It Is Simple
- Thread starter Steve S.
- Start date
- Status
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
Sure, its simple, and most leftist antigunners are capable of reading at at least a grade school level. What they are incapable of, or unwilling to do, is consider the meaning of the words and their basis in deterring foriegn and domestic tyranny, and preserving our republic. Indeed, they detest US sovereignty and culture- based as it is in the racist ideals of landed, slave-owning old white men.
The most reasonable misguided liberals consider the Constitution a living document, to be reinterpreted and even rewritten to suite the changing times and their "enlightened" whims. For these poor souls, the 2nd Amendment is obsolete and unnecessary.
The radical left would like nothing less than to tear down our borders for the good of "global society" -as if there were such a thing. The private possession of firearms is a barrier to the attainment of their glorious New World Order, and those who resist them are "deplorables" who need to be disarmed and force fed their ideology- or be crushed.
The most reasonable misguided liberals consider the Constitution a living document, to be reinterpreted and even rewritten to suite the changing times and their "enlightened" whims. For these poor souls, the 2nd Amendment is obsolete and unnecessary.
The radical left would like nothing less than to tear down our borders for the good of "global society" -as if there were such a thing. The private possession of firearms is a barrier to the attainment of their glorious New World Order, and those who resist them are "deplorables" who need to be disarmed and force fed their ideology- or be crushed.
AlexanderA
Member
Sure, it seems simple, but it isn't. For example, "the people." That doesn't mean all people. It's well settled that felons, the mentally ill, the underaged are excluded. Likewise, "arms" doesn't mean all arms. Nobody contends that weapons of mass destruction, such as poison gas, biological agents, or bombs are protected under the 2nd Amendment.
I've long contended that the Militia Clause of the 2nd actually expands the types of weapons permissible to civilians. If we assume, as the Founders intended, that the "constitutional militia" is universal, and includes the entire body of the people, then everybody is entitled to individually own all the weapons commonly issued to the military, including machine guns. Therefore the National Firearms Act is unconstitutional. This is a minority view, however.
I've long contended that the Militia Clause of the 2nd actually expands the types of weapons permissible to civilians. If we assume, as the Founders intended, that the "constitutional militia" is universal, and includes the entire body of the people, then everybody is entitled to individually own all the weapons commonly issued to the military, including machine guns. Therefore the National Firearms Act is unconstitutional. This is a minority view, however.
Yup The NFA pretty well poops on the constitution. The founders intended citizens have equal firepower to the military to keep the government straight. Of course they never could have imagined the future military capacity! I believe constitutionality we were meant to own anything the military has. Now days since the gov could wipe any of us off the earth in minutes or less it pretty well gives them an unfair advantage to be tyrants.
Of course back in the day they simply put anyone that was a danger to society to death or they got into it with the wrong folks or each other so the felons owning guns wasn’t an issue.
Today’s problems of society are multifold.
Pills proscribed to these kids. Bad bad if we only knew the conspiracy’s big pharmaceutical and the GOV have going.
City living, disconnected from the earth and relying on yourself and community to survive.
Bully’s not getting their butt kicked because us good guys don’t want to go to jail and loose all our rights. when your freedom of speech isn’t governed to some degree by consequences of those words it gives some really bad stuff a platform.
The media. Even on a local level stories are reported from either a left or right perspective (mostly left, all the news comes from the city) No concern for the facts, money is in click bait.
scaatylobo
Member
And I have too often explained that the same " we the people" is exactly the very same "people" that is in the 1st Amendment.
So lose the 2nd,lose the 1st !!!!
AlexanderA
Member
Yes, but we have it, and the courts (including a "conservative" Supreme Court) are likely to uphold it.
I think that if we have a new AWB, the antis are going to use the NFA to solve the "problem" of existing guns and having to pay compensation. They'll create a new category for semiautomatics in the NFA, enact a Hughes-like freeze on further production, and set up a one-time amnesty to register existing guns. Thereafter, you'd be able to transfer your registered existing guns after a 5-year (optimistically) wait for processing.
Simple? Is anything simple in court? lol
That said, no matter how clear it is or isn't written and intended, the antis don't care, they hate us and our guns, no matter that we are all enjoying them legally and are committing no crimes, they hate guns, hate us, and will not stop until they achieve their goal.
We are in a fight that started a very long time ago and will not stop. It has ebbed and flowed over the centuries, some spells of free people with arms, some spells of slaves to governments, some rebellions, some great new starts, but mostly in between where we fight the fight.
We are lucky to live where we do, but our forefathers left us a great country to take care of, and part of that is a continual fight for freedom, and the freedom to bear arms is at the forefront. People that want to disarm honest citizens are the kind that want to rule them.
That said, no matter how clear it is or isn't written and intended, the antis don't care, they hate us and our guns, no matter that we are all enjoying them legally and are committing no crimes, they hate guns, hate us, and will not stop until they achieve their goal.
We are in a fight that started a very long time ago and will not stop. It has ebbed and flowed over the centuries, some spells of free people with arms, some spells of slaves to governments, some rebellions, some great new starts, but mostly in between where we fight the fight.
We are lucky to live where we do, but our forefathers left us a great country to take care of, and part of that is a continual fight for freedom, and the freedom to bear arms is at the forefront. People that want to disarm honest citizens are the kind that want to rule them.
EIB0879
Member
I saw an article from some idiot the other day that someone should volunteer as a military reservist to own a firearm because of the word militia in the 2nd amendment. I doubt that idiot ever ssrved.
1. Grab popcorn
2. Watch the circus over the next 4-5 mos.
3. Write lots of letters to your elected officials and support your 2A organizations.
Pretty much all of the current Dem candidates have signed on to an AWB with mandatory buy-backs, some are worse
'ALL' is about to get another redefinition if we can't stop it.
GOA has set up an easy to use form letter here:
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ppen-goa-needs-our-help.854734/#post-11202429
2. Watch the circus over the next 4-5 mos.
3. Write lots of letters to your elected officials and support your 2A organizations.
Pretty much all of the current Dem candidates have signed on to an AWB with mandatory buy-backs, some are worse
'ALL' is about to get another redefinition if we can't stop it.
GOA has set up an easy to use form letter here:
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ppen-goa-needs-our-help.854734/#post-11202429
Last edited:
NIGHTLORD40K
Member
Clearly he has never heard of District of Columbia V Heller either since the "well regulated militia" is now, legally, meaningless prefatory language.
Last edited:
Demi-human
maybe likes firearms a little bit…
It IS simple.
But, there are none so blind as those who WON'T see.
They NEED to control us, but don't you DARE try to control them...
But, there are none so blind as those who WON'T see.
They NEED to control us, but don't you DARE try to control them...
badkarmamib
Member
Part of what gets liberals elected, is what they promise to GIVE their constituents (who apparently have never learned that nothing is free). They are completely building their 2020 platform on what they are going to TAKE. While I believe we must be on our guard, I can see this backfiring spectacularly on them.
Plan2Live
Member
That may be but we lost that argument back in 1934.
CapnMac
Member
Yes, it is simple. For those who measure things by action, by results; not so much for those whose only metric is intentions.
It's become much more complicated when the rhetoric is reduced to a simplicity of "my side is correct, and no other values are valid."
When "tolerance" is measured by "only those who fully agree (or virtue-signal) with me and my ilk."
Sadly, almost all of the "sides" in this are guilty of these sins.
Which is human nature, when an opponent reverts to attempting to "win" an arguement by merely shouting louder, it's extremely difficult to no shout back. When faced with shouted absurdity, replying with equal shouted absurdities does nothing but raise the volume.
None of which is to say that the "shoutees" ought meekly defer to the "shouters." Instead, we have to hope, and pray, that there are voices of wisdom, of consideration, of rationation, can opine and give us all guidance to which we can all agree to adhere to.
Equally sadly, there are those perfectly comfortable with the commonweal totaly engages by all this shouting, and also shouting at clouds, to where no one listens anymore at all, at which point, those elites can step in and be the sole arbiters, and the only price for being secure in one's knowledge of what to do, what to say, and how to act is to give up all pretense of liberty and individualism.
It's become much more complicated when the rhetoric is reduced to a simplicity of "my side is correct, and no other values are valid."
When "tolerance" is measured by "only those who fully agree (or virtue-signal) with me and my ilk."
Sadly, almost all of the "sides" in this are guilty of these sins.
Which is human nature, when an opponent reverts to attempting to "win" an arguement by merely shouting louder, it's extremely difficult to no shout back. When faced with shouted absurdity, replying with equal shouted absurdities does nothing but raise the volume.
None of which is to say that the "shoutees" ought meekly defer to the "shouters." Instead, we have to hope, and pray, that there are voices of wisdom, of consideration, of rationation, can opine and give us all guidance to which we can all agree to adhere to.
Equally sadly, there are those perfectly comfortable with the commonweal totaly engages by all this shouting, and also shouting at clouds, to where no one listens anymore at all, at which point, those elites can step in and be the sole arbiters, and the only price for being secure in one's knowledge of what to do, what to say, and how to act is to give up all pretense of liberty and individualism.
- Status
Similar threads
