Charleo0192
Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2010
- Messages
- 182
When I say "we", I mean the people who are pro-second amendment and by win, I mean successfully end the debate between what we see as our right and what they (those that are anti-second amendment) deem is not needed.
To my thought, point, or whatever it is. We already have what we want. We have the right to keep and bear arms. Well not completely, so we do have a some more fighting to do, but that's not what I am getting at. We are defending these rights like crazy though. We lose part of it every so often, and sometimes we may even get a break and get some of it back.
Now if this were a court case, I could be tried for something, but to my knowledge you can only be tried once for the same thing. Meaning if I was tried for murder and found not-guilty I could not be tried for the same crime again unless the charge was changed or (and I could be very wrong about this next part) unless outstanding evidence were to come about and 100% no-doubt about it proved I was the one.
So while it is true that the debate on the second amendment is not a completely the same and it may not even be in the same boat, but is there any chance this debate could end without us, pro-2a, losing.
It just seems wrong to be constantly "tried" over something and know you can never win. That at best you can prolong defeat, whether that means a few weeks, or hundreds of years.
I hope I was understandable as I am not always that great at getting my thoughts out in an understandable way. To finish this up, I hope you find what I wrote to be interesting.
To my thought, point, or whatever it is. We already have what we want. We have the right to keep and bear arms. Well not completely, so we do have a some more fighting to do, but that's not what I am getting at. We are defending these rights like crazy though. We lose part of it every so often, and sometimes we may even get a break and get some of it back.
Now if this were a court case, I could be tried for something, but to my knowledge you can only be tried once for the same thing. Meaning if I was tried for murder and found not-guilty I could not be tried for the same crime again unless the charge was changed or (and I could be very wrong about this next part) unless outstanding evidence were to come about and 100% no-doubt about it proved I was the one.
So while it is true that the debate on the second amendment is not a completely the same and it may not even be in the same boat, but is there any chance this debate could end without us, pro-2a, losing.
It just seems wrong to be constantly "tried" over something and know you can never win. That at best you can prolong defeat, whether that means a few weeks, or hundreds of years.
I hope I was understandable as I am not always that great at getting my thoughts out in an understandable way. To finish this up, I hope you find what I wrote to be interesting.