- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Is this an extremist view? Re Second Amendment
Posted on 3/4/14 at 7:46 pm
Posted on 3/4/14 at 7:46 pm
Whenever discussing "gun rights", the first thing I ask is "Why did our founding fathers create the Second Amendment?"
Was it so we could hunt wild game? maybe
Was it so we could defend ourselves from our thug neighbors? maybe
Was it so if our government became overbearing, we could take it back? I think so.
People scoff at the thought of us having to this, or us having the capability to do this. Especially with fighter jets, and such in the goverment's arsenal. Just depends on the situation, I suppose. But certainly, with no firearms, we are at the whim of our government.
A rifle? Who cares?
Did you notice the confrontation at the airbase in Ukraine today? All about a rifle.
Is it inconceivable that one day our offspring will have to take up arms against whatever force we call "government" at that time? Our country is a mere 230 years old. Have we peaked?
Was it so we could hunt wild game? maybe
Was it so we could defend ourselves from our thug neighbors? maybe
Was it so if our government became overbearing, we could take it back? I think so.
People scoff at the thought of us having to this, or us having the capability to do this. Especially with fighter jets, and such in the goverment's arsenal. Just depends on the situation, I suppose. But certainly, with no firearms, we are at the whim of our government.
A rifle? Who cares?
Did you notice the confrontation at the airbase in Ukraine today? All about a rifle.
Is it inconceivable that one day our offspring will have to take up arms against whatever force we call "government" at that time? Our country is a mere 230 years old. Have we peaked?
10
Posted on 3/4/14 at 7:47 pm to Grassy1
Poli board
Posted on 3/4/14 at 7:50 pm to KingRanch
I am very pro-gun, but..
The OB isn't the place for this.
quote:
Poli board
The OB isn't the place for this.
Posted on 3/4/14 at 7:54 pm to KingRanch
Well, the frame of the question is the founding fathers. They had no conception of fighter jets, tanks, heavy military arsenal, etc. However, I would guess it was more for the ability to stand your ground against any gov't, including our own.
The militia was more the route taken at the time instead of a formal army. No right to bear arms = no militia.
Whatever their reasons, I'm glad they did it.
The militia was more the route taken at the time instead of a formal army. No right to bear arms = no militia.
Whatever their reasons, I'm glad they did it.
Posted on 3/4/14 at 7:56 pm to Grassy1
quote:you betcha
Is this a Poli board topic?
Posted on 3/4/14 at 8:15 pm to KingRanch
I know its a poli board topic, but we know where the pro-gun guys hang out.
And these are the only guys that will be debating these issues with friends/family/acquaintances.
I never go to the poli-board. Maybe I should though.
And these are the only guys that will be debating these issues with friends/family/acquaintances.
I never go to the poli-board. Maybe I should though.
Posted on 3/4/14 at 8:36 pm to Grassy1
any drive-by history lesson through the 2A, the Federalist papers, or the men writing the 2A would answer this question.
THE number one reason that the 2A exists is for the fight of a tyrannical govt. That is it. not hunting, not self defense, not to buy and sell. but they are nice derivatives of the above.
THE number one reason that the 2A exists is for the fight of a tyrannical govt. That is it. not hunting, not self defense, not to buy and sell. but they are nice derivatives of the above.
Posted on 3/4/14 at 8:40 pm to lsuroadie
damn op, do some reading first, thug neighbors ?? wtf
Posted on 3/4/14 at 8:48 pm to ninthward
quote:
Thug neighbors
Mebbe he means the French, Injuns and the Spanish, all of whom were our "neighbors" at the time, and with whom we might scuffle.
Posted on 3/4/14 at 9:25 pm to ninthward
thug neighbors...
you know, the folks we conceal carry for, and the folks we discuss daily about which weapon to keep by our beds...
you know, the folks we conceal carry for, and the folks we discuss daily about which weapon to keep by our beds...
Posted on 3/4/14 at 9:28 pm to Grassy1
Anyone that thinks that small arms can't defeat the war machine that is the American military need only be reminded of Vietnam and Afghanistan.
Posted on 3/4/14 at 9:30 pm to lsuroadie
quote:
any drive-by history lesson through the 2A, the Federalist papers, or the men writing the 2A would answer this question.
THE number one reason that the 2A exists is for the fight of a tyrannical govt. That is it. not hunting, not self defense, not to buy and sell. but they are nice derivatives of the above.
okay... I bet if you were to ask most folks WHY the second amendment was written, most would say for "hunting, or home defense, or maybe to defend ourselves from the indians"
I think its critical for those of us who discuss this issue with others bring this up.
People ask "why do you need a firearm with a 100 round magazine?" or why do you need an "assault" rifle?
If my grandson has to fight his government one day, which of those would I like to take from him?
Posted on 3/4/14 at 9:59 pm to INFIDEL
quote:
Anyone that thinks that small arms can't defeat the war machine that is the American military need only be reminded of Vietnam and Afghanistan.
People that make this argument are also the flawed in the assumption that the whole military will be on the side of the government in a hypothetical American revolution. These are people who didn't learn from history. That didn't happen the first time and it won't if it happens again.
A lot of the military, even high ranking and powerful members of the military will be siding with the people IMO.
This post was edited on 3/8/14 at 8:44 am
Posted on 3/4/14 at 10:39 pm to DrTyger
quote:
People that make this argument are also the flawed argument that the whole military will be on the side of the government in a hypothetical American revolution. These are people who didn't learn from history. That didn't happen the first time and it won't if it happens again.
This really is truly baffling to me (bappling?
). Liberals think that an overwhelmingly conservative military is going to back their ways. My response? Get fricking real. Maybe the corrupt police forces in big cities will get behind them but the military wouldn't turn on the very people that they go overseas to defend.
This post was edited on 3/4/14 at 10:40 pm
Posted on 3/5/14 at 6:17 am to Grassy1
quote:
Was it so we could hunt wild game? maybe
had absolutely nothing to do with this
Posted on 3/5/14 at 6:38 am to lsuroadie
quote:
Why do you need a car with a 25 gal gas tank? Why do you need a house with more than 1500 sq ft?
This is always what I want to scream at Reid and pelosi on tv when they start talking about what guns we need. Why does a civilian NEED a H3 vehicle or a 6000 sq ft house or a paycheck of over $1 million or a Rolex etc...
Posted on 3/5/14 at 6:52 am to lsuroadie
I only a firearm or two, or so, but over the last year I was surprised to hear people close to me being anti "assault weapon" and "big magazines."
I know I changed some of their minds when I remind them why having a firearm is in the 2nd Amendment.
And then ask them which firearm would you like to take out of your grandson's arsenal and what is the number of bullets would you like to allow him to shoot when he's defending himself against the federation one day.
Changed all of their minds? Doubtful.
But at least I reminded them why the hell its in the Bill of Rights.
ONE DAY, we will have to take this country back. Anyone who thinks otherwise simply doesn't watch the news, is simple-minded and naive. Hopefully it will be our grandkids, or their grandkids, or theirs.
I know I changed some of their minds when I remind them why having a firearm is in the 2nd Amendment.
And then ask them which firearm would you like to take out of your grandson's arsenal and what is the number of bullets would you like to allow him to shoot when he's defending himself against the federation one day.
Changed all of their minds? Doubtful.
But at least I reminded them why the hell its in the Bill of Rights.
ONE DAY, we will have to take this country back. Anyone who thinks otherwise simply doesn't watch the news, is simple-minded and naive. Hopefully it will be our grandkids, or their grandkids, or theirs.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 6:56 am to Grassy1
The 2A is so the people can defend themselves against tyranny in government. Madison, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and more said so in many other works, including the Declaration Of Independence.
Hunting, no.
Defense against neighbors, no.
Stop a tyrannical government, yes.
Hunting, no.
Defense against neighbors, no.
Stop a tyrannical government, yes.
Posted on 3/5/14 at 9:54 am to H.M. Murdock
quote:
Stop a tyrannical government, yes.
Do hear this injected in "gun debates", whether on TV or in day to day conversation?
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News