re: The reason the right sucks at defending the 2A and other natural rights

quote:

---

So you want a POS convicted criminal getting their hands on a weapon?

---

What's stopping them now? Your 4473?

quote:

---

So I fill out a 4473 the guy at the gun place runs it. I come up clean and 2 minutes later I'm driving home with my purchase.

---

So, what happens when a POS criminal does this?

In nearly every case - nothing. No prosecution (it is a criminal act). Not even a strongly worded letter.

(12 out of 13,000 from FY 2017 were ultimately prosecuted, as an example.)

quote:

---

Message
The reason the right sucks at defending the 2A and other natural rights by KiwiHead
So you want a POS convicted criminal getting their hands on a weapon? So I fill out a 4473 the guy at the gun place runs it. I come up clean and 2 minutes later I'm driving home with my purchase. My right to defend myself or to bear arms is not in the least bit infringed

---

Can we start with putting said criminal in jail.

quote:

---

Are you a well regulated militia?

---

If the 2nd was, in fact, referring to a government-run militia, just who would be the potential infringer?

Without the 4473 and background check you don't even get that. You get to wait at least until the few that do trigger the database to committ a crime. You say you want to keep the guns out of the hands of criminals, yet you really don't if it means seeing if you are a criminal. You want "mental health" protections, which is laughable, but you don't want anyone making that determination.

In short you are quite willing to accept the outcome of what happens and you are willing to accept it over and over again. Not saying that I support confiscation or a ban on semi automatics but I don't see where my right is infringed . Look if the government wants to rock and roll on your arse . Your Ar-15 is not going to stop them.....you might take a few with you. I say that as the owner of a 9mm, multiple shotguns multiple hunting rifles a .357 and a .995 carbine.

Besides, I'm no match for a trained sniper no matter what weapon I have. That's what they'll send for you if they want to take you. Then they'll take your gun.

quote:

---

Shall not be infringed.

---

The full text of the Second Amendment is:

"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."

So, about that well-regulated militia? What do you think about that?

Also, read the Federalist Papers and consider the historical context of the Second Amendment, and you'll find that the framers were concerned not only about the last clause of the Second Amendment, but also understood that the right should be regulated within the context of the states having their own defenses readily available, considering that they'd just fought an entire war for their independence from England.

They wanted to ensure that the states that comprised the colonies were both secure and free (to preserve the rights already conferred in the First Amendment - speech, press, religion, assembly, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances - all rights that were not conferred on citizens in England), and to do this, militias had to be formed within the states to ensure their security. Those militias were literally your Joe Blow colonists who lived in the states. It's kind of the precursor for each state having its own national guard.

So, for Joe Blow to provide security for the free colonies that were members of the United States, militias had to be formed and regulated, and to ensure that those militias were properly armed, the last clause was included.

So, the Second Amendment wasn't written because the big, bad government wants to come and confiscate your guns. It was literally written with the goal of securing states and securing for the citizens within those states those rights included within the Constitution.

Also, if you can't purchase a nuke or ICBM's and launch them from your personal property, then you can't keep every "arm" you think the Second Amendment says you should be able to "keep" or "bear." So, infringements on your Second Amendment right already exist.

"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."

quote:

---

So back to the original point, the main purpose of the 2A is to be able to kill and overthrow tyrants, that is it. It also comes with benefits of self defense (which we all have a right to) as well as ability to harvest our own food through hunting (which we all have a right to). But the main purpose is to be a check on those who wish to enslave American Citizens and remove the Constitution. So they know in the back of their head, that if they go too far, it may not end well for them.

---

I pretty much agree, but I think you are mistaken on a couple of points. You don’t pay for the privilege of exercising a right. Game and fish commissions across the country are in the business of making you pay for the privilege of taking game.

The Bill of Rights and therefore the Constitution is under assault from both sides, much more so by the marxist democrats, but republicans have their share of tyrants as well. This is not by accident.

What I think they aren’t acknowledging is the fact that when they start stripping fundamental rights, all bets are off for a large swath of citizens and patriots.

Any gun control argument can be won with 4 words:

Shall Not Be Infringed.

quote:

---

So back to the original point, the main purpose of the 2A is to be able to kill and overthrow tyrants, that is it.

---

The natural law is self-defense be it from government or the thug trying to mug you.

But where the right goes wrong is trying to use facts and stats. The Left uses emotion, muh feels, and fear. All more powerful, especially after a mass shooting of children.

quote:

---

A well regulated Militia

---

What was the definition of the militia back then?

quote:

---

So, about that well-regulated militia? What do you think about that?

---

Wrong definition of “regulated”. Idiot.

quote:

---

Also, if you can't purchase a nuke or ICBM's and launch them from your personal property, then you can't keep every "arm" you think the Second Amendment says you should be able to "keep" or "bear."

---

Indeed. Great argument for being able to own anything. Awesome!

quote:

---

So, infringements on your Second Amendment right already exist.

---

If I punch you in the face, does that mean it’s OK if I do it again?