protect ourselves from crime, or the ultimate meaning of the 2nd - to protect ourselves from tyranny.”

Such a passive, misdirected tactic unnecessarily avoided the issue and gave the argument to the gungrabbers.

gaffer correctly stated: “A law-abiding citizen has the RIGHT to protect himself ANYWHERE.”
Whereupon the obviously well-meaning and intelligent epow responded: “…until the Utopian day arrives…”

That exchange points out the difficulty.
At what point did we agree to give up that natural right and wait for that Utopian day, a foolish move by any standard? Or, was the option taken from us by “law” by the government we formed?

When we determined to form a government which was to operate with and by our consent did we also, under any reasonable theory, step aside from our natural right to protect ourselves? (Did it commence with a couple of thristy drunks and a “Check your guns at the Sheriff’s Office” sign?)

For instance, when did we expressly or impliedly agree to not carry firearms into a courtroom for a public trial, or a city council meeting, or a government buiiding - where passions might run high?


8 posted on 05/01/2010 10:57:15 AM PDT by frog in a pot (Wake up America! The Socialists are winning the long war against you and your Constitution!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: frog in a pot; dagogo redux; epow; Gaffer; NFHale
At what point did we agree to give up that natural right and wait for that Utopian day, a foolish move by any standard? Or, was the option taken from us by “law” by the government we formed?

When we determined to form a government which was to operate with and by our consent did we also, under any reasonable theory, step aside from our natural right to protect ourselves? (Did it commence with a couple of thristy drunks and a “Check your guns at the Sheriff’s Office” sign?)

a lil of both I think, but the cement was poured in 34' IMO...after NFA the 'concensus' became the amount of infringement allowed to trickle down via federal 'law'...

of course this was all gradually accepted from the wild west gunslinger days when the frontier demanded the sheriff to be the whole 'law' of the land...im sure many Rights violations went uncontested, and as civilization and different forms of enlightenment approached said frontier, the same do-gooders brought official nannystatism to bear as well...

if any of that makes any sense...

today the randy weavers and david koreshs' of the country get abandoned and we wonder why so many are afraid to wade out into the open to be the next target...I didnt make the 19 apr marches on DC for many reasons [mostly economic] but the fact that it wasnt a true million man armed showing was dissapointing, IMO most people were inclined to think that it was gonna be spark, and werent willing to be martyrs for the first round...

anyways, my .02...

10 posted on 05/01/2010 2:18:41 PM PDT by Gilbo_3 (Gov is not reason; not eloquent; its force.Like fire,a dangerous servant & master. George Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | 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