The right to bear arms (2nd Amend) is specifically intended for DEFENSE AGAINST MODERN ARMY

Since you can be drafted up to around the age of 60 years of age, make some sense!

Fuck you, slave trader.

don't know anything about 4th and 5th gen warfare, do you?

In the case of the Citizens of the USA, only and only IF the U.S. Constitution's 2nd Amendment were first repealed or amended and passed by Congress, signed by the President and then Ratified by either the State Legislatures or the People, in a nation wide referendum. Only then would it be a legal law curtailing the Congressional ban on military type weapons in individual citizens hands and possesions, even at home.

The power to change the Law of the Land is full within the Venue of the U.S. Constitution itself and its LAWs about how to amend the self same Constitution, even without the need for calling in a full blown Constitution Convention of all the States.

This is the process that so many revolutionaries seeking to destroy the USA, its people, and its governments, are working overtime to get people to just ignore.

at the moment, the 2nd ammendment would be very difficult to overturn (not to say it would not be attempted)

they will chip away at the edges of it first

if it actually came to an attempt to convene a constitutional convention to alter the constitution, at that point serious seismic faults in the US electorate would be triggered

jmho....

The patriotic spirit is strong on this one

Most Americans do not realize that the 2nd amendment right to bear arms did not apply to the states until 2010 and prior to that, the federal government (i.e. the Supreme Court) did not recognize the right to bear arms as a personal, individual right for their personal protection (Heller v. District of Columbia and McDonald v. City of Chicago). The debate over gun control is a contentious one- as an owner and user; it is difficult for me to discuss this with anyone who doesn’t own a gun because they don’t understand. However, the argument that the second amendment is the right to protect Americans from their own government is a misconception that arose during the mid-1960s. In truth, if we equate “good government” with an armed populace than places like Afghanistan and Syria would be considered “well-governed.”
Voices from the far-right are trying to manipulate their voters’ fears and paranoia with the false notion that America is not a self-government republic, but almost a Mad-Max style confederation governed by Hobbes and Rand where each person may chose which laws to follow and which ones to disobey without any social contract binding us together. The result of this dystopia would be an ungovernable state of nature, much like the “governments” of Syria and Afghanistan.
A right of self-defense, like the other enumerated rights in the Constitution, is subject to REASONABLE regulation to produce a system of laws to balance our heritage of gun ownership, and allow reasonable regulations to protect us from an anarchist-type government. Should we get rid of all assault rifles? No- they are already in the stream of commerce and removing them will do little if any good (once something enters the stream of commerce it is almost impossible to get our). Should we require gun shows to do background checks? Maybe- none of us have the answer but our fear of government and misconception of the 2nd amendment will only add fuel to the left’s fire by labeling owners as gun toting rednecks and hillbillies (not that there is anything wrong with that).

BTW- that Jefferson quote is false- he never said that, "When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." That was John Basil Barnhill. Jefferson, much like Washington, would not agree that the 2nd amendment was created for people to protect themselves against the government. In fact, Washington was fearful and disgusted by the Shay rebellion and it contributed to his decision to come out of retirement and help frame a new national charter to prevent such outbreaks.

Also, look into Art. I Sec. 8 and Congress's power to arm militias and call them to suppress uprisings. This is the first time militias are mentioned in the Constitution and it is interesting to look at the 2nd Amendment as a continuation of this power of Congress.

Reaper type drones, armed with LASER 'death ray' Guns.. can only be fought against by LASER weapons, as any projectile fired against them could well be destroyed in flight to the target.

Oh, and by the way, The People have has much right to fly and operate Drones as the US Government, and State governments, and county governments, and even city governments, and corporations have to be flying their drones.

And the phrase, "What it means is... " is an interpretative indication. I.e., this is what I interpret this to mean. Others will have their own opinions of what they interpret it to mean, hence was have a Supreme Court. Those that uphold the U.S. Constitution will abide by the decisions of that U.S. Supreme Court and bide their time for a change in the Court's membership.

Just like Religious texts, there is much about interpretation and how each person interprets what they read.. hence there is a natural formation of division because peoples brains and minds are different... even in genetically identical twins and triplets.

Welcome to being Human.

interesting thoughtful post, I will research more of what you wrote

However I don't think many necessarily equte gun ownership in and of itself with good governance...that can only come from literacy, education and awareness.

However I believe it is viewed a necessary support to good governance, and one can point to various countries in the 20th century which have been entirely disarmed to show that lack of weapons does not equal good governance or safety either

Also remember that at the time the Wiemar Republic was a duly established Constitutional Democratic Republic.. which VOTED to overthrown by its own laws that standing constitutional democratic republic. It was all perfectly Constitutionally legal. As exactly the Roman Republic was transformed into an Empire with a 'god' Ceasar. The same sort of thing happened with Athens democratic republic... it was all LEGAL in the terms of its own Law of the Land.

Having a Constitutional Democratic Republic is no proof at all that said constitution will not in its organic body contain the seed or out right declarations of certain powers that will establish at least a temporary dictatorship.

Did the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics have an organic constitution in which the eligibility to vote was determined by its constitution along certain lines? I do not know, perhaps a Russian verse in the law of the USSR could answer that question.

The US definitely did originally... and in fact still does.

And just think how many semi-automatic rifles, and shotguns, and hand guns the Branch Davidians had in their compound outside of Waco in their possession and notice how effective they were to save the lives of even one of the human beings inside that compound?

Did not the U.S. Government run over them? Yes.

Did the Sheriff of that County? No.

Both the Sheriff and the Davidians knew they were in a complete worthless position.. they were biding time to just come out and surrender, but the U.S. Government got impatient... and used its overwhelming force against them.

Even if those people had exhausted all their ammon, and all other forms of weapons they had, they still would not have 'Won the day'.. they would have been overwhelmed before they were ready to come out.

Learn the lessons. That it is the People in mass, not the one or two armed goons, but thousands, or tens of thousands, or millions literally open carry, and yeilding loaded weapons of all sort.. is the only think that would make a tyrant think twice.

The first US Civil War was pretty much a collection of States against a collection of States, the next one will be nothing more than People against People.

You have a clear understanding of the real issue and what is at stake, the gravity of which can't be understated. Not just now for us but future generations. Thanks

Personal Attack Drones are the individuals "Stand off" weapons.

Actually the shrub administration explicitly recognized an individual right to keep and bear arms.

holder,obama et al don't. So it is a matter of opinion and not law. In spite of the Heller decision. Opinion and ideology overturns rule of law it seems.

That particular quote by Jefferson may be incorrectly attributed but there are plenty along the same lines that aren't. The same is true with Washington. I am reasonably certain Washington didn't play much, if any role in Shay's rebellion. You are probably confusing it with the Whiskey Rebellion.

Jefferson in fact wrote this to a friend regarding Shay's rebellion, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure".

The concept of the second amendment as a check on tyranny didn't "arise" in the 60s. It has been there since it was ratified and is the very reason it exists. Read the anti federalists. I think even the loathsome federalist hamilton agreed.

Your "in truth" remark is ridiculous on the face of it.
You are equating very different histories and cultures as the same. With a good dose of hysteria and unsubstantiated opinion about anarchy thrown in.

Calling out the militia to suppress "insurrection" is in the CONstitution.

The question is who would be the more Constitutional, a government that has devolved into tyranny or those seeking to restore the Constitution?

Last Edited by s. d. butler on 12/18/2012 07:31 PM

Hey, we all have an agenda, all of us, just not necessarily the SAME agenda.

I suggest for your own personal enlightment, that you yourself actually go read the U.S. Consitution, or if you cannot read, have someone you trust and know well to read it to you.

You're 100% correct, OP.

I already did guy. I corrected myself after checking. Read the corrected post above. For your personal enlightenment I suggest you refrain from gratuitous insult.

Last Edited by s. d. butler on 12/18/2012 07:29 PM

There has been no duley Congressional Passed nor State Legistlature Ratification, nor any People's referendum on the Nation-wide Ratification of any Constitional Amendment to Repeal nor even modified in any way, the Standing 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. And you know that. And you know that your assertion is nothing more that hot-air, and the People that read you, the vast majority of them also know your assertion is hot-air and perhaps wishful thinking.

Thank you, however, on that part about US History... except your false assertion that the 2nd Amendment was scraped.

I apologize for the subtle insult, it was not really my intention to insult you, it was meant to remind people to help those that cannot read to set down and read it to them.

Still the admonishment is toward those who do not bother in the least to set down and read it, but whom think they already know it because someone said this or that pertaining to it.

"keep in mind the rest of the world will be watching..."

Yes, and keep in mind what is now going on in Syria, and all the international armament that is being funneled into that Land... and to only the weapons but also foreign military advisors -- and media, and that is on both 'sides' of that Civil War.

Just as other nations are attempting to find reason and method to security Assad and the Government of Syria's chemical weapons .. so to foreign nations will be in a very big hurry to 'Secure' the current US nuclear arsenal, and its chemical and biological weapons.

This is not a game.

Heller and McDonald decisions, look it up yourself.

I kind of admire your disingenuous reply.

Yes, in those days, even Canon and Mortars were carried in by the People.. in arms. Had they had Sopwith Camels and 50 pound aerial bombs they would have used them too. Oh, and they used BOMBS.. yes, folks, bombs.

And they did use ROCKETS.. as well.

We lost the battle against tyranny long ago. You're dreaming if you think the American people would ever stand a chance against their own government's power. Ask the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan how that's going for them.

The conflict against govt tyranny is just getting started.

You are dreaming,ignorant or a disinfo agent if you think govt is all powerful.

The U.S. has already lost the war in Afghanistan. All that remains is to withdraw.

how many bomb carrying drones do you think you could shoot down when the military comes in? you wont ever see it coming so your arguements to keep automatic guns is mute.