Posted: 9/4/2009 8:00:33 AM EDT
|
(This is from my cell phone, might be hard to read ) I have been listing to people talk where i work . they have been talking about the 2nd amendment and how it does not cover handguns and Aks and ARs. They are Idiots and i Dont even get involved in there talks. But it has me thinking, Why do i need to lean on the 2nd anyway ? Why do I need any piece of Paper to say i have the right to protect my family and my self ! I want to make this statement but I wanted to say my thoughts here because i am sure AR15 could tell me if that is a stupid statement. that way of looking at it is making a lot of Sence to me right now! Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
If you jumped on a spacehip and found another planet.
Moved to that planet and settled there. Someone came to your planet and started hurting your family are you expected to just take it or would you be expected to defend yourself? My land is my planet and I will defend it to the death. I told one person that if my wife was getting raped in my house, I was already dead. |
|
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
You should just tell them, everyone has a natural right to freedom and liberty. Many people will want to take that away and many will do it with force. The 2nd is there to protect your rights, therefore it is a right in and of itself. |
|
Quoted:
Google dc vs Heller. It most certainly does cover semi auto rifles, and arms commonly used by the military. Well, actually the Second Amendment covers all arms whether the SC agrees or not, because Free Men say so. The rest of our society will understand that on another day. |
|
You're very correct in the way you are thinking. The Founders were thinking the same way.
2A does not grant any rights ! All it does is articulate the rights that we already have and it prevents (or was intended to prevent) laws being made that would suppress those pre-existing, inalienable rights. |
|
Quoted:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. You should just tell them, everyone has a natural right to freedom and liberty. Many people will want to take that away and many will do it with force. The 2nd is there to protect your rights, therefore it is a right in and of itself. Exactly. It enables us to protect all of the other rights we have...........it in effect is the 'warranty' to them. 
Good luck with your friends BTW.............really. 
Some folks will just never get it. |
|
Quoted:
(This is from my cell phone, might be hard to read ) I have been listing to people talk where i work . they have been talking about the 2nd amendment and how it does not cover handguns and Aks and ARs. They are Idiots and i Dont even get involved in there talks. But it has me thinking, Why do i need to lean on the 2nd anyway ? Why do I need any piece of Paper to say i have the right to protect my family and my self ! I want to make this statement but I wanted to say my thoughts here because i am sure AR15 could tell me if that is a stupid statement. that way of looking at it is making a lot of Sence to me right now! Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Just let them know the 1st Amendment doesn't cover television or radio. |
|
Thanks for the feed back . I have come to Apprishate this site a lot and respect the input I find here . I Dont come here looking to find people that just blindly agree with one another. I am not one that goes out of my way to get others approval , But with something as important as the topic at hand , it made my day to read the reply here ! Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
Quoted:
(This is from my cell phone, might be hard to read ) I have been listing to people talk where i work . they have been talking about the 2nd amendment and how it does not cover handguns and Aks and ARs. They are Idiots and i Dont even get involved in there talks. But it has me thinking, Why do i need to lean on the 2nd anyway ? Why do I need any piece of Paper to say i have the right to protect my family and my self ! I want to make this statement but I wanted to say my thoughts here because i am sure AR15 could tell me if that is a stupid statement. that way of looking at it is making a lot of Sence to me right now! Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile It's common knowledge that the 2nd amendment only covers flintlock single shot rifles, pistols and cannon. |
|
Quoted:
You're very correct in the way you are thinking. The Founders were thinking the same way. 2A does not grant any rights ! All it does is articulate the rights that we already have and it prevents (or was intended to prevent) laws being made that would suppress those pre-existing, inalienable rights. Thats what I was gonna say but Marine 78 said it better, and first. |
|
You don’t need the piece of paper. The Second Amendment doesn’t create the “Right to Keep and Bear Arms” it merely recognizes that it exists. If the amendment didn’t exist then you would still have the right.
And, if you read the amendment carefully you will notice that it talks about the “Right to Keep and Bear Arms” as a thing that already exists and not a thing that is being created by the amendment. This brings up the question about what the “Right to Keep and Bear Arms” actually is. I’ll spare you my reasoning but I’ve concluded that it protects your right to own the basic weapon of an infantryman (rifle) and the basic weapons of the police (handgun and shotgun.) Although, it could extend to other weapons under certain conditions. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
(This is from my cell phone, might be hard to read ) I have been listing to people talk where i work . they have been talking about the 2nd amendment and how it does not cover handguns and Aks and ARs. They are Idiots and i Dont even get involved in there talks. But it has me thinking, Why do i need to lean on the 2nd anyway ? Why do I need any piece of Paper to say i have the right to protect my family and my self ! I want to make this statement but I wanted to say my thoughts here because i am sure AR15 could tell me if that is a stupid statement. that way of looking at it is making a lot of Sence to me right now! Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Just let them know the 1st Amendment doesn't cover television or radio. We don't alter Constitutionally protected RIGHTS just because technology changes. |
|
Quoted: the 2nd amendment and how it does not cover handguns and Aks and ARs. Actually, it does cover such things - if anything, it wouldn't cover their duck-hunting shotgun and deer-hunting rifle. Tell them that, watch their heads explode. that is well put and true |
|
Quoted:
Because without that piece of paper firearms would be outlawed. Good point - with out it firearms would have been outlawed long before I was born . also I was looking at it like the 2nd amendment gave us the right , instead of the fact it protects are right . The more I understand the more Apprishation I have for this country and the founding fathers ! Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
Quoted:
Shouldn't the 2nd ammendment be the 1st ammendment since it protects all others? I think the first protects all others, The second is if the first is taken from us. We speak our mind and they listen, if we cant speak our mind and they dont listen then the 2nd comes to play. |
|
One thing that people seem to lose sight of, and the anti run from, is that when the S2nd was written, if you had the money, you could own a warship with as many cannons as it could cary. The potential for destruction you rain down on a city or another ship was huge. Yet that was perfectly acceptable. A lot more firepower than an AR, AK, etc.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
the 2nd amendment and how it does not cover handguns and Aks and ARs.
Actually, it does cover such things - if anything, it wouldn't cover their duck-hunting shotgun and deer-hunting rifle. Tell them that, watch their heads explode. that is well put and true Another very good point worth remembering. As much as that makes Sence I Never looked at it that way. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |