Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Reality Check: The very politically incorrect truth about the Second Amendment

page: 1
7

log in

join

posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 10:35 PM
link   
If you don't understand our second amendment rights, PLEASE check this out, absulutly phenomenal video!

Ben Swann knocks it out this time!!


[size=4pt]Reality Check: The very politically incorrect truth about the Second Amendment

Throughout this week Reality Check has looked at the numbers behind gun control and crime rates.

Tonight, we are looking at the second amendment, the intention behind it and what the founders might think about the gun debate today.

This is a reality check you won't see anywhere else.

www.fox19.com...
edit on 20-12-2012 by FuZe7 because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 11:04 PM
link   
Ha!

It's what I have been saying all along... And I'm an Aussie!!!



posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 11:08 PM
link   
The start of the segment says they would answer what the founding fathers would have thought today. But by the end of the segment he dovetails around answering that with a "we don't know what they would think".

Also if that is the literal interpretation - the right to match the military then where's my tank and rocket launcher? Where can I pick up a drone or a stealth bomber? The rules and tools of engagement are COMPLETELY different now than when the Founding Fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment. I'm pretty certain they would not want to write any law that ensured that everyday citizens had access to nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. We don't need to ban guns but the 2nd Amendment needs an Amendment - it needs to be brought up to date.



posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 11:18 PM
link   
The bottom line is this. ANYONE outside of the United States should mind their own damn business about our laws and Bill of Rights. I say this because there are a lot of people chiming in, including now China, who are trying to tell us what to do.

And the hypocrisy of Eric Holder talking about gun control today made me almost throw up. This man is going to tell American's they can't have guns, while he's busy handing them out to Mexican Drug Cartels. Arrrghh... So mad.

The fact is this. If the government decides they are going to ban certain weapons, or take away weapons, they are out of their minds. America is the most armed country in the world. And I know for a fact that gun owners aren't just gonna turn over their weapons. This debate is going to turn into a seriously explosive situation. Bad things are going to happen.

In respect to the video, very valid points were made. The 2nd Amendment was really for us to protect ourselves against enemies foreign and domestic. It's not about hunting, or target shooting. It's about being able to defend ourselves against foreign invaders, or our own government. Now obviously we can't get access to military grade munitions. But if we follow it to the letter, then we should very well be able to access what they term "assault weapons".

edit on 20-12-2012 by DerekJR321 because: typo



posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 11:32 PM
link   
Yes, that is exactly what the second is about.



Remember as the second Amendment goes, so go the rest of the Amendments.



posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 11:47 PM
link   
The term " we the people" with all documents dealing with this means the rights of the individual person.

There is a reason why China has never invaded us with their 200 million strong army, there is a reason why we are a "united states" republic and not a democracy. Our forefathers understood that a federal Government can become a tyranny and just because it is 2012 doesn't mean it can never happen again.

When we look at Germany that basically marched across Europe never fearing "the people" we see what can happen when "the people" are sheeple that have ZERO protection against foreign or domestic forces. Just think o the outcome if Germany faced 3 BILLION civilian weapons instead if a totally unarmed civilian populace. Well that is what China would face if they ever invaded America.

This is also why countries like Sweden has heavily armed their populace, and why countries like Australia has seen an 85% increase in criminal violence since they banned automatic weapons. "the people" cannot always depend on their government and local officials to save them all the time. I carry canceled for that maybe one time in my life I need it, and a reason why if we DID get invaded there would be some sorry ass soldiers if they came by my house.


edit on 20-12-2012 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by DerekJR321
The bottom line is this. ANYONE outside of the United States should mind their own damn business about our laws and Bill of Rights.
Say What!!

900 US Bases Worldwide and Your talking about "Minding your own Business"

Silly Man.



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by DerekJR321
The bottom line is this. ANYONE outside of the United States should mind their own damn business about our laws and Bill of Rights.
Say What!!

900 US Bases Worldwide and Your talking about "Minding your own Business"

Silly Man.


Quite a few Americans too are upset about that. Check out Ron Paul & his supporters.



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 01:11 AM
link   
Reality Check nailed it....and by extension of the argument that citizens were to be armed even for protection against their own government (which relates both to the locus of sovereignty with the people in principle and their particular experience with the british crown and its soldiers) and as a check to a standing army in the country then it is precisely those military weapons (assault rifles) that are protected. Still that doesnt mean that crazy people and criminals should have them....so we have a balancing act to perform in society.



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 03:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sovaka
Ha!

It's what I have been saying all along... And I'm an Aussie!!!


You're a good man sir!



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 05:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Terrormaster
 


You do know that they had cannons, and, war ships, at the time The Constitution and The Second Amendment were penned, right?

The Founding Fathers didn't include the right to private citizen ownership of those particular implements of war in The Second Amendment.

Just small arms.



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Mike U.
 


The founders did not specify "small arms".
The individule could have any weapon he could afford and some did and do have cannons. Some private citizines even now own working tanks, demiliterized for the time being, but still working.



posted on Dec, 21 2012 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by RedmoonMWC
 


True.
If your wealthy enough, you can own full auto rifles, pistols, shotguns, and, even .50 BMG machine guns.
That is, after you jump through all the hoops fed.gov has in place, and, pay the exorbitant fees.

Now, I recall seeing a video where a privately owned anti-aircraft gun was used to bring down a target drone airplane.
If I remember correctly, it was owned by the guy who founded, and, owns Dillon Reloading Machine Co.


I just invalidated my own argument.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 04:24 AM
link   
reply to post by FuZe7
 


2nd Amendment Discussion after today's Shootings in Connecticut.

The problem is NOT guns, let me explain why. Guns, like baseball bats, golf clubs, fireplace pokers, samurai swords, bowling balls, potato launchers, cars - trucks - boats - RV's - airplanes, bows and arrows, kitchen knives and so on and so forth, are just tools that are used to do particular things. When these tools are used improperly, people get hurt. Now, its not the tools that are to blame. Its the IDIOTS operating the tools. So, please understand, it is NOT GUNS that are dangerous, they are only tools, it is the IDIOTS MISUSING them. For every group of statistics that you can quote that prove your position, I can give you 10x more that prove mine. So where does that leave us? At a stalemate of sorts. Who is right and Who is wrong?

Confiscation of Guns would make the founding fathers roll over in their graves. They gave us the 2nd Amendment so that :

0. We could hunt for food
1. We could defend ourselves
2. We could defend our families
3. We could defend our country
4. We could defend our property
5. We could take down TYRANTS and TYRANNY.

You fail to understand that when our families came here from Great Britian, King George did not allow them to own weapons because if he did, they would have executed him for the rotten crap that he pulled on them in an abuse of power.
So, they wrote the Constitution and Bill of Rights to guarantee that we would indeed never have to suffer the pain of TYRANNY again.

If every person age 18 or older were required to buy, register and carry a concealed weapon, we would have a lot less crime than we do today. Think of this, that 20 yr old is seen walking up to the school armed to the teeth. Teacher alerts other teachers and before he has a chance to enter the school, they've drawn their weapons on him and possibly disabled him or killed him saving 26 lives in the process. A guy walks into a bar or stop n go store and pulls a gun. 3 people inside are also armed. He backs down immediately or dies.

These are the things that we are faced with every single day. However, in states where guns are very prevalent, there is very little crime. Statistics on Australia after their forced gun grab indicate crime has risen tremendously since it took place. Before that, there was very little crime at all.

So you see, statistics are numbers meant to support which ever side they are made for.

The bottom line, if you give up your right to bear arms, you walk right into the hands of TYRANNY without a way to end it.



posted on Dec, 23 2012 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by FuZe7
 


The Amendments were written with the intention to be open to interpretation and change, so saying "this is what the founding fathers had in mind" is inherintly and definitively incorrect.

DEY TOOK RRRR GRRRRRNNNNNS!

edit on 23-12-2012 by HairlessApe because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join