Second Ammendment schmecond ammendment.

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by GMFWoodchuck, May 31, 2009.

  1. GMFWoodchuck

    GMFWoodchuck New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,369
    Location:
    Binghamton, NY
    The 2nd ammendment is there only to restate the fact that we have the fundamental right to own firearms and that right shall not be infringed. Obviously, every single gun-control law in this control is completely and totally unconstitutional and thereby illegal by our own country's supreme standard. However, we all forget a simple fact. The 2nd ammendment does not give us the right to bear arms. We already have that right. It has always existed. For as long as bad people existed we have always had this fundamental right to protect ourselves. You and I will always have this right to own firearms. No matter what laws these politicians put in place, and you will always have the right to protect yourself. And you and I will always know, that no matter the result you and I are fundamentally in the right. That said, every single gun-control law is illegal. Constitutionally and ethically. No matter what "laws" are passed, we will always know that we are in the right to reserve our capacity to protect ourselves. They can pass all the laws they want, we at a basic pure human level, being part of survival of the fittest, do not ever have to give up your firearms if rightfully obtained. (I say that because stolen firearms are not rightfully owned.) The 2nd ammendment was put in by our founding fathers to restate this fact. The fact that is currently being ignored. However, we do need to realize that our right to protect ourselves will always exist, no matter what laws bureacrats pass. If your firearms are yours fair and square, they are yours fair and square. The end.
  2. topper

    topper New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    748
    Location:
    deep in the woods
    politicians will still try to keep us from owing and using firearms despite what is in our constitution. i feel that the law will actually come to our residences and physically TRY to remove our firearms at some future point. note i say TRY, because i will defend my property, loved ones, myself and my constitutional rights even if it means i will die in the process. the more resistance that is incountered by the government, means the more chance that we, the people, will protect our sacred freedoms. i only hope that many more folks than myself feel this way also. the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed means just that to me. no exclusions or hidden clauses. the same goes for all our other freedoms in america, despite who interpets them differently. take a stand now or bow down later.





    Keep both barrels loaded!
  3. RunningOnMT

    RunningOnMT New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    Messages:
    4,720
    Location:
    Akron, Ohio

    +1. In the past I have expressed the same view but not nearly as well as you have here. Good post.
  4. Bobitis

    Bobitis Guest

    The fact that we have an opposable thumb puts us at the top of the food chain.
    Why?

    In order to pull the hammer back!:D
  5. Hardballer

    Hardballer New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    Messages:
    471
    Location:
    Smack dab in da middle
    That Constitution you are referring to has a limited life span. It is getting shorter every election cycle. As it is, ask any 10 twenty year olds about the Constitution and you will be met with dumb looks.

    The lights have been flashing and the bells clanging since Bush and the so called "Patriot Act". If any of you have ever read "1984", you'll understand why they gave the most oppressive act in two centuries a name like that.
  6. OBrien

    OBrien New Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2009
    Messages:
    554
    Location:
    Bangor Maine
    I beg to differ because there will be at least 1 in 10 that know what your talking about. BTW I'm in my early 20's lol
  7. alhefner

    alhefner New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Messages:
    205
    Location:
    Reno, NV
    GMFWoodchuck, you are 100% correct. The right to defend life and limb is a "natural right" and exists simply because the person is alive and in existence on planet earth.

    All of the Bill of Rights were put in place not to "grant" any right but to provide special protection for certain pre-existing rights.

    Ask anyone on the street if they have the "God given" right to protect their life by any means necessary, and they will say "absolutely!". Then ask them if they have the right to use a firearm in the defense of their life and 70% will say "certainly". Now ask them if the right to keep and bear arms is a "God given" right and most will have to really think long and hard about it.

    The framers of the Constitution knew that we all had the natural right to self defense and argued long and hard about the need to enumerate that right in the Constitution. Many felt that by including the right to keep and bear arms in writing, they would open that right up to attack. How right they were!

    We now face powerful groups who feel that it is not a natural right of any person to defend their own life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Of course the individuals of these groups exempt themselves because "they" are responsible enough to know when and how to use deadly force but the "public" does not.

    Yep, every law that limits the possession of firearms is unconstitutional, against the "God given" right to self defense.

    For those who say that people who have, in their PAST, been convicted of any felony should not be allowed to possess a firearm, you are stating that they have lost the right to life and to defend that life. Personally, I say let them have their firearms with the full knowledge that if they use that firearm to illegally endanger the life of another, they will die in the process.
  8. swiftman

    swiftman Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    224
    Location:
    East Central Ill
    Last edited: May 31, 2009
  9. 45nut

    45nut Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    3,455
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    But al, how many innocent people would be robbed or killed before the BG happened upon an individual willing and ready to end their sorry lives? I say we keep the felons legally unarmed anyway.
  10. bcj1755

    bcj1755 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,357
    Location:
    A wretched hive of scum and villiany
    Why bother? How many innocent people would be robbed or killed by a felon with an illegal gun before he happens upon an idividual with a concealed handgun? A felon can get an illegal gun faster, easier, and cheaper than we can get one legally. Filling out a 4473 when I buy a gun is just a waste of my time (and I don't even have to go through the NICS anymore because I hold a valid CHP) and the whole NICS/4473 system is nothing but a thinly veiled backdoor form of gun registration.
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2009
  11. carver

    carver Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2008
    Messages:
    15,067
    Location:
    DAV, Deep in the Pineywoods of East Texas, just we
    Have they paid their debt to society? If so, then why can't their rights be restored? All of them.

    GMFWoodchuck I am in total agrement with you, well said!

    There should be only one law concerning guns and crime.

    If you commit a crime with a gun, you get 15 years, no parole, no time off for good behavior.

    If you commit a crime with a gun, and it gets discharged, you get 25 years, no parole, no time off for good behavior.

    If the bullet fired hits someone, and they live, you get life, no parole, no time off for good behavior.

    If that person should die, so do you, with a speedy trial, sentence, and death.
  12. FM258

    FM258 New Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2009
    Messages:
    27
  13. alhefner

    alhefner New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Messages:
    205
    Location:
    Reno, NV
    Exactly! If a person is determined to commit a crime, he/she/it will find the tools they want to accomplish that crime. The law will not be much of a factor. The statistics on crime prove that out.

    If a person, who has a criminal past of any sort, decides that they want to be a contributing member of society and never again commit a crime, there is no reasonable argument for not allowing them access to firearms.

    We can go farther in the argument with the basic right to life that EVERY living being is endowed with by their Creator. Since they have the NATURAL, or God Given, right to life, they also have the God Given right to defend that life. With humans having invented firearms that can be used to wrongly take life, it is therefore the God Given right of every human to acquire and keep an equal means of defending his or her life. This is a matter of NATURAL LAW and the rights bestowed upon everyone by God.
  14. alhefner

    alhefner New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Messages:
    205
    Location:
    Reno, NV
    I go a bit harsher than that but it is the same basic idea. I feel that anyone committing a felony such as robbery, assault (of any kind), or other crime involving violence or the threat of violence, while in possession of a firearm should get a 30 year minimum sentence - 100% to be served locked away, no parole.
  15. kerk

    kerk New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Messages:
    118
    As I have said before, let us not lose sight of the intent of 2A. The founders were not concerned with 'Bad Guys', their concern was with 'Tyrannical Government'.

    And whether we have the 'right', or not............you might think you have a 'right' to keep what you own, also, but that hasn't stopped the government from stealing it from you when ever they wish, bit by bit.............at the point of a gun.

    Again, wealth (property, money) is power, weapons are power..............the government will continually try to take as much of 'your' power as they can, and turn it into 'their' power.

    I believe we have to stop worrying about 'which' political party is in, and start being concerned with the 'government' period.

    Hopefully we can control it politically with the vote.

    Be sure to participate in your July 4th tea parties.
  16. 45nut

    45nut Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    3,455
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Bravo kerk!!!!!!!!! Keep speaking the truth. ;)
  17. Trouble 45-70

    Trouble 45-70 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,703
    Location:
    NE Ar. W. of Black River
    Kerk, my opinion exactly.
  18. Hardballer

    Hardballer New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    Messages:
    471
    Location:
    Smack dab in da middle
    The parties are the left and right hand of the same serpent. If one really wants to make a difference, I believe we must start with those closest to us and expand from there. Educate the young because the schools are not and will not.

    Vote? Well, start with your local reps. Vote single issue. You can guess which one. Keep voting single issue all the way to the top. Call elected officials on their bull.

    Speak, write, do.
  19. alhefner

    alhefner New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Messages:
    205
    Location:
    Reno, NV
    Absolutely and they are getting more tyrannical every day.


    That is why I advocate voting for new candidates. We need to toss all incumbents under the political bus. I know there are a few really good, straight up, guys in office but time is short and a massive message must be sent.
  20. Maximilian II

    Maximilian II New Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,385
    Location:
    Northwest GA
    If one human wants to kill another human, they will find a way to do it. I'm a history nut, and this has proved itself many times throughout recorded history. Firearms are expedient, but there are other methods. Laws restricting firearms will not restrict determined killers. Historically speaking, just check out the spear if you want to know what has been the tool used in the most intentionally committed killings, throughout history. It's still issued. It's called a "bayonet" these days.
    No one can stop killing. Humans will do that. It's more important to society to determine whether said killing was "justified."

    Check my sig.
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Arguing the Second Ammendment is a mistake Nov 28, 2005
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Court Ruling: Waiting Periods a "Burden" on Second Amendment Rights Dec 20, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Texas House Gives Final Approval to Impressive Number of Pro-Second Amendment Bills May 8, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Will Roberts get a second chance at killing Obamacare? Apr 2, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum A duty to preserve the Second Amendment Mar 30, 2013