- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
re: How the NRA Rewrote the Second Amendment
Posted on 5/20/14 at 10:26 am to DelU249
Posted on 5/20/14 at 10:26 am to DelU249
quote:
no shite, out of context....
It's just an easier game then saying what they really think.
That's what the OP does...it's who he is.
He'll pretend that he thinks it's just interesting, will outright lie about his personal position on the issue, etc. He's as intellectually dishonest as it comes.
Posted on 5/20/14 at 10:29 am to DelU249
quote:
Fox Mulder
quote:
They explicitly state that the threat of violence was meant to keep them in check. I guess Thomas Jefferson just needed more politico context though.
Are you talking about when Jefferson said, "When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. 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."
Yeah... That's most like misattributed or faked...
LINK /
Posted on 5/20/14 at 10:33 am to Truckasaurus
Nope, but you can choose from the plethora of documents and choose one
Posted on 5/20/14 at 10:41 am to a want
quote:
Well, the assertion that the 2nd ammendment was rewritten/reinterpreted in the last 50 years is interesting.
Since you lack the necessary understanding it should be interesting to you. Though I'm sure you could cite some example of this rewriting/reinterpreting.
Actually you probably can't but I find your shallow thinking on this topic amusing.
I'll bring up a few of the more poorly researched parts of the article and see where you "interests" lies.
quote:
was expressing the longtime consensus of historians and judges across the political spectrum
Unfortunately there was no such consensus, either in the courts or with historians. You see, prior to Miller the courts (lower Federal courts largely) often contradicted each other with the scope of the 2A with respect to the question of applicability and whether it protected an Individual or Collective right. Historians have argued whether the 2A created a new right or simply protected and codified an existing right, based on its relation to the English BoR as well as which ownership theory the 2A protected.
quote:
Many are startled to learn that the U.S. Supreme Court didn’t rule that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual’s right to own a gun until 2008...
In fact, every other time the court had ruled previously, it had ruled otherwise.
Interesting and factually devoid. First, with regards to the curious wording of "every other time the court had ruled previously". No question that "the court" refers to SCOTUS, but "every other time" seems to imply multiple cases. There are no multiple cases dealing with the 2A at the SCOTUS level prior to Heller, only the 1939 Miller case and that did not touch on the Individual/Collective Rights theories at all. It simply dealt with what constituted a weapon suitable for militia purpose (e.g. short barreled shotgun). Maybe you are too ignorant to know intellectual dishonesty when it's presented but you are far from alone.
Love how the author of this hit piece seems to think the NRA galvanized its support of the 2A in a complete vacuum by citing a general Conservative "backlash" of the period. Makes no mention of certain lobbying groups such as The Coalition to Ban Handguns coming into play during the same time period. I'm sure you'd find that interesting too, if you had more than a room temperature IQ on this topic. You have anything to say of their radicalizing for strict gun control laws?
quote:
But a historian fact-checked the justice: “Malcolm’s name may sound British, and Bentley College, where Malcolm teaches history, may sound like a college at Oxford, but in fact Malcolm was born and raised in Utica, New York, and Bentley is a business college in Massachusetts.
All true but why did this historian leave out the fact that Prof. Malcolm's background is in American Colonial and British history? No mention of the the books Malcolm has authored on the history of the 2A and its roots in English Common Law? Guess he didn't want to lend scholarly support to Scalia's decision.
This post was edited on 5/20/14 at 11:52 am
Posted on 5/20/14 at 11:27 am to a want
a want, you cannot be serious, can you? The second Amendment is CLEAR as a summer sky.
Posted on 5/20/14 at 11:34 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
This article is just garbage. Full of lies, strawmen, and revisionist history nonsense.
State militias have not been "dissolved". They are legally defined in the constitutions of the states. They are just no longer called upon because there has been no situation that professional law enforcement hasn't been able to handle for over a century, and we no longer utilize a conscript military.
State militias have not been "dissolved". They are legally defined in the constitutions of the states. They are just no longer called upon because there has been no situation that professional law enforcement hasn't been able to handle for over a century, and we no longer utilize a conscript military.
Posted on 5/20/14 at 11:45 am to Truckasaurus
quote:
Are you talking about when Jefferson said, "When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. 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."
Yeah... That's most like misattributed or faked...
What about his:
quote:
No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms.
Or are the first three drafts of Virginia's Constitution "misattributed" or "faked"?
Or what about:
quote:
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure.
Or is his letter to William Stephens Smith "misattributed" or "faked"?
Or how about:
quote:
The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed
Or is his letter to Major Cartwright "misattributed" or "faked"?
Why don't you guys go back to arguing that, "18th century, muskets, blah, blah, blah" - than trying to rewrite something that is "unrewriteable" - Thomas Jefferson - the author of the U.S. Declaration of Independence, passionate advocate for individual rights and the formal Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution and the third President of the U.S. was passionately in favor of the individual right to keep and bear arms.
This post was edited on 5/20/14 at 11:46 am
Posted on 5/20/14 at 11:57 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
Ace Midnight
All of what this guy just said.
/thread
Posted on 5/20/14 at 12:02 pm to Ace Midnight
Thomas Jefferson needs to be sent to reeducation camp
They should stick to arguing muskets, or better yet...some fricking honesty
"We hate the 2nd amendment and we don't care who wrote it"
Why don't they just say that and then there can be an honest debate and discussion. They set themselves up for failure trying to reinterpret something so specific. It's like trying to reinterpret "thou shall not kill" (holy shite in referencing the bible)
And to top it off, they now argue that is not them, but the evil NRA that is reinterpreting the second amendment
I fricking hate liberals
They should stick to arguing muskets, or better yet...some fricking honesty
"We hate the 2nd amendment and we don't care who wrote it"
Why don't they just say that and then there can be an honest debate and discussion. They set themselves up for failure trying to reinterpret something so specific. It's like trying to reinterpret "thou shall not kill" (holy shite in referencing the bible)
And to top it off, they now argue that is not them, but the evil NRA that is reinterpreting the second amendment
I fricking hate liberals
This post was edited on 5/20/14 at 12:09 pm
Posted on 5/20/14 at 12:07 pm to DelU249
quote:
And to top it off, they now argue that is not them, but the evil NRA that is reinterpreting the second amendment
Which is funny because every Libtard with access to a keyboard was gleefully touting the NRA-is-a-paper-tiger line after the November '12 elections. Somehow the NRA went from all-powerful lobby juggernaut to weak-outdated-lobby-of-old-white-guys and back to super-time-travelling-lobby juggernaut in less than a year.
Posted on 5/20/14 at 12:13 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Ace Midnight
Do you think this is crystal clear?
quote:
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.
It seems to me that it sites the militia as justification for arms.
Posted on 5/20/14 at 12:14 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Ace Midnight
I know you may be taking my quote out of context. I was not talking about Jefferson's support of the right to bear arms.
I was questioning the assertion that the reason for his support of that was for armed rebellion against the US Government, which is what a want said when he posted
quote:
They just fought a fricking war against a tyrannical government...they wanted an armed populace to keep the government they just created in check
None of the quotes you posted, which I know at least most of them are correctly attributed to Jefferson, talk about the right to bear arms being used to keep the US Government in check.
Posted on 5/20/14 at 12:15 pm to a want
There are two statements in that quote. Slow down your reading and you will find your answer. Just slow down. It works.
Posted on 5/20/14 at 12:15 pm to a want
quote:. . . and ensures the right of every American to bear arms as a result of that justification.
It seems to me that it sites the militia as justification for arms.
Posted on 5/20/14 at 12:19 pm to a want
Not at all, I'm cocked and locked and no amount of reinterpreting, obfuscating and political bullying will change that
Gun control is a bona fide political loser. Decades of brainwashing have been totally fricked by kids playing their x box
It is here to stay, it literally hurts my brain trying to understand how people like yourself buy such obvious second rate lies without sniffing them out. I guess you feel that towing the line set by the powerful makes you feel like one of the clique, instead of being trampled on you are doing the trampling. Anyway, there aren't enough hours in the day to try and understand that kind of stupidity
Gun control is a bona fide political loser. Decades of brainwashing have been totally fricked by kids playing their x box
It is here to stay, it literally hurts my brain trying to understand how people like yourself buy such obvious second rate lies without sniffing them out. I guess you feel that towing the line set by the powerful makes you feel like one of the clique, instead of being trampled on you are doing the trampling. Anyway, there aren't enough hours in the day to try and understand that kind of stupidity
Posted on 5/20/14 at 12:19 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
. . . and ensures the right of every American to bear arms as a result of that justification.
....so long as every American is in the militia. It seems to me that U.S. Armed Forces or local/state/federal policing agencies serve this purpose. In order to maintain a well regluated militia....
This post was edited on 5/20/14 at 12:21 pm
Posted on 5/20/14 at 12:20 pm to a want
quote:
It seems to me that it sites the militia as justification for arms.
Seems to me it cites A justification and not THE justification which is historically consistent with state analogs on the 2A. Pretty clear when taken in proper context.
Posted on 5/20/14 at 12:21 pm to a want
quote:
U.S. Armed Forces
Really?
You must be trolling
Posted on 5/20/14 at 12:21 pm to Truckasaurus
What quotes did I post?
I already know, I'm not doing the legwork for you. You want to know, you find out. I'm not Acemidnight
I already know, I'm not doing the legwork for you. You want to know, you find out. I'm not Acemidnight
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News