[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Loose Tool wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Loose Tool wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Except that my previous post makes a grand total of one (1) post I’ve made about the subject.
Good, if you don’t feel passionate about the Bill of Rights, feel free to not post.
I know it may seem that way to you, but the Bill of Right does not equal the 2nd Amendment. The other ones are much more important. [/quote]
Without the 2nd amendment all our other rights aren’t worth the parchment they are written on. Which is why the founding fathers put the right to keep and bear arms so near the top of the list in the bill of rights.
An overlooked element of the 2nd amendment is it defines the peoples relationship with the government. By guaranteeing the people the means of rebellion, the 2nd amendment says that the people are to be trusted, instead of suspected. Because of this presumption of innocence and trustworthyness we are able to claim other rights. Like freedom of assembly, freedom of speech, being secure in our person from unreasonable searches and siezures.
[quote]
Again, please think about things before you post, people.
BS. The 2nd Amendment guarantees the government’s commitment to abide by all the others.
Haha! I was hoping this would come up. If you actually think your AR-15, or your Glock with extended pre-ban magazine, or your Benelli tactical shotgun are going to do shit to help you if the government actually came to get you, then any further discussion with you is a waste of time. [/quote]
Why not? That is exactly how a civilian militia kept the US government from arresting a man named Al Sadr.
If the people have the right to be trusted with the means of armed rebellion it naturally follows that they are to be allowed other means of rebellion.
If the people are not to be trusted with arms they need to be vulnerable to be searched at anytime to make sure they don’t have them.
Enforcing a weapons ban gives the government the perfect excuse to be intrusive and authoritarian.
Then there is the lawlessness that results from people being redered defenseless. This gives the government another excuse to crack down on civil liberties. It’s a viscious circle, as gun ownership becomes more restricted lawlessness increases. In turn the government then is needed to step in to fill gaps in security it has created.
The reason why the Republicans originally got into supporting 2nd amendment rights was so Southern Republicans and Freedmen (African Americans) could protect themselves from violent reprisals from southern Democrats.
With this last statement you have proven that very little has changed with you Democrats, because you still want to lynche all who oppose you. So thanks for proving why we still need the 2nd amendment.
