Posted on 02/25/2014 11:02:56 AM PST by Stanwood_Dave
My Clif-Notes version first:
2nd (second) Amendment & See Article I, Section 8, paragraph 11 and the founders had both weapons of MASS DESTRUCTION (canons) and equal to today 2014, A-K 47’s FULLY AUTO in their personal possession, i.e., their superior hunting rifle’s. Although not FULLY AUTO, they did have in their possession the MOST ADVANCE[D] RIFLE’S of the time 1775-6.
Oh, and those ADVANCE[D] RIFLE’S were used for hunting, both duck’s & British.
Actually, the colonists lost the fight at Lexington, then won the battle at Concord Bridge. The Brits attempted to retreat to Boston and got ambushed the whole way.
However, I think it’s important to note that, with the probable exception of King’s Mountain, I’m not aware of any battles won by Americans using purely individual and guerilla tactics.
So you’re in favor of a civil war? Good for you! At least we know where you stand.
I think, however, it is inappropriate to link a desire for revolution and civil war with claimed respect for the Constitution.
Revolution and civil war are by definition the antithesis of constitutional order. You might intend to restore the constitution after you’ve killed everybody you disagree with, but I suggest doing so might be a bit more difficult than you think.
Im not sure I understand the connection....
Thank you for the correction. I switched Lexington and Concord.
“It’s good to see that someone else is arguing that the Congressional power “grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water” implies that private citizens would have military arms, including the 18th century weapon of mass destruction, the cannon. And that power predated the second amendment.”
Unfortunately or not, that backs up the argument for penumbra in the Constitution.
You posted the following:
LOL who knew...but the Law & Order FR types will be right along to tell us why the govt should be more heavily armed....and why we must prostrate ourselves at the feet of tyrants.
I was responding to the “but the Law & Order FR types will be right along to tell us why the govt should be more heavily armed,” by pointing out the corruption that exists in this particular PD and by extension probably most of them, and that they are allowed to carry guns. Sorry, I know it was a stretch, but I am very concerned about the blatant corruption and abuse under color of authority that exists in most, if not all police organizations in this country. BTW I love your posting name, and I really like my AR!
I doubt you have any idea of how "I think"..
How could you.?.. You still think(seem to) think we have a Constitution..
The progressives will give up power Only when it's taken from their cold dead hands...
I'm for that...
:) Sorry, I got that one mixed up w/ another I had responded to...never mind
Also, didn't Paul Revere warn, not that "The British are coming", but that "The Regulars are coming out", meaning the Regular Army of their own government? I think we need to keep emphasizing that the Founders were fighting their own government and were all subject to hanging if caught.
Another point I like to make involves how the Continentals were able to eject the occupying government troops from Boston. They used the cannon which they took by force from Fort Ticonderoga and transported to Boston. The Second Amendment should be sufficient to insure that we don't have to start the next revolution by stealing larger weapons from our adversary.
I guess I should ignore a comment by someone who fail’s to mention semicolon’s versus apostrophe use????
I was watching the show called "AMERICAN RIDE." Ride with America's history teacher, Stan Ellsworth.
I must have had a brain fart, because he talked about this very fact & that it took almost about either 6 months or one year almost to get the cannon from Fort Ticonderoga and transported to Boston. (Just this quote does not do service to how well Stan Ellsworth covered this event, for what it's worth.)
and private ships had cannons too
I can't remember how long it took, but I seem to recall that the snowy conditions helped, allowing sleds to be used to drag the stuff.
I believe that the troops arranged to fill wagons with earth and moved them into position on the Dorchester heights overlooking Boston during a single night. The enemy awoke to find himself surrounded by guns which would be able to sink the warships in the harbor.
A deal was struck for the occupying forces to leave Boston unopposed in return for not burning the city. I don't think a shot was fired.
I wonder if this was a good deal really. The property owners in Boston probably thought so. One can't help but wonder what the war would have been like otherwise since I believe the troops allowed to leave by ship were probably among those which later arrived by ship to eject Washington's troops from New York.
To make an exhaustive list of errors in your post would take some time. The apostrophe abuse was shocking and jumped out at me immediately, so I quit reading.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.