Posted: 5/21/2015 5:02:47 AM EDT
|
I know its a waste but I cant help it
(outside of the Supreme Court's recent decison) I need some rock solid evidence the founders wrote the second amendment with the intent that is an individual right. Also something useful against the "its for the white man to shoot resisting slaves" would also be nice. |
|
Gun control is racist. Therefore, if you support gun control then you are racist.  |
|
or black owner of black slaves as the case may be.
Dot bother with the argument as that person sounds retarded. |
|
Better US lawyers will have a answer I expect
As far as I know the cases the 'collective right' theory was not supported by a anybody short of agenda driven loons. I believe even the liberal judges didn't go for the 'collective right' theory because there is about zero historical evidence to back it up. |
|
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776 "The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." - Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776 "The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed." - Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824 "I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." - George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788 "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops." - Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787 "A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." - Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788 "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun." - Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778 "This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty.... The right of self defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction." - St. George Tucker, Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, 1803 "The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." - Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788 "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them." - Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, 1833 |
|
you're not going to win an internet argument.
but if you insist on pursuing it, head over to guncite and spend some time perusing the founder quotes. one of the most relevant is from tench coxe, who explicitly states that the idea is for every man to own a gun. but since tench coxe is not a very recognized name, this is not going to be compelling. |
|
Antis are perfectly happy to ignore facts and won't care when you post them. Ask them why the wd amendment wouldn't be considered an individual right when it is in the bill of rights that all guarantee individual rights? Ask them why they hate civil liberties? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
this is also important. gun control is the tool of colonialism, and is necessary for the subordination of the politically disempowered. the first systematic gun control effort in the US was in the post-reconstruction south, and was deliberately intended to prevent negroes from arming themselves. NFA? targeted at immigrants and undesirable ethnicities. 1968 GCA? rushed through a democratic congress in terrified response to black people asserting their RKBA during their protests against the DNC (in chicago, IIRC). the biggest beneficiaries of an individual RKBA are minorities. according to the 'pink pistols', a pro-gun gay organization, "armed gays don't get bashed". lynch mobs aren't as effective if the minority can shoot back. |
|
give them a few comic learning books from JPFO. can they read? they got a lot of drawings in most.
they do have a few just along the issue of race restriction and politics. granpa jack #4 has just what you need. http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m2/movieplay-gpjack.htm |
|
Quoted:
I know its a waste but I cant help it (outside of the Supreme Court's recent decison) I need some rock solid evidence the founders wrote the second amendment with the intent that is an individual right. Also something useful against the "its for the white man to shoot resisting slaves" would also be nice. All the rights in the BOR are individual rights. They would not make #2 randomly a "gov right" There are tons of letters and papers by the founding fathers expressing the need for the right to bare arms. The first gun control laws were to prevent blacks form owning guns, since keeping a people disarmed is the 1st step to keeping them slaves. |
|
Quoted:
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776 "The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." - Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776 "The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed." - Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824 "I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." - George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788 "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops." - Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787 "A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." - Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788 "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun." - Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778 "This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty.... The right of self defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction." - St. George Tucker, Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, 1803 "The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." - Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788 "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them." - Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, 1833 Thanks for this factual post. OP should show this to his antagonist and whatch his head explode. |
|
Quoted:
I know its a waste but I cant help it (outside of the Supreme Court's recent decison) I need some rock solid evidence the founders wrote the second amendment with the intent that is an individual right. Also something useful against the "its for the white man to shoot resisting slaves" would also be nice. you can always point out that the gun control act from the 60s was written in response to the civil rights movement, to help prevent minorities from obtaining firearms. cos it sounds like they're trying to play a few race cards. or... ask the person why it's "unjust" to require IDs for voting. When they start vomiting the libtard dogma about how it's so "hard" for minorities to get ID cards cos it costs money etc... well those same gun-control laws they love affect the poor and minorities more than they affect you, cos you can afford to pay. Kinda like that stupid joke that Chris Rock said about making bullets cost $5000 each. He never really thought that one through cos that would mean ONLY the upper class and "hated" 1% would be able to use firearms. So where would the poor be then when only the rich effectively have the right to defend themselves? Edit: I like those quotes about "Who are the militia". Cos I know each year the libtards try to act like "but when they wrote the 2A they didn't mean citizens when they said 'militia'!"... yet right fucking there, it's explained they meant JUST THAT. |
|
Quoted:
If that's the stupid comment you have to refute, you might as well be arguing to a wall. This. It's the 2A.......it's there, it's always been there and strangely, all these people upset over it have lived with it in place their entire lives and never gave it a thought until they were told to do so by Barry & Co. |
|
Quoted:
I know its a waste but I cant help it (outside of the Supreme Court's recent decison) I need some rock solid evidence the founders wrote the second amendment with the intent that is an individual right. Also something useful against the "its for the white man to shoot resisting slaves" would also be nice. Go read the Federalist Papers. In particular #46 and #29. Madison on the 2nd Amendment & militia clause http://bearingarms.com/madison-on-the-2nd-amendment-milita-clause/ Original Intent and Purpose of the Second Amendment http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndpur.html The other thing to point out any time the anti rights person talks about racism, bigotry, or slaves is to ask them which political party is the one who wanted to keep slavery going. Hint it wasn't the Republicans. Ask them which political party enacted the "Jim Crow" laws. Ask them about the "Sullivan Act" laws. Ask them why Democrats are passing anti gun laws that generally restrict guns to those most in need of them for self defense (ie poor minorities who live in the inner cities). In the end though you will find that all you've done is been reduced to their level of ignorance as they claim victory by beating you with their ignorance of history. They are arguing based on their emotions not on facts or logic. 
|
|
Quoted:
or black owner of black slaves as the case may be. Dot bother with the argument as that person sounds retarded. You're looking at it all wrong. You're not doing it to convince the liberal of anything. You're doing it to show all the other low-information undecideds watching the argument how stupid the liberal arguments are. |
|
Ask for proof of their point. Where is the evidence that the founding fathers intended the 2A to be a 'collective right' (whatever that means)? Just like in a debate, they need to clearly state the proposition, support their position with proof, and counter potential arguments. Why are we countering a proposition that has not been proved or supported with proof?
Put the monkey on their back. |
|
This is post founding and from france, but it's good:
Each of us has a natural right — from God — to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties? If every person has the right to defend even by force — his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right — its reason for existing, its lawfulness — is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force — for the same reason — cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups. -- Bastiat, The Law If you want heavy ammo find the documentary "in search of the second amendment" and look up books by Clayton Cramer |
|
Quoted:
I know its a waste but I cant help it (outside of the Supreme Court's recent decison) I need some rock solid evidence the founders wrote the second amendment with the intent that is an individual right. Also something useful against the "its for the white man to shoot resisting slaves" would also be nice. Try crafting an argument that helps the unwashed masses understand that they are, in fact, protestin their own freedom. Too often they frame the argument, and you deal with answering their stupidity. Socrates would instead let them demonstrate what stupidity is, cause them to demonstrate what they want is stupid, and then force them to admit they are stupid. |
|
Scott vs Sanford- 1857 From the opinion of the court: "It would give to persons of the (n)egro race, ...the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, ...to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased ...the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went." |
|
I read this one somewhere, and i can't remember where, but i thought it was pretty effective. Sorry i can't cite the source....
"a well educated electorate, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books shall not be infringed". Do you see anything in that passage that says only the well educated should be allowed to keep and read books? Anything there that says what kind of books? anything that would indicate what type of medium the books are printed, or displayed on? Anything that says that books may only be kept and read in libraries? Anything that would allow the taxation or restriction of said books? Me neither. Plain and simple, the founders were scared to death of a repeat of the monarchy they just overthrew, and intended the second amendment to protect the right to keep arms FOR MARTIAL PURPOSES (i.e. purposes of, or related to, war). Federalist papers will reinforce that. At the end of the day you're not going to convince someone who thinks guns are icky otherwise, but it does occasionally help to publicly show them the pimp hand, especially in front of those who are fence sitters. You won't turn the hardcore antis, but you can bring more moderate closer to our side if you frame the argument correctly. |
|
Quoted: I know its a waste but I cant help it (outside of the Supreme Court's recent decison) I need some rock solid evidence the founders wrote the second amendment with the intent that is an individual right. Also something useful against the "its for the white man to shoot resisting slaves" would also be nice. Supreme Court ruled: "The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense." |
|
Also something useful against the "its for the white man to shoot resisting slaves" would also be nice.
You really want to blow his head up? Point out the FACT that the NRA helped arm southern blacks and teach them marksmanship, much to the chagrin of the Democrats in the KKK. |
|
Quoted:
Tell them that their ignorant misinterpretation of the Second Amendment does not matter, SCOTUS's decision is the only opinion that legally matters. Supreme Court ruled: "The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense." Quoted:
Quoted:
I know its a waste but I cant help it (outside of the Supreme Court's recent decison) I need some rock solid evidence the founders wrote the second amendment with the intent that is an individual right. Also something useful against the "its for the white man to shoot resisting slaves" would also be nice. Supreme Court ruled: "The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense." Can't say i totally agree here. If SCOTUS' makeup changes and says 5 years from now that it's a collective right, outdated, etc...would that be the only valid argument. fuck that. and fuck them if/when they do say that. |
|
The second amendment only referred to weapons of that time, does not apply to any modern firearms, and was written by racist white men.
Just like the first amendment only referred to media available at that time, does not cover the Internet, radio, or TV, and was only designed to protect hateful speech of racist white men. FHRITP. |
|
If the argument is its the "white man to kill slaves" why don't you ask then why are you a democrat because they have been oppressing minorities about as long as the second amendment as been around.
If you need some conservatives blacks to mention: MLK and Jackie Robinson |
|
Quoted:
I know its a waste but I cant help it (outside of the Supreme Court's recent decison) I need some rock solid evidence the founders wrote the second amendment with the intent that is an individual right. Also something useful against the "its for the white man to shoot resisting slaves" would also be nice. To believe anything else than it is an individual right is to believe that all of the rest of the Bill Of Rights restrict the federal government's actions, but, somehow, that pesky second was thrown in there to acknowledge that same government's "rights? ???" It takes an amazing level of denial to come to the conclusion that one amendment is completely the opposite of all the others. Then, add in the writings of the founding fathers, and you pretty much have to be evil or an idiot. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
Quoted:
I know its a waste but I cant help it (outside of the Supreme Court's recent decison) I need some rock solid evidence the founders wrote the second amendment with the intent that is an individual right. Also something useful against the "its for the white man to shoot resisting slaves" would also be nice. All you have to do is look at any of the founding fathers quotes regarding guns. Their position on what the 2nd means is clear as crystal. In regards to the militia = military argument that libtards like to throw around...it clearly says "the people". " the people" is used countless times throught documents of that time period and clearly refers to the citizens. The slave shooting thing is just race baiting bullshit because he knows he truly has no argument. Tell him to find one piece of historical writing that supports his theory. He can't. There are plenty that say it is to defend against tyranny, which was and is it's obvious purpose. I hope your friend gets super aids. |
|
Quoted:
I know its a waste but I cant help it (outside of the Supreme Court's recent decison) I need some rock solid evidence the founders wrote the second amendment with the intent that is an individual right. Also something useful against the "its for the white man to shoot resisting slaves" would also be nice. http://www.amazon.com/Negroes-Gun-Black-Tradition-Arms/dp/161614839X/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1432216378&sr=8-2&keywords=blacks+and+the+history+of+the+gun |
|
Your friend is a fascist.
Fascists believe that the words I underlined words in the Tenth Amendment have the same meaning. Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. According to them, it really says, Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people states. (Gee, you've got a big pussy.) We can rewrite the Second Amendment using the fascist definition. The word 'people' does not refer to individuals. This is the principle they claimed for the last fifty years. Amendment II A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people states to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. If 'people' means 'state' in the Second Amendment, then it means 'state' in the whole document. Let's fix the other amendments to show the changes. Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people states peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. According to your friend, individuals have no right to speak freely. That right belongs to the states. Massachusetts can say whatever it wants. Your friend has the right to shut the fuck up. Amendment IV The right of the people states to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people states. In a single stroke, your friend destroyed the Bill of Rights. His God-state has unlimited power because whatever words define its power can be redefined according to his whim. That power extends through the entire country because fascist democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt told us that the commerce clause in Article I, Section 8 means that the federal government has the right to regulate everything in the universe. So, federal agents armed with machine guns in Tennessee can enforce paperwork violations from Madagascar and the federal government has the right to regulate what a person may do in Antarctica or outer space. It also means that fascist democrats can kill brown people whenever they want, as long as they claim new meanings for the words that previously authorized them to record the minutes of legislative sessions. Amendment XIII Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. Recent examples demonstrate that the above authorizes fascist democrats to murder brown people for selling a cigarette in New York City, for owning a pocket knife in Baltimore, and for holding up their hands in Ferguson. We can see that they did not enslave any of those people; they are technically within the definition of the words in the law. |
|
Quoted:
I read this one somewhere, and i can't remember where, but i thought it was pretty effective. Sorry i can't cite the source.... "a well educated electorate, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books shall not be infringed". Do you see anything in that passage that says only the well educated should be allowed to keep and read books? Anything there that says what kind of books? anything that would indicate what type of medium the books are printed, or displayed on? Anything that says that books may only be kept and read in libraries? Anything that would allow the taxation or restriction of said books? This is an argument I use a LOT. - All amendments are created equal. You can't ignore the First, while supporting the Fourth. - The closest Amendment to the Second is the First, in that they both put limits on how the government can restrict citizen's behavior. No other amendments do that--the rest limit what the .gov can do to citizens, not what citizens can do. - Therefore, for every gun control law you are considering, replace "arms" with "books," or "protests," or "worship," and see if it's still something you'd be okay with. Liberal. Minds. Blown. |
|
Quoted:
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776 "The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." - Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776 "The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed." - Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824 "I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." - George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788 "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops." - Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787 "A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." - Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788 "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun." - Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778 "This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty.... The right of self defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction." - St. George Tucker, Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, 1803 "The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." - Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788 "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them." - Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, 1833 OP, if you cite these, the fascist democrat will say that they're not in the Constitution and therefore have no meaning. Here's the Jefferson letter to the Danbury Baptists for him to contemplate after he says that: http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html |