Fun with the SECOND AMENDMENT

Corporate M--- .com ^ | Dec 2002 | Ken Mondschein

[Bob Mc]

"What we need is a sane and non-dogmatic way of looking at speech in America—and we need to recognize that speaking may be, like driving a car, a privilege and a responsibility, but it is not, and should not be, a right."

[Political Junkie Too]

Since the Second Amendment is just words, all the constitutional scholars in the world sitting around trying to apply its antiquated terminology to our modern world is like... [awkward religious analogy snipped]

Would this include words like "WE, THE PEOPLE...," or "the people" referred to in the First, Second, Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments?

-PJ

[harpseal]

You beat me to the punch on these points.

I would also point out that the adoption of a Bill of Rights was a condition of ratification of our Constitution. The repeal of one of these first ten ammendments would make the entire Constitution null and void and all laws enacted under said Constitution. If there is no law then we have rule by the strongest. Such a situation is the worst possible situation for anyone who can not claim to be among the strongest of the strong. Those who do not respect the Second Ammendment do not know what kind of world they are asking for. Without an armed citizenry the blood will flow in the streets like a great river such is the way the history of the world works.

Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown

[PatrioticAmerican]

Another racist who thinks that white guys with guns are nothing but rednecks. Notice the reference to beer in this moron's propaganda.

[Hunble]

Wow Demidog, that is a keeper!

[FreedomCalls]

...assuming that they wanted the American people to have the capability of overthrowing the government that they had spent a long, hot summer putting together, borders on the ludicrous

Huh? Assuming that they wanted the American people to have the capability of overthrowing a government like that they had themselves overthrown just 11 short years earlier. The most powerful empire on earth. The one country with the biggest Navy, the biggest Army, and the most money. Yes, they very much would have put such a provision in their Constitution.

[Tench_Coxe]

The fellow obviously hasn't read the Constitutional Convention debates. Oh sure, modern military weapons can be used in isolated situations ( ala Waco ), but in the case of general discontent, where armed agents of the government put down one Warsaw Ghetto, several more spring up. Unless the government is willing to use military assets on its cities, supply lines, of course. Only problem there is, the government ends up destroying the very infrastructure upon which it feeds, laying itself open to a true revolution or civil war.

The arguments during the debates discussed the potentials regarding standing armies and an armed populace. Even a fraction of the estimated 80 million gun owners in the U.S. fields an army that is greater than the military. Even with the serious leverage with military technology, these still aren't good odds.

I can cite a few examples from history that give the benefits of an armed population--Yugoslavia is one. Sure, the Nazis took over fairly quickly, but then committed a serious number of resources ( I think at one point it was 30 or 31 divisions of troops ) to maintain order of a sort. In the U.S., such a scenario becomes even worse when the people speak the same language--you can't pick out the partisans from the bootlickers. In this case, you have a war of attrition, which doesn't look good for the fewer numbers, especially if, as mentioned in the previous paragraph, military assets were used that destroyed the infrastructure.

The intent behind the 2nd, from reading the history, is that the citizens should be armed as well as the typical infantry soldier ( during the Revolutionary War, there were private cannon and armed sloops ).

The author of the article is partly right when talking about the Swiss system. The militia was supposed to undergo regular training. Justice Story was concerned, because the practice of training the militias ( well regulated, for those who think it means subjected to registration and confiscation ) was falling off, that people would forget the reason for the right, and would eventually be in danger of losing it.

As far as the author is concerned, I say 'Molon Labe'.

[TigersEye]

Nice piece of wordsmithing! I hope this guy appreciates that.

[Atlas Sneezed]

"But without my assault weapons, how will I hunt those flak-jacket wearing deer?"

The 2nd amendment is about hunting like the first is about playing Scrabble(R).

(And flak jackets don't stop rifle bullets!)

[Atlas Sneezed]

"The second part of the sentence is "being necessary to the security of a free state." This is what we grammar Nazis call a "subordinate clause." "

Good! You get it! And it applies to the entire: 'a well regulated' phrase.

Now, please explain how a free state can be secured by fascist regulations that would have made Hitler's nation and military more secure...

[TheGrimReaper]

A fact that liberals WILL NOT acknowledge:

Places where the Second Amendment has been effectively suspended:
- New York City
- Washington DC
- Los Angeles CA

Places that lead the nation in homicides:
- New York City
- Washington DC
- Los Angeles CA

Coincidence, I'm sure.

[Michael Barnes]

And flak jackets don't stop rifle bullets!

Careful...I have heard a couple liberals using this ruse now...When you make such a statement, the immediately retort with, then why the need for so much power..It's all a word game and feelings with them anyway...

[litehaus]

FACTS.....what's that got to do with Liberals?

[TheGrimReaper]

Facts on liberals...
... like Holy Water on a vampire.

[Cacique]

bump for later read

[elmer fudd]

This is just an example of what the current thinking is out there in liberal la-la land.

Actually although I disagree with the author passionately, at least he aproaches the issue honestly and admits that the solution for the gun grabbers is to change the constitution. Most liberals are nowhere near as honest and simply reinterpret what is pretty plain English to suit their agenda.

[nightdriver]

"Today, rather than having citizen-militias as we did in the early years of the Republic, we have a very modern and very professional military that makes the idea of amateur armed resistance ludicrous."

This guy is so ludicrous it's impossible to know where to start. Talk about taking things out of context and manufacturing stories!

It wasn't the US army that intimidated Hitler in his idea to invade the USA from Mexico, it was the fact that the populace was armed!

Take that, Mr. Mondschein!

[Valin]

And calling us liberal pinko tree huggers ain't gonna help with anything.

Ok how about broad crimson tree-clincher?

[Nick Danger]

In the eighteenth century... the top-of-the-line civilian weapon, the Kentucky long rifle handmade by Pennsylvania craftsmen, differed considerably from a mass-produced British military musket

It is doubtful that there was such a thing as a "mass-produced British military musket" in the eighteenth century. In 1798, the U.S. government awarded a contract to one Eli Whitney to produce 10,000 muskets. It took ten years to fulfill that contract. That is the first known instance of "mass production" of anything. Whitney's claim that he could make these muskets of out standardized, interchangeable parts was considered highly dubious at the time.

[xzins]

The first part of the sentence is, "A well-regulated militia." Simple enough. This tells us that what we're discussing is a militia, or a part-time civilian military organization like the Marine Corps Reserve or the Knights of Columbus. Note the compound adjective "well-regulated." This implies that the militia is subject to the rule of law, that is, military discipline—some sort of structure of officers and enlisted men with penalties for disobeying orders, something that Billy Joe and his buddies shooting their AR-15s at woodchucks most certainly do not have, unless you count the influence of Captain Morgan.

Wrong on both counts. A militia is a body of citizens who organize themselves into a defense force.

In the era this was written, well-regulated was not about rules that had to be followed -- There were "regulars" that were full-time soldiers. What set them apart was their EQUIPPING with standardized, uniform (regular) weaponry.

This passage very clearly says: Since citizen soldiers need standardized equipping, the right of arms shall not be infringed.

Whoever wrote the article is an imbecile.