| Click here to go to the original topic View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
whatnotwho
Joined: 19 Jan 2006
Posts: 499
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 30, 2006 11:14 am Post subject: 2nd amendment |
|
|
| Do you think the 2nd amendment would be written differently if created today? The weapons available at the time were crude one shot black powder flintlocks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Winchester
Joined: 23 Aug 2005
Posts: 6510
Location: Montana
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 30, 2006 12:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Given the nature of the power hungry spineless wonders we have in office now, I doubt any of them would have had the balls to sign the Declaration of Independence let alone have the foresight to draft a document that has served our citizens so well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Aqualung
Joined: 03 Jun 2006
Posts: 2233
Location: Washington
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 30, 2006 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Winchester wrote: Given the nature of the power hungry spineless wonders we have in office now, I doubt any of them would have had the balls to sign the Declaration of Independence let alone have the foresight to draft a document that has served our citizens so well.
Agreed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
ATrow
Joined: 28 Jul 2006
Posts: 114
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 30, 2006 8:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Winchester wrote: Given the nature of the power hungry spineless wonders we have in office now, I doubt any of them would have had the balls to sign the Declaration of Independence let alone have the foresight to draft a document that has served our citizens so well.
Totally. We forget the amendment is only there because things needed to be changed. The amendment was there to reflect the needs at that time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Winchester
Joined: 23 Aug 2005
Posts: 6510
Location: Montana
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 30, 2006 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ATrow wrote: Winchester wrote: Given the nature of the power hungry spineless wonders we have in office now, I doubt any of them would have had the balls to sign the Declaration of Independence let alone have the foresight to draft a document that has served our citizens so well.
Totally. We forget the amendment is only there because things needed to be changed. The amendment was there to reflect the needs at that time.
Things may need to be changed in the future too and hence why the 2nd is still applicable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
JackarooSundown
Joined: 29 Oct 2005
Posts: 433
Location: Three thirty.
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 12:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Winchester wrote: ATrow wrote: Winchester wrote: Given the nature of the power hungry spineless wonders we have in office now, I doubt any of them would have had the balls to sign the Declaration of Independence let alone have the foresight to draft a document that has served our citizens so well.
Totally. We forget the amendment is only there because things needed to be changed. The amendment was there to reflect the needs at that time.
Things may need to be changed in the future too and hence why the 2nd is still applicable.
For sure. The 2nd is there to enable us to defend against a corrupt govt. when push comes to shove. |
|
| Back to top |
|
ATrow
Joined: 28 Jul 2006
Posts: 114
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 1:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
JackarooSundown wrote: For sure. The 2nd is there to enable us to defend against a corrupt govt. when push comes to shove.
Right, but if you're defending against a corrupt government, you really don't care about following the rules do you? Me (as much as I detest him), I'm not two worried about George Bush turning the American Government into an evil dictatorship. Besides if he did, there are plenty of ways to make weapons without a gun :wink:. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Gatz Nieblas
Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 99
Location: California
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 2:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Really, it seems that Bush is moving the country very close to an evil dictatorship. In fact, the beast has been prevalent in our government and its centralization experiment since those wretched years of FDR when he plunged this country into socialism.
On topic, though, the 2nd amendment would be written the same today since the second amendment calls for defense against an unjust government and calls for the right for everyone to defend themselves (life, liberty, and property). Trust me, there are a few legislators who still hold these values true. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Blinky
Joined: 18 Mar 2006
Posts: 2238
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 3:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Winchester wrote: ...a document that has served our citizens so well.
Um...yeah. It's been brilliant.
:lol: |
|
| Back to top |
|
Blinky
Joined: 18 Mar 2006
Posts: 2238
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 3:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
JackarooSundown wrote: Winchester wrote: ATrow wrote: Winchester wrote: Given the nature of the power hungry spineless wonders we have in office now, I doubt any of them would have had the balls to sign the Declaration of Independence let alone have the foresight to draft a document that has served our citizens so well.
Totally. We forget the amendment is only there because things needed to be changed. The amendment was there to reflect the needs at that time.
Things may need to be changed in the future too and hence why the 2nd is still applicable.
For sure. The 2nd is there to enable us to defend against a corrupt govt. when push comes to shove.
Push has come to shove (New freakin' Orleans). What happened? Nothing.
Its all chest-beating and bravado. Nothing more. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Winchester
Joined: 23 Aug 2005
Posts: 6510
Location: Montana
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 3:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Blinky wrote: Winchester wrote: ...a document that has served our citizens so well.
Um...yeah. It's been brilliant.
:lol:
Actually it is, quite a lot of forthought by the founding fathers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Blinky
Joined: 18 Mar 2006
Posts: 2238
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 3:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Winchester wrote: Blinky wrote: Winchester wrote: ...a document that has served our citizens so well.
Um...yeah. It's been brilliant.
:lol:
Actually it is, quite a lot of forthought by the founding fathers.
How has it served you well? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Lucky Luke
Joined: 28 Oct 2005
Posts: 8662
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 5:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Blinky wrote: Winchester wrote: Blinky wrote: Winchester wrote: ...a document that has served our citizens so well.
Um...yeah. It's been brilliant.
:lol:
Actually it is, quite a lot of forthought by the founding fathers.
How has it served you well?
Not last year:
Quote: Preliminary Annual Uniform Crime Report, 2005
.........
murder +4.8%
:-D
:-D |
|
| Back to top |
|
perdidochas
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 15408
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:16 am Post subject: Re: 2nd amendment |
|
|
whatnotwho wrote: Do you think the 2nd amendment would be written differently if created today? The weapons available at the time were crude one shot black powder flintlocks.
Do you think the 1st amendment would be written differently if created today? The "press" available at the time were manually typeset hand operated printing presses. The religions known were various forms of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
perdidochas
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 15408
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
ATrow wrote: Winchester wrote: Given the nature of the power hungry spineless wonders we have in office now, I doubt any of them would have had the balls to sign the Declaration of Independence let alone have the foresight to draft a document that has served our citizens so well.
Totally. We forget the amendment is only there because things needed to be changed. The amendment was there to reflect the needs at that time.
And if the 2nd amendment (or any other amendment) is considered un-needed, it should be repealed by another amendment, not by going around it by the courts/legislature. Prohibition of alcohol was a stupid, unconstitutional idea, but at least it's proponents did the honest thing and pushed through a constitutional amendment to allow it, instead of having activist judges pervert the Constitution to allow it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
perdidochas
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 15408
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Blinky wrote: JackarooSundown wrote: Winchester wrote: ATrow wrote: Winchester wrote: Given the nature of the power hungry spineless wonders we have in office now, I doubt any of them would have had the balls to sign the Declaration of Independence let alone have the foresight to draft a document that has served our citizens so well.
Totally. We forget the amendment is only there because things needed to be changed. The amendment was there to reflect the needs at that time.
Things may need to be changed in the future too and hence why the 2nd is still applicable.
For sure. The 2nd is there to enable us to defend against a corrupt govt. when push comes to shove.
Push has come to shove (New freakin' Orleans). What happened? Nothing.
Its all chest-beating and bravado. Nothing more.
The government backed down in New Orleans after merely the threat of a lawsuit, not by violent action. There was no need for chest-beating and bravado. Peaceful means (which most of us gun owners prefer) resolved it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Onevote
Joined: 18 Sep 2004
Posts: 1688
Location: Tampa, Florida
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Blinky wrote: Winchester wrote: ...a document that has served our citizens so well.
Um...yeah. It's been brilliant.
:lol: Indeed , it is brilliant! and has worked quite well for us. The framers lived under tyranny and understood the evolution of Governments. Something some of you might want to take note of yourselves. Regardless of how much you may love your Country, how much you may trust your Government. Things evolve, and not always for the benefit of it's citizens. Freedom is not free. You must sometimes fight for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
britboy
Joined: 02 Jun 2006
Posts: 3339
Location: London
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
I've never had to fight against my government trying to repress me.
nor did my parents, or my grand parents, or THEIR grand parents!
If we'd worried about this happening, it would have been hundreds of years of wasted worrying! Millions of people learning to use guns that wouldn't have needed to because they never used them.
Billions of pounds spent on guns to defend us from our government, which would have been a complete and utter waste of time owning (as, we now know, the government hasn't tried to oppress us into slavery once in, er, well, at least 200 years!). Millions of hours wasted down the gun range as everyone has to learn to shoot a gun to save them from the government, even though they are not remotely interested in guns. Mrs Smith from number 32 who would MUCH rather have spent the money on more clothes for her grandson and hates guns -- but nope -- instead she has to learn to shoot a handgun just in case her government wants to repress her. So do millions of other housewives across the country. But they haven't spent the money on this. They chose in the UK to live gun-free .. AND our government is still working for us, not against us! Amazing eh? Generations after generations have decided to NOT pointlessly learn how to shoot government representatives, buy all the equipment etc. Boring, expensive, time consuming, accident prone and PROVED to be absolutely pointless. It'd have been a total waste of time. Thank goodness we have avoided that one (so far!)
Thank goodness we trust our government and our trust was correctly placed. Meanwhile, you US better start teaching your kids how to defend you freedom. while you do that, and spend money taking your teenagers down the range even though they hate guns, for that day when your government tried to enslave you (!!) I'll be down the pub spending MY money on partying or perhaps giving my kids a new school uniform instead! I don't need to defend myself against my government.
Deep down, to be honest, I think the US government is trying to actually do the best for the American people as well (SHOCK HORROR)! and the 'we must defend ourselves from those nightmare hell-hound government officials' is just a load of silly paranoia |
|
| Back to top |
|
leftneckredwing
Joined: 13 Nov 2004
Posts: 31131
Location: North America
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 10:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| You may mever have to save a life either, but should that prevent you from learning CPR? |
|
| Back to top |
|
britboy
Joined: 02 Jun 2006
Posts: 3339
Location: London
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 31, 2006 10:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
leftneckredwing wrote: You may mever have to save a life either, but should that prevent you from learning CPR?
It's fact that a certain percentage of people will require the use of someone who has been trained for CPR, within our nation. That is the difference. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Click here to go to the original topic |
