Comprehending the 2nd Amendment

a reply to: visitedbythem

unlike the English bowing to a German queen.

We don't.

The Queens mother was Scottish.

originally posted by: cynicalheathen
a reply to: AMPTAH

But, We the People appears before all of that, to remind the goverment of who is in charge. Power comes from the people and is lent to the government. All the restrictions are on the government.

Well, "We the People" can dissolve the constitution, and write another one. That's the ultimate power of the people. But, as long as "We the People" tell the government to uphold the constitution, and the government officials take an "oath" to do so, then the government will follow the principles written within it, according to their understanding of the rules therein. So, unless the people tell the government to tear up that document, it will stand.

Can you cite any court cases or jurisprudence where your "6 goals" in their particular order have been used to decide anything?

These "6" goals come from "natural law". They are not put there to "become law", but to "remind of law" that already exists, and cannot be violated without destruction. Without the preamble, the constitution remains exactly the same. Except, without that friendly reminder, of how to proceed, to achieve success in your overall goals.

It's much like a reminder to surf with the waves, rather than attempt to buck the waves, if you want to succeed in staying above the water. The principles were not "invented" by men, but "discovered" by them.

They are considered "secret principles", known only to the wise, and was considered too esoteric to be understood by the general public. But, today, everybody is educated enough, to understand them. [Well, at least, partly understand.]

They are encoded in various forms of symbolism. Here is the 1st President of the United States, with the "6" principles encoded on the two pillars that flank him,



Image from Library of Congress.


To understand the connection, they come again from "Christian" scripture,


From the pillar on George's "right hand":

There is,

No "Union" without "Charity"
No "Tranquility" without "Hope"
No "Welfare" without "Faith"

principle "order" as given in KJV, 1 Corinthians 13:13

From the pillar on George's "left hand":

There is,

No "Justice" without "Beauty"
No "Defence" without "Strength"
No "Liberty" without "Wisdom"

This is also where the "3" parts of government comes from: Legislature, Judiciary, Executive.

The whole constitution is built on these "natural law" principles.

So, no court will reference them, because it's unnecessary. It's not man made law.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: visitedbythem

unlike the English bowing to a German queen.

We don't.

The Queens mother was Scottish.

Yeah, and her granddaddy was George V. It is as recent as 1917 that he changed the family name to Windsor, from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, and thought it prudent, in the midst of war with Germany, to drop all his German titles and estates.

The House of Windsor is a sham, a public relations end to the House of Hannover, not a natural end through bloodlines.

Britain kneels to the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha's.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: visitedbythem

unlike the English bowing to a German queen.

We don't.

The Queens mother was Scottish.

Yeah, and her granddaddy was George V. It is as recent as 1917 that he changed the family name to Windsor, from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, and thought it prudent, in the midst of war with Germany, to drop all his German titles and estates.

Yes we know that.

Doesn't make The Queen a German though.

By that premise most U.S. Presidents are British, as per their bloodline.

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: visitedbythem

unlike the English bowing to a German queen.

We don't.

The Queens mother was Scottish.

Yeah, and her granddaddy was George V. It is as recent as 1917 that he changed the family name to Windsor, from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, and thought it prudent, in the midst of war with Germany, to drop all his German titles and estates.

Yes we know that.

Doesn't make The Queen a German though.

By that premise most U.S. Presidents are British, as per their bloodline.

All American bloodlines are not British.
We're not talking about all people either or even most people, we are talking about the Windsors, a family of German descent (very recently) who changed their name to appear more British. It's only 150 years or so ago that our king did not even speak English, only German.

The bottom line is the royal family go by a made-up surname, Windsor, to hide their very deep German bloodline.

a reply to: UKTruth

All American bloodlines are not British

Try and read what i stated. I didn't say all,i said most.

The Queen Great Great Great Great Great Great Grandfather on here mothers side The Bowes Lyon Family was Scottish,and all who came after him.

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: UKTruth

All American bloodlines are not British

Try and read what i stated. I didn't say all,i said most.

The Queen Great Great Great Great Great Great Grandfather on here mothers side The Bowes Lyon Family was Scottish,and all who came after him.

en.wikipedia.org...

...and her father's bloodline is German, and the Queen's real surname is Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, from the House of Hannover.
Queen Elizabeth Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: UKTruth

All American bloodlines are not British

Try and read what i stated. I didn't say all,i said most.

The Queen Great Great Great Great Great Great Grandfather on here mothers side The Bowes Lyon Family was Scottish,and all who came after him.

en.wikipedia.org...

...and her father's bloodline is German, and the Queen's real surname is Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, from the House of Hannover.
Queen Elizabeth Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.

Oh dear.

Do you think when a baby is conceived it only takes the blood line of the father? Try educating yourself on gynaecology.

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: UKTruth

All American bloodlines are not British

Try and read what i stated. I didn't say all,i said most.

The Queen Great Great Great Great Great Great Grandfather on here mothers side The Bowes Lyon Family was Scottish,and all who came after him.

en.wikipedia.org...

...and her father's bloodline is German, and the Queen's real surname is Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, from the House of Hannover.
Queen Elizabeth Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.

Oh dear.

Do you think when a baby is conceived it only takes the blood line of the father? Try educating yourself on gynaecology.

gynaecology? Do you mean genealogy?

ROFL....

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: UKTruth

All American bloodlines are not British

Try and read what i stated. I didn't say all,i said most.

The Queen Great Great Great Great Great Great Grandfather on here mothers side The Bowes Lyon Family was Scottish,and all who came after him.

en.wikipedia.org...

...and her father's bloodline is German, and the Queen's real surname is Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, from the House of Hannover.
Queen Elizabeth Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.

Oh dear.

Do you think when a baby is conceived it only takes the blood line of the father? Try educating yourself on gynaecology.

we know enough to understand that the most dominant bloodline is the one that will be more present

My father was full blooded Sioux, and my mother was 1/2 Scottish

Guess what physical features are more obvious, and on a genealogy break down of my DNA are more prominent?

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: UKTruth

All American bloodlines are not British

Try and read what i stated. I didn't say all,i said most.

The Queen Great Great Great Great Great Great Grandfather on here mothers side The Bowes Lyon Family was Scottish,and all who came after him.

en.wikipedia.org...

...and her father's bloodline is German, and the Queen's real surname is Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, from the House of Hannover.
Queen Elizabeth Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.

Oh dear.

Do you think when a baby is conceived it only takes the blood line of the father? Try educating yourself on gynaecology.

Lol, "gynaecology". What was that about education?
Hilarious. Made my day.

Anyway, back to the point that the Windsors have a fake surname, and it's really Saxe-Coburg-Gotha descended directly from the House of Hanover

a reply to: neo96

en.wikipedia.org... better example was the assault rifle of its day

The Girandoni air rifle was in service with the Austrian army from 1780 to around 1815. The advantages of a high rate of fire, no smoke from propellants, and low muzzle report granted it acceptance. It did have problems and was eventually removed from service for several reasons decades after introduction. While the detachable air reservoir was capable of around 30 shots

22 rounds in the span of a minute if you wanted to empty the gun well with in the founders life times and yet they didnt see fit to amend the second then ,to shot silently and around the muzzle velocity of a 45cp

Wan't a good reason to retain the 2nd as it is interpreted? Try this non-political reason on for size. Do you think the federal government could maintain order in the event of a global natural disaster? I don't.

www.wnd.com...
VOLCANO ALERTS: YOU WANT TO TALK 'CATASTROPHIC CLIMATE CHANGE'?

At least two potential super-volcanos have the attention of scientists worldwide because of the devastation any of them – two in the U.S. and one in Japan – could wreak on the planet, killing tens of millions and ravaging global economies.

Saturday’s rumblings at the Yellowstone Caldera in America’s most famous national park caught the attention of seismologists over the weekend because of its cataclysmic potential. Scientists warn that a major eruption of the Wyoming volcano would kill an estimated 87,000 people immediately and render two-thirds of the U.S. uninhabitable because of an ash cloud that would spark rapid climate change.

If that scenario sounds apologetically scary, consider the other volcano being watched worldwide off the shore of Japan. Just last week, Japanese scientists were warning an eruption at the Kikai Caldera, about 50 miles south of Japan’s main island, could kill 100 million people and set off catastrophic global climate change that would make the world forget about “global warming” scares.

How about in the event of nuclear war or even if a rogue nation sets off an EMP strike on the US?

These scenarios may seem absurd or highly unlikely but stranger things have happened. Yes?

a reply to: UKTruth

and the arms of the day also included cannons,mortars and armed warships etc i don't think that's something the left would like to see revisited as applying to the second as the founders intended them
en.wikipedia.org...
i mean an auto cannon is technically a cannon so that may put the 25mm bushmaster on the menu

en.wikipedia.org...(weapon)


www.forgottenweapons.com... better video of the giradoni ,its pouch came with 2 back up air tanks pump and 4 speed loaders of 22 rounds of ammo in .46 caliber

originally posted by: RalagaNarHallas
a reply to: UKTruth

and the arms of the day also included cannons,mortars and armed warships etc i don't think that's something the left would like to see revisited as applying to the second as the founders intended them
en.wikipedia.org...
i mean an auto cannon is technically a cannon so that may put the 25mm bushmaster on the menu

en.wikipedia.org...(weapon)


www.forgottenweapons.com... better video of the giradoni ,its pouch came with 2 back up air tanks pump and 4 speed loaders of 22 rounds of ammo in .46 caliber

Indeed.

The 2nd Amendment was influenced by the British Bill of Rights in 1689. People should read the origins of that Bill to understand the language of the 2nd Amendment a little better.

a reply to: AMPTAH

they are not man-made laws???????....who in the hell made them?.....a dog?....a cat?....a mythical god?....

originally posted by: CharlesT
Wan't a good reason to retain the 2nd as it is interpreted? Try this non-political reason on for size. Do you think the federal government could maintain order in the event of a global natural disaster? I don't.

Those with guns are shooting those without guns, and there isn't even a natural disaster for excuse.

In a natural disaster, people automatically come together and help each other out. Its only in the movies, that the story-line is told that people will descend into chaos and battle for the scarce resources, hence end up fighting each other. It makes good movies.

In peace time, people get agitated, because there are no real problems to captivate their attention, so some people create their own disaster by setting about to stir things up themselves.

All these crazed shooters, would not practice their art, if they had a volcano to deal with.

originally posted by: jimmyx
a reply to: AMPTAH

they are not man-made laws???????....who in the hell made them?.....a dog?....a cat?....a mythical god?....

It's like gravity.

Who made the law of gravity?

There's no court that will convict a man for his attempt to break the law of gravity.

It wouldn't even be considered in a court of law.

Because, it's not a man made law.

You can be wise, and recognize that the law of gravity exists, and so cooperate with that natural law, or you can decide to ignore this law and jump off a cliff and fly to the moon.

That's all.


Now consider the following "PARADOX"

take the bottom two rungs of the ladder

. WELFARE
. LIBERTY

constitution grants you both.

Now say a disease breaks out among the population, and it's a very "contagious" disease. Easily spread from person to person.

Which of the two "goals" would you pick

1) Constitution says people have the right to liberty, so you let everybody go about their usual daily activities, keeping their liberty, and let the welfare suffer, because more and more people catch the disease and get sick and die.

2) Constitution says people have the right to welfare, so you detain all the sick people, and put them in isolation camps, taking away their liberties, in order to protect the welfare of the rest of the population.

You're now a government official, charged with the responsibility of protecting the U.S. Constititon.

Which of these two actions do you pick: (1) or (2) ?

See?

a reply to: AMPTAH
How do you know this? Have you been there and done that? I haven't, and I doubt you have either. You base you opinion on speculation.

Ask to people that endured hurricane Katrina.



Let's ask some of the looters during some of the regional disasters.


Also ask rioters during the Rodney King LA riots.


One last edit. Let's ask the Donner Party about this possibility.

a reply to: elysiumfire

The comstitution doesnt enumerate your rights. It restricts the government. So unless it gives the government the authority to prevent our self protection, the government has no role at all.