[ForYourChildren]

I really don't like posting such dribble. But in this case, it is one of the headlines on www.yahoo.com . Why is it on Yahoo today? I don't know, the article was originally written on 12/18/12, and by The Daily Beast.

But since it is one of the lead articles on yahoo, many low-information people will see it and their ignorance will be reinforced.

The only thing I can think of is that there is an election coming up.

Chaps my you know what.... Bunch of liars!

[ForYourChildren]

The comments on the site are very good.

[Objective Scrutator]

LOL, the SPLC classifies everyone who joins a militia as a terrorist, so there’s no getting the Left to respect the Second.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

A lot of liberals believe that it is very easy for democracies to degrade into oligarchies, especially plutocracies.

If a person believes that, and has even just two neurons to think with, wouldn't he/she (or he-she?) want to have some minimal protections from such a state?

Wouldn't they want, for example, the right to bear arms and the right to private property?

I also happen to think that it is very easy for democracies to degrade into oligarchies. And that is why I am a strong defender of the 2nd Amendment and property rights.

Why liberals, especially liberal Blacks and Jews, can't see this basic logic is surprising to me.

[ForYourChildren]

Here is really nice comment on that site, that shows the stupidity of thinking that the 2nd amendment is about militias.

“The whole first half of the second amendment is just a reminder... an example given, as to why it’s so import for the people to be armed, not a requirement for being armed.

People seem to have problems with the sentence structure, so here is an example I try to give people that might make more sense to them. This is the same structure of a sentence...

‘A healthy breakfast, being necessary to the start of a good day, the right of the People to own and eat food shall not be infringed.’

In this example, who has the right to own and eat food... the People, or the breakfast? Is it saying there is no right to any food unless its breakfast, it must be healthy, and it can only be eaten at the start of a good day? No, the first part is simply a reason given as a reminder as to why it’s so important.”

[Fungi]

Nonsense, pure nonsense. How many times do we have to suffer such drivel?

[Jack Hydrazine]

Let’s re-write the title for the Left.

Free Speech Advocates Should Fear History of First Amendment
Think it’s one short sentence that gives everyone the right to shoot off their mouths? Think again.

[tumblindice]

Thomas Jefferson succinctly summarized the thoughts of the ‘founding fathers’ on the differences between tyranny and liberty, and the concomitant responsibilities of free men.

The comparison of the 2nd amendment’s recitation of the natural law right to defend oneself and others to the “treason clause” and saying the existence of one repudiates the other is where the writer loses the plot.

Rebellion to tyranny is not treason, but common sense.

This is just more weak beer from the left: ‘You shouldn’t be allowed to own firearms unless you are militia, and if you are militia you must be an “extremist”.
Stop talking about it, and come and take them.
Leonidas

[goldstategop]

Hoplophobes continue to drive themselves crazy over the Second Amendment.

By claiming it does not mean what it actually says.

[TigersEye]

Unlike this crap that Jason DeCrow wrote here is an intelligent analysis of the meaning of the 2nd Amendment based on the linguistic meanings of words and phrases of the time.

THE UNABRIDGED SECOND AMENDMENT

[goldstategop]

What’s ironic is these are the same folks who want to regulate your speech in the name of political equality.

They’re being consistent in their preference for government regulation of our thoughts and actions alike.

[BenLurkin]

The right to bears arms is a fundamental right. The Second Amendment does not confer the right — it exists in every free man and woman.

[skinkinthegrass]

!

[John Leland 1789]

The Battle of Alamance in North Carolina, a decade prior to the War for Independence, explains “a well regulated militia.” It is a militia, like the British Militia under Tryon, confronted by REGULATORS. Armed citizens REGULATING the excesses of despotic government by force of arms.

[Minsc]

The point libtards never get is the ‘well regulated militia’ part. Back in those days every male had a gun and was in their towns ‘militia’. There was no standing army then, it was made up of EVERYONE.

[Pox]

This “Drivel” does not hold up to the writings of the meaning of the Second Amendment in the Federalist Papers.

The author of this garbage is purposely lying and is a fraud.

[FlingWingFlyer]

What Jason and his little buddy Saul don’t understand is that the Bill of Rights belong to the American people, NOT THE U.S. GOVERNMENT. The Bill of Rights say what WE THE PEOPLE say that they say. If the government wants to break that contract between the people and the government. So be it. We’ve been here before.

[Politicalkiddo]

God gives me that right.

[SWAMPSNIPER]

I know about the 2nd amendment, my gr,gr,gr, gr. grandfather did too.

We got here a long time before Bloomberg's folks got off the boat.

Early Brass Barrel Kentucky Rifle Dated 1771, Attributed to Hans Jacob Honaker, Frederick County, Virginia

.55 cal. smoothbore, 45" swamped octagonal brass barrel, steel tang. Iron rear sight, brass front blade sight. Engraved flat-style lockplate, with flat cock, faceted-style pan, frizzen spring with finial. 2.25" wide brass buttplate, brass sideplate, brass two-piece patchbox, brass triggerguard, brass ramrod thimbles and nosecap. Maple stock with raised carving behind the cheek piece, behind the tang, and a border around the lock ending in the rear with a tear drop. Carved border on the bottom of stock running from buttplate to triggerguard on both sides. Carved border outlining the butt plate. Nice border carved on both sides of the comb of stock. Nice carved molding running from the rear ramrod molding running down past the front thimble. This rifle is one of the most important American long rifles known. Its prominent feature is the American-made long tapered and flared brass barrel. It is dated 1771 near the breech on the bottom of the barrel and has Do (short for "Anno Domini" 1771 engraved inside the box lid. It is the earliest known dated American long rifle with a hinged box, and is the second oldest dated American long rifle. The earliest dated long rifle is signed by John Schrite of Reading, Pennsylvania; it has a Germanic style sliding wood box cover. A dated 1771 Pennsylvania side-opening detached box (probably excavated) is in a private collection. While much has been written regarding the hinged box (called "patch box" after 1790) being developed by 1750, the 1771 brass barrel rifle is the earliest survivor. In addition to its date and extraordinary brass barrel, the architecture of the stock is the strongest Germanic example known to have been made in America. The massive long cheek rest is strongly molded on its edge with a convex section followed by concave molding. The back of the cheek rest ends with a graceful covered step down that terminates with a convex molding running perpendicular to the cheek piece molding. From this molding another curved step blends smoothly into the buttstock. At the wrist, the cheek rest terminates with a flowing serpentine step in concert with the serpentine relief line that forms the transition of the comb and wrist. The only other example of this complex architecture is a somewhat later (ca 1775) iron barrel rifle from the same shop. (See Shumway, Rifled of Colonial America Vol. II, 1980: fig 145, pp.610 and 616.) The cheek-rest of this brass barrel is convex and the overall nature of the buttstock has the bulbous qualities of the baroque style of the late 17th century. Hans Jacob Honaker, like the vast majority of immigrant gunsmiths, came from a provincial area where the style tended to be old fashioned. The relief carving behind the cheek piece is a simple baroque scroll interrupted by the first cheek rest step. This interruption of the carved design leaves the voluted scroll to be connected by the eye of the viewer. The ending of the scroll has a small rosette with clusters of simple leaves. The high-relief buttstock molding is incised with a front-to-back serpentine line with sprigs ending in circular grains. This "vine and berry" design also runs backward along the top edge of the edge of the cheek rest, travels gracefully down the stepped edge of the cheek rest, and ends in the corner of the brass butt-piece. This termination has two leaves pointing inward with a berry in the center. The relief molding of the breech stock terminates at the rear of the trigger guard return. At the end of the step a narrow relief molding continues past the triggerguard finial termination with a chip border and small leaves. The breech pin tang carving is also closely related with a three-leaf termination. The wrist carving terminates with a cluster of three leaves when it meets the incise-carved border that surrounds the brass box arched finial. A chip border follows the brass butt-piece along its back and front to the butt-piece top extension. The chipped borders are connected by an incised line that parallels the top extension on both sides of the butt-piece. These combined borders completely surround the butt-piece. All of the carving is beautifully integrated with the complexly shaped stock. The stock architecture suggest that Hans Jacob Honaker was trained in gun stocking in Switzerland. The carved decorations are more aligned with American backcountry long rifle art -- baroque design combined with folk art qualities. This combination of architecture and carved decoration like this brass hinged box and brass barrel makes an outstanding American frontier statement from 1771. Like many early American rifle guns, the brass barrel was bored smooth in its latest stage of active use. Fortunately, in this conversion to shot gun the remnants of the hind sight survived, revealing that it was originally a folding leaf long-range type. This leaf sight is matched by only one other 18th Century American example. A rifle of ca 1775 from Shenandoah County, Virginia, has an intact leaf sight and it also shares some carved and architectural features with the brass barrel rifle. The exceptionally large and boldly sculptured triggerguard is unique to the Hans Jacob Honaker Shop, which was the first to develop a strong regional type that extended throughout southwest Virginia and Tennessee in the late 18th and early 19th century. The guard stud was fitted with a sling swivel, and the middle barrel loop is thicker than the others to retain the forward sling swivel. The front of the guard bow has a deep wear groove from the swivel hitting, showing the rifle was carried hundreds of miles without a sling attached. The imported Germanic lock has remained in its original flint lock form, although the cock was replaced (ca 1789, English origin) during its active use. Since the rifle was used in the late 18th century with this cock, it has been retained as an important part of the rifle's history. The overall age of this brass barrel rifle is evident in the shrinkage of the curly maple breech stock. The butt-piece now extends well beyond the toe and shrinkage stress cracks penetrate the relief carving behind the cheek rest. The witness of the mismatch of the relief buttstock molding is obvious on the lower edge of the toe of the brass butt-piece. On the box side the shrinkage has eliminated part of the incise-carved molding next to the door on the toe side. The deep black patina highlighted by wear is another important record of the rifle's age. This rifle is a singular bench mark of backcountry production, reflecting the dynamic cultural amalgam of the American frontier. ATTRIBUTION: The attribution of the brass barrel rifle to Hans Jacob Honaker is based on artistic and structural details found on rifles made by his sons and grandsons. They have a common architecture of the breech stock that has a prominent "step toe" or "step wrist." The step ends at the rear extension of the guard; the profile of the toe is straight from there to the butt-piece. The comb profile of these stocks typically is a moderate "Roman nose" profile, although occasionally makers used an almost straight line. A very unusual structural feature that occurs constantly throughout the group is the breech pin tang held with a wood screw rather than a draw screw that enters the trigger plate. The two earliest rifles in the group, (i.e., this brass rifle of 1771 and the iron barrel example, ca 1775) both have their first barrel retaining pins placed in front of the end of the fore stock, offset in the fore end adjacent to rear thimble. Other Shenandoah rifles of the early period also have this unusual placement. This forward placement of the first barrel retaining pin is not a feature found on Pennsylvania long rifles. In the Valley of Virginia, including in the products of the early gunsmiths of the Honaker family, the long pin placement does not extend into the post-Revolutionary Federal period. The placement is moved back closer to the breech between the locks and the tail piece (called "rear ramrod thimble" in modern times.) While the brass barrel rifle has a single trigger, it is important that Hans Jacob Honaker's sons and grandchildren made set triggers of a distinct type associated with Germanic wheel-lock guns. They have springs held by a single screw that is mounted in the front of the trigger plate. All three Honaker family rifles offered here have set triggers of this structure that is exclusively a Honaker or a Honaker-associated feature. At this writing no other makers in American backcountry are known to have used this type.

[Bobalu]

Those that contend that the 2nd only gives the right to bear arms to a militia (army) are arguing that the founders actually envisioned a day when an army of the United States might be deprived of the right to bear arms...this makes no sense at all. Who in their right mind could envision an army or militia that was devoid of arms!?

[sauron]

TALKING POINT #1:

...the right of the MILITIA to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

OOOPS. It doesn’t say that! It’s the right of the PEOPLE, isn’t it? (Point that out to a liberal friend.)

TALKING POINT #2:

Note that no other right in the Bill of Rights had the language “...shall not be infringed” in it. Pretty strong language, eh?

The First Amendment has been expanded, expanded, and...well, expanded like a balloon. The Second has been restricted over time, DESPITE the strong language (”...shall not be infringed”).

TALKING POINT #3:

The Bill of Rights (first ten amendments) were numbered the way they are currently because that’s the order in which they were passed by the respective state legislatures.

Tells ya somethin’, huh?

Tells you that there was very easy agreement on passing the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the Third Amendment...etc., and less agreement on the Ninth Amendment, the Tenth, etc.

This tears down liberal talking points. Refute them thusly.