Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: rktman

An armed civilian population was necessary in 1787 and is still necessary now.

The Second Amendment simply protects an essential element of freedom and of ordinary human life.

If Americans were barred from owning firearms in 1787 and protecting themselves from Indians, new immigrants from Europe would simply have chosen to settle on the frontier lands run by other governments.

As the militia clause indicates, the elite didn’t want ordinary folks to have guns in 1787 either.

However, necessity in 1787 and 2016 requires ordinary people to be able to protect themselves.

We may no longer be threatened by Indians, but there are hundreds of thousands of dangerous people in our midst.


15 posted on 07/09/2016 9:20:52 AM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Brian Griffin; ExTexasRedhead

“We may no longer be threatened by Indians, but there are hundreds of thousands of dangerous people in our midst.”

Perhaps, since it’s worked so well with the “Indians,” we should let a few Blacks build casinos on their “tribal lands” ( like East Oakland, or the South Side of Chicago, etc). History as shown this kind of largesse on the part of us white folks lets the lazy “provide for themselves.” And gee, think of letting them “police” themselves!


38 posted on 07/09/2016 10:03:42 AM PDT by vette6387
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson