We are caught up in varying definitions here. Yes the second amendment mentions natural rights, but the Constitution itself is setting down legal rights. There is a philosophical issue going back many centuries regarding the distinctions between natural rights and legal rights. Natural rights are considered beyond the authority of any government or international body to dismiss. Legal rights are those bestowed onto a person by a given legal system. The wording of the second amendment has conflated these distinctions.
The guy is an IDIOT. Here is the deal, when the militia is called up, and don't assume if we were invaded there would not be militias, you bring your arms. That is the whole deal, you have arms in case a militia is called up. To say only those in militia would have arms while in militia is just pitiful thought process. When the militia is called up, what do you bring, fly swatters? Or maybe National Geo maps of Granada? Maybe someone should dig up ADM Yamamota's quote about the consequences of Japan invading the US. Somewhat germane! I can't believe this guy is even in traffic court, much less the supreme court.
The 1st Amendment protects our free speech from government infringement. The 2nd protects us from the government. I believe the government is supposed to work for us, not us for them.
Weren't Militias and the 2nd amendment only added because southern whites were afraid of revolting slaves?
Gun registratipn and and hi-cap mags registration will never take hold. CT is undergoing this issue now, and thw registration deadline for NYC is looming. As of now a majority of CT residents willfully ignored the registration deadlines and by the letter of the law are now considered criminals. What is the CT Governor going to do? As of now not shit, and he knows if he forces the issue he's out. The NYC deadline for registering all considered "assault weapons" and hi-cap mags is fast approaching and experts are expecting upwards of 90% of the people who own these weapons to ignore the law as well. And as of now the State Police, and elected Sheriffs are not going to enforce the law on those who disregard this law. When you lose the support of Law Enforcement, you tend to be fucked. The liberal disease sweeping the northern portion of this country is not being tolerated well by gun owners regardless of political spectrum. As the majority of people ignore these laws, what are these dumbasses going to do, lock up millions of people for simply not registering? Nope they're going to STFU and pout, but in terms of action they can't do shit. A lot of people are tired of the direction the broke dick Muhammed Obama is taking this country, and people are finally fed up. The Federal Gov't fucked up big time at the Bundy Ranch, and now people are realising the ability to protect themselves from our ineffective leaders is a real necessity.
No. It was added because about 12 years prior to the Constitution being enacted, the people decided to oust a government they viewed as tyrannical, and local militias played a huge role in ousting that tyranical government. Seriously, where do you get this shit?
Oh I don't know, maybe because of that thing slavery. You may have heard of it. http://truth-out.org/news/item/13890-the-second-amendment-was-ratified-to-preserve-slavery Deny all you want and that's cool but Southern Whites were way more afraid of rebelling slaves than they were of the British.
Find me one reputable historian who lends any creedance to this. You realize truth-out is a radical left wing opinion blog run by op-eds with no background in history? The entire case is rested on a few quotes from Patrick Henry, none of which found their way into his rebuttals of the federalist papers, nor were they included in his arguments for amending the Constitution with the Bill of Rights. The right to keep and bear arms had a long hostory in the English Common Law, dating back to the 12th century, and was formally codified in the 17th century. It was considered a natural right, and an especially important one in light of George attempted gun confiscations.
Not sure about that. There was never a general slave rebellion. Only one slave rebellion in the whole era extended beyond two counties in Virginia. It just wasn't a serious threat. The British, on the other hand could and did send large armies to America regularly to fight the French, the Indians, The Spanish, British colonial insurgents, Revolutionaries, and eventually the USA in 1812. They burned Washington. Much more serious threat.
Bundy Ranch. Americans practicing their 2nd Amendment rights tha way it was intended. The 1700's were very tough times. If you weren't armed you didn't live long.
