The Founders on the 2nd Amendment and the Right to Bear Arms

Any of you depending on the strength of the 2nd Amendment to protect your rights are profoundly naive. More is needed

a reply to: Leonidas
Yes, our rights are just the solid foundation.

originally posted by: Leonidas
Any of you depending on the strength of the 2nd Amendment to protect your rights are profoundly naive. More is needed

Most of us understand that by the time it comes down to picking up a weapon that the other avenues of redress have failed, men have failed, checks and balances have failed and the fifth column has taken control.

originally posted by: Leonidas
No new thinking is allowed regardless of the social, technical, geographic and demographic changes

What changes in the social, technical, geographic and demographic
have any bearing whatsoever on an individuals right to self
defense or collective right to defend the state or nation?

a reply to: Leonidas

Any of you depending on the strength of the 2nd
Amendment to protect your rights are profoundly
naive. More is needed


Well about 250 years ago three percent of the population of the english colonies relied exclusively on their self proclaimed second amendment in order to overthrow a tyranny that had been visited upon them, and I think their results were fairly impressive. They did not have a tenth of the material and men that Britain possessed and yet they relied exclusively on their right to bear arms and kicked britains butt.

Now who is profoundly naive?

a reply to: Leonidas

Thus the reason why those of us that understand OUR 2nd Right, continually state that OUR rights as a whole are being encroached upon.

But, thanks for bringing up the obvious.

originally posted by: Leonidas
Not so much hypothetical as a realistic scenario that could easily play out over the next eight (8) years. As our numbers stay the same, the opposition is growing.

I dont think you get that we are on the same side of this issue. I just dont believe the "2nd Supporters" are enough and as a percentage of the population they are shrinking...and the NRA is a dangerous bedfellow...at best

A Muslim is allowed to shave before he commits himself to God in a holy war attack.

The same is true for the patriots distancing themselves from the outspoken members in the war for gun rights.

Look at a tsunami as the water reseeds before the big wave and you will see better what is taking place.

When I was in the army a Sargent came to me with concerned look on his face and ask if I knew what was going on with the troops.

He said that the leadership had growing concerns of trouble within the ranks because everyone stopped complaining.

It was the quiet just before the storm!
It is the quiet just before the storm!

Read the tea leaves and see the empty shelves at the gun store...it is strangely quiet out there...
You are NOT in the LOOP?

If you can't hear the drums of war you must be deft!

originally posted by: Leonidas

I dont think you get that we are on the same side of this issue. I just dont believe the "2nd Supporters" are enough and as a percentage of the population they are shrinking...and the NRA is a dangerous bedfellow...at best

If you ignore NRA membership, firearm sales numbers, background check numbers and CCW applications and go with telephone based polling of 1000 people then yeah, you would believe that numbers are shrinking.

There was a joke in DHS management about our employees think what we tell them to think.

The mass media now control the hearts and minds of the general dumb public. (GDP)

a reply to: waltwillis

NOT FRINGE ELEMENTS!
We still stand strange.

The FF were insightful into the
workings of government.

originally posted by: macman

originally posted by: Leonidas

I dont think you get that we are on the same side of this issue. I just dont believe the "2nd Supporters" are enough and as a percentage of the population they are shrinking...and the NRA is a dangerous bedfellow...at best

If you ignore NRA membership, firearm sales numbers, background check numbers and CCW applications and go with telephone based polling of 1000 people then yeah, you would believe that numbers are shrinking.

When the number against gun ownership rights grows, it has an affect on the denominator in the equation. It is not that the number of 2nd Amendment supporters is shrinking, the issue is that the opposition is growing faster. You can find any host of statistics to support either side of any issue, as is evidenced by you citations.

Pay less attention to statistics and more attention to the money being spent by special interest groups and the politicians and bureaucrats who are eager to take that money and push that agenda.

As an aside, if you believe the NRA are interested in your 2nd Amendment rights, they have been successful in their campaign to have you believe it.

The single and only point remains; Belief in, and support of, the 2nd Amendment is NOT ENOUGH.

a reply to: waltwillis

Even when I run your post through spell-checker and make allowances for your non-existent understanding of grammar you still do not make a cogent point. You are repeating your fears under the cloak of meaningless anecdotes and adding nothing to the discussion.

I should know better than to ask this: Have you thought of what the first 48 hours of your story will play out? What will you be doing? Who - specifically who - will you be shooting at?

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Leonidas
Any of you depending on the strength of the 2nd Amendment to protect your rights are profoundly naive. More is needed

Most of us understand that by the time it comes down to picking up a weapon that the other avenues of redress have failed, men have failed, checks and balances have failed and the fifth column has taken control.

Exactly. Those checks and balances are being watched carefully...timed and measured by We The People (those that are not kept distracted by MSM and other mundane bs.) Remember, our Liberty is insured by:
The Ballot Box, The Jury Box, The Soap Box, and last, but NOT least, The Cartridge Box.

originally posted by: Leonidas

originally posted by: macman

originally posted by: Leonidas

I dont think you get that we are on the same side of this issue. I just dont believe the "2nd Supporters" are enough and as a percentage of the population they are shrinking...and the NRA is a dangerous bedfellow...at best

If you ignore NRA membership, firearm sales numbers, background check numbers and CCW applications and go with telephone based polling of 1000 people then yeah, you would believe that numbers are shrinking.

When the number against gun ownership rights grows, it has an affect on the denominator in the equation. It is not that the number of 2nd Amendment supporters is shrinking, the issue is that the opposition is growing faster. You can find any host of statistics to support either side of any issue, as is evidenced by you citations.

Pay less attention to statistics and more attention to the money being spent by special interest groups and the politicians and bureaucrats who are eager to take that money and push that agenda.

As an aside, if you believe the NRA are interested in your 2nd Amendment rights, they have been successful in their campaign to have you believe it.

The single and only point remains; Belief in, and support of, the 2nd Amendment is NOT ENOUGH.

I would agree with your last bit--that the 2nd Amendment is but one of several individual liberties designed to be a check and balance to the state. However, support of one does not imply disregard for the others.

originally posted by: Leonidas
a reply to: waltwillis

Even when I run your post through spell-checker and make allowances for your non-existent understanding of grammar you still do not make a cogent point. You are repeating your fears under the cloak of meaningless anecdotes and adding nothing to the discussion.

I should know better than to ask this: Have you thought of what the first 48 hours of your story will play out? What will you be doing? Who - specifically who - will you be shooting at?

If shots are to be exchanged they would be very well directed at anyone that would make an overt act of aggression against innocent people that are trying to exercise the freedoms enumerated in our US constitution.

As far as my use of grammar and spelling, I would much prefer to have a short coming and deficiency in that aspect of my life then to have piss poor judgment in matters of great importance.

Imagination is far more important than intelligence. Had to add the "R" in the word "Short'.

So sorry to offend you guy!

originally posted by: Leonidas

When the number against gun ownership rights grows, it has an affect on the denominator in the equation. It is not that the number of 2nd Amendment supporters is shrinking, the issue is that the opposition is growing faster. You can find any host of statistics to support either side of any issue, as is evidenced by you citations.

So, your explanation as to the shown number of gun sales, background checks, new CCW permit applications is basically that it is a minority backlash against oppression.

BUll$h1t. Plain and simple.
Is it a backlash??? Yes it is. More and more people, here in the US (being here and actually understanding the US, and not from Canada) means a great deal.

originally posted by: Leonidas
Pay less attention to statistics and more attention to the money being spent by special interest groups and the politicians and bureaucrats who are eager to take that money and push that agenda.

Oh, you mean like Bloomberg and his proxy groups.
And I love this whole boogeyman idea of the NRA being this giant Pro-gun monster.
The NRA is the reason why US citizens have to ask permission to carry a firearm concealed. So, using them as your scary guy argument really doesn't hold much water.
Aside from companies dealing with local Govt, the larger monies are coming from the same tired old Anti-2nd groups.

originally posted by: Leonidas
As an aside, if you believe the NRA are interested in your 2nd Amendment rights, they have been successful in their campaign to have you believe it.

And when have I ever stated such a thing.
You should probably research a little before you open your mouth.

originally posted by: Leonidas
The single and only point remains; Belief in, and support of, the 2nd Amendment is NOT ENOUGH.

Alas we have sales numbers driving this point.
CCW permit applications soaring.
The market shows you are as incorrect as it gets.

a reply to: macman

No quite sure how anyone can deny gun sales and permits have been trending upwards for years when all the data clearly indicates such.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Blindly towing either a party line, or rope attached to some Progressive ideals.

originally posted by: waltwillis

originally posted by: Leonidas
a reply to: waltwillis

Even when I run your post through spell-checker and make allowances for your non-existent understanding of grammar you still do not make a cogent point. You are repeating your fears under the cloak of meaningless anecdotes and adding nothing to the discussion.

I should know better than to ask this: Have you thought of what the first 48 hours of your story will play out? What will you be doing? Who - specifically who - will you be shooting at?

If shots are to be exchanged they would be very well directed at anyone that would make an overt act of aggression against innocent people that are trying to exercise the freedoms enumerated in our US constitution.

As far as my use of grammar and spelling, I would much prefer to have a short coming and deficiency in that aspect of my life then to have piss poor judgment in matters of great importance.

Imagination is far more important than intelligence. Had to add the "R" in the word "Short'.

So sorry to offend you guy!

An inability to communicate in your native tongue really takes away from any point you may be struggling to articulate. Besides you will find that most people that cannot communicate properly are the ones "to have piss poor judgement".

As for your plan to run around shooting people who are "aggressive" seems to have a built-in single-bullet solution. We need people with intelligence in protecting our rights, not imagination of what those rights are and what you imagine should be done about it.

And I am certain that you are sincere when you place imagination ahead of intelligence.

You are a one-man band of crushing your own argument.