A little 2nd ammendment clarification please - Ford Powerstroke Diesel Forum
2nd Amendment Discuss the politics of the 2nd.

Powerstroke.org is the premier Diesel Truck Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-04-2010, 10:35 AM
Emergency Services
 

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 1,593
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
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
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #2  
Old 10-04-2010, 10:50 AM
Unapologetically American


 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Littleton, Colorado
Posts: 19,729
Thanks: 2
Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Feedback Score: 4 reviews
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
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #3  
Old 10-04-2010, 10:59 AM
Super Moderator

 

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Orangevale, CA
Posts: 11,231
Thanks: 8
Thanked 75 Times in 69 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #4  
Old 10-04-2010, 06:36 PM
Emergency Services
 

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 1,593
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2006PSDSD View Post
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 definitely agree with the background checks for firearms. I can't imagine a worse scenario then ANYONE walking into academy, buying a handgun and a box of ammo, and walking out no questions asked.

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:
Originally Posted by SuperCrutyPS View Post
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.
Yah i seem to have that problem with my professors
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #5  
Old 10-05-2010, 04:31 AM
Unapologetically American


 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Littleton, Colorado
Posts: 19,729
Thanks: 2
Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Feedback Score: 4 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shooter04 View Post
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.
Interpret it however you want, to me, it MEANS that I have the RIGHT to keep and bear arms . 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:
"You cannot invade the mainland United States.
There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."

- Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto
(Japanese Navy)
Other interesting quotes:
Quote:
"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people,
it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government
-- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."

- Patrick Henry
Quote:
"How a politician stands on the Second Amendment
tells you how he or she views you as an individual;
as a trustworthy and productive citizen,
or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over,
controlled, supervised, and taken care of."

- Dr. Suzanna Gratia Hupp
Quote:
"What good fortune for governments that the people do not think."

- Adolf Hitler
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #6  
Old 10-05-2010, 04:40 AM
Unapologetically American


 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Littleton, Colorado
Posts: 19,729
Thanks: 2
Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Feedback Score: 4 reviews
Quote:
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself.
They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone
under independence. The church, the plow, the prairie
wagon and citizens firearms are indelibly related."



- George Washington


"The most effective way to find ourselves enslaved
will not be done openly. If weakened we will sink gradually.
I ask, who are the militia? They consist of the whole people,
.... except a few public officers."

- Thomas Jefferson


"The Constitution shall never be construed to authorize congress
to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable
citizens .... from keeping their own arms."

- Samuel Adams



"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms .... disarm only
those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.
Such laws make things worse for the assaulted
and better for the assailants. They serve rather to encourage
than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be
attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."

- Thomas Jefferson


"Only an armed people can be truly free.
Only an unarmed people can ever be enslaved."

- Aristotle
I'll be keeping my guns, I promise

Last edited by 2006PSDSD; 10-05-2010 at 04:47 AM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #7  
Old 10-05-2010, 05:57 AM
Premium Member
 

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: in absentia...
Posts: 2,769
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shooter04 View Post

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?

Not gonna lie....an RPG would be sweeeeeeeeeeettttt


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 :
The government has decided that they would be too difficult to mow around. It's for your own good.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #8  
Old 01-30-2011, 02:59 PM
Powerstroke.org Fanatic
 

Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 149
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
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"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #9  
Old 01-31-2011, 04:59 AM
Unapologetically American


 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Littleton, Colorado
Posts: 19,729
Thanks: 2
Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Feedback Score: 4 reviews
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
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #10  
Old 04-22-2013, 09:16 PM
Powerstroke.org Rookie
 

Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 16
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2006PSDSD View Post
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
And that right there is why our country is going down the drain. Common sense is not common anymore. Judges and politicians have way to much unbridled power.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Powerstroke Diesel Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
Garage Plus, Vendor Tools vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.

vB.Sponsors