Americans, what use is your right to "keep and bear arms" for protection from a tyrannical government?

Question

If you're not allowed to use your guns to attack corrupt government officials?

I'm against guns btw. I do not support the idea of shooting anyone! But why have guns if you're not allowed to use them for their supposed purpose?

Answer 1

Attacking corrupt officials is a violation of law. The proper remedy is to file charges against the abusive officials in court.

Answer 2

Well, you have two different things here, one the 2nd amendment and concealed carry registration laws. One if federal the other is state. The 2nd amendment was put there to stop the federal government from taking guns from the public, and it gives that power to the state. Yes I know the federal government requires permits for full automatic firearms, but if I remember right it was done by restricting the transportation of fully automatic firearms, not though a law stopping you from owing one. Now a state could forbid the ownership of any firearm. But most states have a provision in their state constitution that is similar to the 2nd amendment. But a state can stop you from even owing a firearm. A state can require you not only to register ALL your firearms; they could say you can only own certain types of firearms. So if you want to change the law, take it up with your state. Edit To KC V What part of “the right of the people to keep and bear arms,” didn’t you see? The Courts have already ruled, recently, that, that meant the people. The Supreme Court may be taking up the issue. A well regulated militia: that was up to the states to define what a regulated militia was. It was up to the state to raise the militia and thus it was a state function. So it was up to the states to regulate their own militias. Now what I find strange is that rights in every amendment except one have been expanded, that one is the 2nd. It is also the one least visited by the courts, it’s an area where the federal government doesn’t really want a ruling on, nor do most those people who are pro or con gun control. If the courts ruled as the founders intended that would mean that the federal government has no right to regulate firearms. It would be up to the individual states to do that. Think about it, the founding fathers just fought a war with one of the greatest military powers of the time, using civilians, who owned their own firearms, why would they take the guns from the very people who made up the army? The founders also realized that at some time in the future the US government might become oppressive and that the people may have to rise up and overthrow the government, some of them felt that as long as the people owned guns the government would show restraint, if not then the government would cease to exist. Of course the Constitution has never stopped the Supreme Court; all we have to do is look at recent rulings to see that. After all it the job of the Supreme Court to interpret the constitution, but recently we’ve seen Justice Anthony Kennedy looking overseas to decided what the law of our land should be, one more thing to think about. So how the court will rule is anybody’s guess. Of course that said a state could ban all firearms.

Answer 3

The right to bare arms keeps any one in government from holding power illegally.It only works if the people are willing to stand up.
The same reason people in cities drive SUVs.They make you feel safer.
Where I live people do use guns for the purpose they were made for,they hunt,they defend their homes.We have a law that you can use deadly force when either attacked on the street or when someone breaks into your home.

The Idea behind owning guns is not to attack but defend.

Answer 4

The right to bear arms has nothing to do with what you just said. If we have corruption in the system there is a process to get it out. The second amendment has to do with bearing arms and having regulated militias to insure freedom. That would be inclusive of criminal elements and foreign entities that have it in for the USA. Sounds like your interpreting the Constitution with a radical Islamic mind set. You might as well forget it, George W. Bush is a GOOD MAN! Now please leave us alone...

Answer 5

The reason we don't have (PLEASE NOTE: DON'T HAVE) a tyrannical government is because we have that right. You have no idea what a tyrannical country is, clearly. If you think the USA is a tyrannical country, go on holiday to North Korea or Zimbabwe or Burma or Saudi Arabia or Somalia, the Sudan and then complain so Chris can do his report.

Answer 6

The "second amendment" the US constitution says these exact words:

"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."

The "second amendment" was instituted with thoughts of the British as an invading or occupying government, to have the populace ready to form militias to fight off future invasions. Those who wrote it did not and could not have had the foresight to see that private gun ownership would create a criminal society; had they known, I doubt they would have included it.

Those who argue for private gun ownership today are perverting the intent, not abiding by it. It's very similar to the perversion of the "first amendment" by religious nutballs. The "first amendment" says:

"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 peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

The word "respecting" means _reference_, not "reverence". It doesn't means that certain religions should be respected, it means no religion should be favoured by laws. And that intent, the separation of crutch - oops, church - and state has been perverted by those who seek to turn the US into a theocracy.

What's all the more pathetic is that I, a Canadian, know more about US history and law than the Yanks do. Freedom and democracy are like muscles: if you don't exercise them regularly, they'll atrophy. And muscles only atrophy when a person - or in this case, a country - is lazy about protecting freedom and democracy.


.

Answer 7

its not for use against corrupt officials.it is for protection from a tyrannical goverment like we had under british control.it maintains a check on the government.

Answer 8

Well then just get out there in the street and start shooting then. I'll save my ammuntion for the radical islamists that try to take this country.

Answer 9

Right wingers kind of have this fantasy where fringe millias of rednecks rises up and start a revolution. I guess the idea is that in a revolution, one is allowed to do pretty much anything they want. I guess they can dream.

Answer 10

*lol* Crusin.... That is why I like my trusty shotgun.. All I have to do is shoot in the general direction. Something is bound to connect.