A question about the second amendment:

Some Quotes bt Thomas Jefferson.

Read the following and decide for yourself if this man wanted the common man to bear arms...

"If ever there was a holy war, it was that which saved our liberties and gave us independence"

"One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them"

"The law of self-preservation is higher than written law"

"Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day: But a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period and pursued unalterably through every change of Ministers, too plainly proves a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing us to Slavery"

"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"

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. 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"

"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have .... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases"

"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks"

"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms [of government] those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny"

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it"

"A little rebellion now and then is a good thing"

"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ... And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure"

Originally posted by Implosion
I wonder how many thermonuclear weapons you would need to have stashed in your tool shed, before the government of the US saw you as a viable threat. Alas, I feel that may be a different thread altogether.

As with every amendment, the Second Amendment is limited by reasonableness. That's the question: what is reasonable for a gun owner to have? That is precisely why it is not part of the First Amendment to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

Originally posted by thedigirati

this is why the 2nd amendment is still valid even in the nuclear age, chances are fairly good they by the time the armed insurrection starts, the military will be on the side of the people

This is why UN troops would be used instead of American...Remember most of our troops are fighting overseas in an unconstitutional war...Thousands dead, how long do you think it takes for them to catch onto what's really going on here? Perhaps many already have.

I recently wrote to my Senator asking for his stance on the Second Amendment. I whole heartedly believe it's for the people... no if ands or buts.

Here's what I got back from Sam Brownback (08 candidate).

March 2, 2007

Dear Mr. XXXXXXXXX,

Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding the constitutional right to bear arms. There is no better guide for making tough decisions than hearing from the people whom I serve.

As your Senator and Chairman of the Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Property Rights, I promise to faithfully adhere to the Constitution of the United States. At the heart of the Constitution is the Second Amendment, which provides that "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." I believe that the text of this Amendment (as supported by the expressed intent of our Founding Fathers) guarantees an individual, as opposed to a collective, right to bear arms. This was also the conclusion of the U.S. Department of Justice in a detailed August 2004 paper from the Office of Legal Counsel.

With regard to the prevention of violence in our country and the prosecution of the perpetrators, I am fully committed to bringing criminals to justice by vigorously enforcing current laws. This is a much better solution that creating new laws that could infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.

Thank you again for contacting me regarding this important issue. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of further assistance. In the meantime, I encourage you to visit my website at brownback.senate.gov for additional information on this and other issues on which I am working.

Sincerely,


Sam Brownback

Orangetom said:
"IN American principles the people are the Soverigns not the Government."

I applaud what you say,.... hear hear, Orangetom!!!

^+1

"For the people, By the People."

The phrase 'right of the people' appears in several other amendments of the Bill of Rights. If it applies to the everyday citizen in those, why not the 2nd amendment as well?

Conversely, it must also be true that if one believes that the 'right of the people' in the 2nd amendment does not refer to the everyday citizen, it also does not apply to them in the other amendments.

Goddamn right by the people for the people. As I said in an earlier thread, if someone were to come try and take the arms of my family and friends(as I own none peronally) they would find another thing coming. Especially from me, I wont take such # sitting down.

vor78, you seem to be assuming I actually know about the constitution and the amendments. I don't, hence the question. Of course, what you say appears to be perfectly valid. However, I am very much an outsider looking in.

Originally posted by ludaChris
Goddamn right by the people for the people. As I said in an earlier thread, if someone were to come try and take the arms of my family and friends(as I own none peronally) they would find another thing coming. Especially from me, I wont take such # sitting down.

Did you enjoy the firearms confiscation video I posted earlier in this thread?

How many here actually understand that the Second Amendment is the heart of our Constitutionally protected rights.

If the Second ever gets erased (as they've tried for a long time), what means do you think you'd have to stop them from taking away all of your rights?


As far as your video link, all that did was piss me off. It makes me sick to my stomach to think theres even one military personnel that has forgotten that they've taken an oath to uphold the Constitution 1st, command from the President comes 2nd.

Furthermore, again, here here for "For the people, by the people."

Originally posted by Infoholic
here here for "For the people, by the people."

They are indeed pretty words, but do you really think that they represent the reality of living in the United States today?

Originally posted by Implosion

Originally posted by Infoholic
here here for "For the people, by the people."

They are indeed pretty words, but do you really think that they represent the reality of living in the United States today?

I can't speak for every American citizen, but I'm certain there's more than enough out there that feel the same way. You've got to understand that not everyone will be "provoked" enough to act, until it directly effects them. But once it does... they'd better look out.

As far as I'm concerned, you bet.

I'll gladly stand tall for the principles that America was built on, even if alone.

You've got to understand that not everyone will be "provoked" enough to act, until it directly effects them. But once it does... they'd better look out.

“In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, Brave, Hated, and Scorned. When his cause succeeds however,the timid join him, For then it costs nothing to be a Patriot.”
-Mark Twain

In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
-Martin Niemöller

These are unfortunate things to bear in mind.

The entire document is an enumeration of the rights of the people.

In light of this, to propose that the 2'nd is an enumeration of the rights of the military, or of the government, is absurd.

Previous posters have explained it quite well, imo.

[edit on 3/24/07 by Shadowbear]

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

The Founders of this nation knew exactly what they were talking about when they endorsed every man, woman and child owning a gun and being trained in how to use it. The Founders wanted the common American to be ever armed and ever vigilant against corruption and tyrrany from within his own government. The Founders always spoke within the context of fighting our own government when they spoke of the right to bear arms. That had to be in the forefront of their consideration.

Tonight, while watching our local "community television," I once again heard that ultimately lame liberal argument against individual Americans owning and bearing arms: "The Constitution already provides for a militia, and it's called the National Guard." Which is pure BS.

No slam against the Guard, but in the event that a New American Revolution or New Civil War broke out today, do liberals seriously believe that the National Guard would be prepared to fight against an oppressive United States government? Unlikely; in fact, although I hate to think of it, you can bet that the National Guard would be called to the front lines of crushing any revolution.

I hate to think of it because the Guard would be ordered to go up against millions of private gun owners across the country. And that would be a true waste of fine Guardsmen.

— Doc Velocity

Originally posted by Nicotine1982

“In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, Brave, Hated, and Scorned. When his cause succeeds however,the timid join him, For then it costs nothing to be a Patriot.”
-Mark Twain

In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
-Martin Niemöller

These are unfortunate things to bear in mind.

That is very very true... sad but very true.

I wish more people would actively participate in todays government, and not have to wait when they have the raping of our rights happening before their very eyes.

But then again, I was in that very same boat about 9 months ago. I didn't begin to pay attention until the slipped the Port Security Act through, of which took away my ability to play online poker for cash.

Originally posted by Infoholic

As far as your video link, all that did was piss me off. It makes me sick to my stomach to think theres even one military personnel that has forgotten that they've taken an oath to uphold the Constitution 1st, command from the President comes 2nd.

Furthermore, again, here here for "For the people, by the people."

I'd like to see the cops here in Oklahoma try to take our guns away. Ain't happening. We're all armed and we'll stay armed.

Originally posted by TheAvenger
I'd like to see the cops here in Oklahoma try to take our guns away. Ain't happening. We're all armed and we'll stay armed.

On the idea of what took place in N.O., I'm willing to bet those that the confiscations took place with, not too many of them were "educated" as to their rights.

I'm sure a few of them were, but the onlookers were thinking, "Ah, $hit, I'm not touching that one with a 10ft. pole."

Of which, IMO, they should have been right up in their faces.

I dunno, I'm certain actually being in that situation is a bit different than just talking about it. I'm about dumb enough to try though.

Originally posted by TheAvenger
I'd like to see the cops here in Oklahoma try to take our guns away. Ain't happening. We're all armed and we'll stay armed.

Reminds me of a little vacation I took in 2005 up to the Pacific Northwest, with side trips to Idaho and Montana. I'm telling you, I would not want to be in law enforcement up there and be called upon to disarm the citizenry. Virtually everyone up there is armed, and they're not afraid to say so.

Strangely, those states have some of the smallest law enforcement departments yet some of lowest crime rates. Hmmmm...Funny how that works, ain't it?

— Doc Velocity