The NRA Continues To Compromise On The Second Amendment - Page 4
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 53

Thread: The NRA Continues To Compromise On The Second Amendment

  1. Quote Originally Posted by Bohemian View Post
    But what the heck what do I know I am just a dumb Jar-Head and Right Wing Extremist]
    Better than being a pinko.

  2.   
  3. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by MONTANA View Post
    I respect the views and the passion of everyone on this issue. The constitution itself was written, based on a series of significant compromises. Compromise is not a bad thing if it can help one maintain the overall objective. I know the constitution well and read it through every two or three months. My undergraduate degree is in education with most of my teaching hours in history. The Consitution is a document that protects our rights with the reasonable expectation of logical responsibility. To think that someone should be able to build a nuclear weapon in a privately funded facility based on the protection of the Second Amendment borders on the rediculous. There are expectations of responsibility accompanying the ownership of all rights. And believe it or not, I'm a Libertarian in the vast majority of my views (see some of my other posts)............however logic and reason are our friends and we shouldn't fear them.
    FINALLY, we see somebody here with reasoning ability and a thought process ability to understand things. Thank you for coming to this site. I appreciate your presence here and your valuable input.

    College taught me some useful things. No, I'm not talking about the stuff I learned in Economics, my major. Most of that is long forgotten, and doesn't apply in this new economic climate of the world with so much Govt influence in the markets. The most important thing I learned in college was to question things...what made things happen, who/what caused it, to look for solutions, never take what is said as Gospel..research it to see if it's really true. In other words, how to think and process information, and how to make INFORMED decisions, based upon correct analyzing of a situation using facts. Training in the Quality Process in the Corporate World further amplified and gave practical application to the theory training I had in college.

    You have a very good understanding and an enlightened approach to our discussions of the Second Amendment. I agree with you about the logical responsibility issue.

    For those here that base their statements on the "Defending against our Govt trying to use arms against us" argument: I want you to send me some of the stuff you're smoking. It must be good stuff, cause you are in a delusional world. Do you REALLY think that if Obama declared National Marshall Law and ordered our troops to take up arms against any dissenters, that you could actually mount a competitive fight against them? If you say "YES", you need some serious mental therapy help. When the M1A1 tanks roll in, you're going to be seriously out-gunned. LOL! Talking about getting weapons that are used in combat just gets us lumped into the Gun-Nut category ,and viewed as a bunch of para-military type wierdos.

    In the days when the Constitution was being written, the Military had but one weapon that civilians didn't have...the canon. Those days are LONG gone. Effectively, they COULD mount a defense against the GOVT, and ib fact did. It's how our Country was formed. Today, we couldn't do that, IF our troops in uniform actually followed orders and took up arms against us. We are out-gunned because of technology. So we need to drop the arguments about the Second Amendment gives us protection against the GOVT. That ridiculous!


    I challenged Bohemian to state what he wants from the Second Amendment in practical terms. I haven't read his response yet. But I can tell you what I expect from it, and it's not the right to try to arm myself for a fight against the FEDERAL GOVT. I simply want the right to arm myself and carry gun/s on my person, openly or concealed, anywhere in this Country I choose to go. There, that's a short, concise, statement of what I think the 2nd A gave me the right to do, and it is all I'm asking my State Govt, and other State Govt's, through reciprocity, to quit restricting me from doing, in order to defend myself and family from anyone or thing trying to do me or my family, or anyone harm. (Notice I didn't say "allow me" to do, I said "restrict me from doing)

    If we collectively starting stating this objective as our "go-to" mission, I think we would get what we wanted a lot more quickly. We also need to refrain from giving stats on how crime goes down when we arm ourselves. I don't believe that necessarily ties in with the local citizenry being armed. Our reason to be armed is to FIGHT CRIME when it is AIMED at US personally. If the crime rate has dropped 5% for whatever reasons, I don't care! If I am one of those victims in the 5% category, crime hasn't dropped for ME! I want a gun to defend myself, not for JUST the HOME, but EVERYWHERE!!!

    A person should NEVER be a crime statistic ONLY because he/she had no means by which to defend themselves. That is against ALL Natural LAW!! And THAT is why we should be armed, and not restricted from doing so!

  4. #33
    +1 gov5

  5. #34
    GOV5, BOOMER, MONTANA, et.al.

    What is my desire, what do I want you ask?

    To open others minds to the fundamental message that Samuel Adams was trying to convey in the following quote...
    "It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." -
    Samuel Adams

    OR George Washington's - "IF we do nothing, we can only say we died NOTHING"...

    ..."SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"...

    "How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!" Samuel Adams

    Some 30-odd years ago when I joined the USMC I took a oath in part that states ...
    I would support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic...

    As I see it there is no expiration date on that oath...

    After spending 27 years in the USMC on active duty keeping that oath, I had to retire after my units last disagreement with some Devout Muslims...
    4 of my kids are still deployed...
    I can't fight the fight abroad any longer, but I found there is a much more grave fight right here at home in the U.S. ...
    Suffice to say I am now a disabled vet, that spends much of his free time as a activist around Nevada and on the phone and the internet attempting to open the eyes of those that have grown too accustomed in my view to the gradual erosion of our Constitutional rights, though the acceptance of Liberalism & Progressivism as the status quo that you cannot do anything about so why bother...

    Some things for you to further cogitate on...

    Ever hear of William Wallace?

    Study the Militia's Run-and-Fight Tactics of the Revolutionary War much?
    The Alamo? (and Sam Houston's subsequent pay back?)

    Ever read about the Battle of Isandlwana? where the British were annihilated by the Zulu whom did not have one single firearm...

    Review the Soviet War in Afghanistan and the current U.S. & Allied Forces engagement in Afghanistan and you might get some insight on how having superior technological capabilities did not help the 1980's Russians or current U.S. & Allied Forces defeat the natives so to speak...

    “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” - Edmund Burke

    "When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic." - Dresden James

    “The ideal tyranny is that which is ignorantly self-administered by its victims. The most perfect slaves are, therefore, those which blissfully and unawaredly enslave themselves.” - Dresden James

    "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves." William Pitt 1783

    "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

    "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." - Thomas Jefferson

    "The liberties of our country, the freedoms of our civil Constitution are worth defending at all hazards; it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors. They purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood. It will bring a mark of everlasting infamy on the present generation – enlightened as it is – if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of designing men." - Samuel Adams

    "Whenever governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins." Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts

    Once again, you seem unable/unwilling to fundamentally grasp; that without the Unabridged Second Amendment, how would WE THE PEOPLE, ever be able to remove & replace a tyrannical government?

    You claim to be intelligent and educated, but in what? Liberalism & Progressivism 101 ? You guys are very narrow minded for those claiming to support the Second Amendment as it was written & intended by the framers; and you are literally reciting the arguments of the anti's word for fricking word, unless you guys are more forum infiltrating Obama Bots I would suggest you think a lot more in-depth about the ease in which give up your ONLY ability to remove & replace a tyrannical government as the framers intended should the need ever arise...
    Without the Unabridged Second Amendment, not one bit of the Constitution, Bill of Rights etc is enforceable...

    Are you ready & so-willing to be sheep?

    The Declaration of Independence In Part...
    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. 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. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world...

    The First Fundamental Principle of Constitutional Interpretation: Your Rights Don't Come From Government...
    Stewart Rhodes - U.S. Army Ranger, Yale Educated Attorney & Noted Constitutional Authority and Founder of OathKeepers:
    Oath Keepers: CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC 101: YOUR RIGHTS DON’T COME FROM GOVERNMENT

    I think Tench Coxe said it best...
    "Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people." - Tench Coxe 1789

    WTFU SHEEPLE, TAKE BACK THE REPUBLIC

    Fire Congress November 2nd, 2010

    NoBama 2012

    "The people never give up their liberties, but under some delusion." - Edmund Burke

  6. #35
    wolfhunter Guest
    +1 Bohemian.

    I'd like to stress a point from the end of Bohemian's post:
    "I think Tench Coxe said it best...
    "Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people." - Tench Coxe 1789"

  7. #36
    Bohemian I admire your zeal & you are no doubt a patriot. However... Quit thumping your chest & pontificating on a "unabridged 2nd amendment" & take a few moments to consider what that really means.

    You want to quote Ruby Ridge & Waco as the feds at their worst & no doubt they were but what about the other side of the coin. How about Columbine or Virginia tech or another other of dozens of shooting across this great land. WHAT IF those disgruntled individuals because of your "unabridged 2A" had access to a satchel charge, M203, LAW, AT4 or any of a dozens other military weapons? Instead of a tragedy they would have been wholesale slaughters. JUST ONE incident like that & you can bet your bippy the knee jerk reaction would be the outright ban of all firearms & public opinion would be behind that action.

    RIGHT NOW if some one walks into a building & starts shooting the argument can be made that "If just one person in that building had been carrying a gun it could have been stopped" and John Q Public can get behind that. We keep public opinion at least neutral if not improve it.

    Now let say someone walks into that same building with a M249. Are you actually going to stand up & say "Well if just one person in that building had been carrying a SAW this could have been stopped!" You are going to push the public father away & open the doors to a knee jerk reaction by congress.

    You are no doubt a patriot but alas you can not see the forest for the trees.

    Lastly 25yrs ago I took the same oath you did. I have the ribbons & scars to prove I did my part. DO NOT presuppose that you somehow have the market cornered on patriotism & that someone who disagrees with you is somehow less patriotic.

  8. Quote Originally Posted by Boomer View Post
    You want to quote Ruby Ridge & Waco as the feds at their worst & no doubt they were but what about the other side of the coin. How about Columbine or Virginia tech or another other of dozens of shooting across this great land. WHAT IF those disgruntled individuals because of your "unabridged 2A" had access to a satchel charge, M203, LAW, AT4 or any of a dozens other military weapons? Instead of a tragedy they would have been wholesale slaughters. JUST ONE incident like that & you can bet your bippy the knee jerk reaction would be the outright ban of all firearms & public opinion would be behind that action.
    Well if the Second Amendment were truly honored, there would have been at least ten students packing heat to class to take out Cho.

    Let people earn their Darwin Awards. It shouldn't infringe on MY right to bear arms.

  9. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Midnight View Post
    Well if the Second Amendment were truly honored, there would have been at least ten students packing heat to class to take out Cho.

    Let people earn their Darwin Awards. It shouldn't infringe on MY right to bear arms.
    Yep, you don't send sheep to kill the wolf.
    "When a government robs Peter to pay Paul it will alway's have the support of Paul" George Bernard Shaw

  10. Quote Originally Posted by Midnight View Post
    Well I just graduated from a Top 20 institution with a major in History, and I can definitely tell you that disarmament is a slow, eventual process. Some of the greatest fascists and communists in history all said that you can't strip away freedoms from the people all at once. You have to gradually do it, justifying each small bit in the name of protection. The Second Amendment is not just a right to own guns; it is an affirmation of the God-given/natural right to protect yourself again oppression.

    Under your logic, it begins with the automatic weapons (civilians don't need them). Then the assault weapons (who needs a gun with an ammo capacity greater than ten?). Then the right to carry in public goes (accidents will be more likely to happen, after all. And most people are stupid, so they shouldn't be trusted. The guns should stay at home). Then the gun registration happens (after all, no one wants to use a gun in a crime if it can be traced back to them. And this keeps the black market in check). Then the handguns go (statistics show that the majority of homicides and crimes are done with handguns). Then the semi-autos go (guns are baaaaddddd. They should only be used for ceremonial purposes). And then finally all guns are banned (ordinary people do not need guns. Only the military does).

    Still think appeasement and compromise is a good idea? Still think compromise is "logical"? While we're at it, why don't we ban cars? Too many people die from that every year. And how about we ban free speech? Racism has no place in today's society after all.

    No, I do not believe in drawing any lines for fundamental rights. Everyone should be allowed to bear arms without restrictions. It's not like arms controls even stops anything. If a psycho wants to build a doomsday device, he'll find a way. I don't think MY RIGHTS should be trampled on by ANYONE ELSE!!
    These are very good points and I appreciate your expertise in this area. I guess I view the fact that natural rights are already regulated. For example:

    You were born with the right of free speech. You were not born with the right to yell "fire" in a crowded theater because you cannot reasonably control the exercise of that right on innocents.

    You were born with the right of self-protection by carrying arms. You were not born with the right to weaponize small pox (if you could figure out how to do it) because you cannot reasonably control the exercise of that rght on innocents.

    Our Founding Fathers were wise men. But there were no weapons of mass destruction during their time. They could not imagine many of the situations which we have to contend with in the modern world.

    Thanks for your comments and I will seriously review my current opinions.

  11. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by MONTANA View Post

    Our Founding Fathers were wise men. But there were no weapons of mass destruction during their time. They could not imagine many of the situations which we have to contend with in the modern world.
    A stray thought: Let's suppose that the people had never let down their guard on their Constitutional rights and it was well-accepted that "the people" would "naturally" have access to any weapons that the gov't developed. Is it not possible then that the development of WMD would have not occurred or at least been severely curtailed?

    That's a moot point, of course, as the horse has already left the barn. It is clear, however, that the overthrow of a tyrannical gov't, one of the reasons for the 2A, could only occur if there was some semblance of "equality" between the people and the gov't in the area of arms. Surely, the Founders didn't intend that we would defend with pitchforks and shovels against extreme firepower held by the gov't. So, I think the Founders didn't have to "...imagine many of the situations which we have to contend with in the modern world". They just naturally expected that the civilian populace would be well-armed enough to contend with "tyrannical gov't". The principle is timeless.

    Now, we're left with where to go from here. We need to be cognizant of political reality, obviously, but we need a "no retreat" stand, also.

    .02 cents worth.
    Prov. 27:3 - "Stone is heavy and sand a burden, but provocation by a fool is heavier than both"

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast