![]() |
Please Visit our Site Sponsors
|
![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
| 2nd Amendment Discuss the politics of the 2nd. |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
|
A little 2nd ammendment clarification please
We just finished going over the 2nd amendment in my government class today and I'm still a little confused. Professor spent more time talking about the modern day interpretation than comparing it's literal meaning (as in the way it was intended to be interpreted when it was originally drafted) to the current one
.Anyways....wasn't the entire point of the 2nd amendment to keep the civilian militia on par with the military? I've been studying the constitution for some time now and it appears to me the founding fathers intended the 2nd amendment to "keep the national government in check" so to speak. That knowing that it's civilians are armed and ready to take it back when they feel the govt isn't doing its job looms as a possible threat to it at all times. But where I become confused is when and where it states in the constitution what an "arm" is. What is an "arm" by definition? How does the govt define an "arm"? Where does it state i can legally own a .50BMG rifle but not an anti-tank weapon? Why can i own a semi-automatic AK-47, but not it's fully automatic equivalent? (not talking about pre-1986 guns, i mean new) Why can't i own a grenade? Or an ICBM? Back during the revolutionary war there was a soldier named Daniel Shay (yes the same Shay from Shay's rebellion) who had multiple cannons positioned on his property before it was foreclosed by the govt he helped to establish. If we're going by that, why can't i have a howitzer or two in my backyard? What I'm getting at here is since when has the govt decided how to interpret an "arm"? Because if a second revolution were to spark now, we as civilians would be at a severe disadvantage to whatever forces the govt can muster up to fire on its own civilians. Not gonna lie....an RPG would be sweeeeeeeeeeettttt
|
| Sponsored Links | ||
Advertisement | ||
|
|||
|
The reason you and I can't own whatever we want is because of the gov't. They decided it would be them, that would tell us what a law abiding citizen should own. Now I think that some of their rules are fair, but some are not. I don't think that a convict or a felon should have the right to own whatever arms he wants.
The second amendment protects all the others ![]() Do yourself a favor, and read Unintended Consequences, by John Ross . Great novel, with more truth than farce IMHO. It talks about gun control, starting back in the early 1900's, up to the rights we have lost up to 1996 IIRC
|
|
|||
|
I think you eluded to the key to "Discussions" about this.....
Interpretation - It is almost like armpits. Everybody has a couple, yet....most of the time they stink!!! You read the 2nd amendment, I read the 2nd amendment, somebody in the government reads...oh wait....gets it explained to them by somebody who can read the 2nd amendment and you will get 3 different interpretations of what it means. As 2006PSDSD pointed out, the goverment keeps 'changing' their interpretation to keep us citizens from having what WE think we should have. |
|
|||
|
Quote:
My problem is my background is clean. Never even had a ticket. So why can't I, the law biding citizen, keep a working M1 Abrams in my backyard . I know that's an extreme example but you get my point.But about the 2nd amendment protecting gun ownership, depending on how you interpret it, it really doesn't. Like i said, how does one define an "arm" and the right to have it? Where is the line between a civilian "arm" and a military/police "arm"? A militia on the other hand, that's pretty cut and dry on what that means. Quote:
|
|
|||||
|
Quote:
. Like I said, the holy fed gov't has put the restrictions on what kind of weapons civilians are aloud to own.Militia, back in those days, meant the armed forced, but it was made up of civilians (you and I). Jefferson created the Marines, but that didn't come till long after the Constitution became the supreme law of the land . I'll bet you that 80% of the gun owners here in the USA would say, "if someone invades our country, I'll be on the front lines to defend it"There's a reason that Yamamoto said this Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
|||
|
Quote:
Last edited by 2006PSDSD; 10-05-2010 at 04:47 AM. |
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
|||
|
That is exactly what the Government wants, they do not want the People to have more Power than them, I think the Government has gotten too Big and People have no say so or Rights anymore on things, When things get like that then it is time for something to happen, I really believe a Revolution is in the Future with the way things are going today, Look at Egypt and what is going on, Basically the same thing where the Government has all the Power and say so and the people do not, People have gotten tired of it.
The Government is suppose to be - "By The People, Of The People, For the People" |
|
|||
|
We have a new case here in CO, where a few kids were having sleepover, and one of the kids (13) shot another with an airsoft pistol. The parents of the shot kid are NOT pressing charges, BUT our dumbazz state attorney (scott story) IS
![]() The charge is, felony assault with a deadly weapon
|
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
| Sponsored Links | |
Advertisement | |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|