2nd amendment?

Question

the right to bear arms. this was instituted for protection and not just of the individual as many think. yes you should be able to protect your family but the main and real reason was to protect yourself from a corrupt government. however over time our nation forgot that, a nation which the government and select organizations are still trying to disarm. without guns, there is no balance of power, one could rule all. even though the average citizen has next to nothing compared to the military, bands were made called the militia to keep the country in check. the only really still active militia is in pennsylvania. once you lose your guns and are disarmed, you no longer have a say in anything. what is your opinion?

Answer 1

Is there a question in there somewhere? Yes we do have a second amendment to the Constitution of the US.

Answer 2

Minnesota has a militia too but i think it's just for historical reasons the right to bear arms is an important amendment but it was used when our country was first created to give more power to the states the only reason our country exists today is because the constitution gave allot of power to the states inccluding the 2ND amendment so the only way the states could protect itself from domestic or foreign attack was to have militias the army was weak at the time so the states militias provided a the bulk of our army.

Answer 3

I don't own a gun, but I do enjoy target shooting when the opportunity is there.
I don't hunt. I don't think it's fair unless to lower the exploding deer population...As long as you eat it. I suppose it's more honorable for the deer to be "properly hunted" by an experienced hunter then crushed by a semi truck....
I think it's fine to own a gun or two, but not an arsenal of Uzi's and Mac10's
That's where I stand about guns in general.
But... I am left with the image of that ONE LONE UNARMED man blocking a chinese tank in Tianiman (sp?) square. He had no gun and he stopped a whole line of tanks from entering.
If a line of tanks came down your road do you think your gun would stop it? It would only get you killed. But maybe if you just happened to stand infront of it? That image on the news would be more powerful than anyone of your guns.
Regards

Answer 4

When they pry it from my cold dead hands. Hear that Mr and Mrs liberal leftist? Hear that Hillary and Rudy? I never expect to have to fight our government. I think we may have to defend ourselves and our country from a Bolshevik type revolution of the left trying to institute communism by force. That is what the anti gun rhetoric is really all about.

Answer 5

Agree. But I think a much more efficient way to keep the government in line would be to simply stop paying taxes . . . If the crap ever hits the fan I think this would be more effective.

Answer 6

You lose the guns you lose your freedom. We have a 300 million strong militia in this country. I support this.

Answer 7

Well, except for the fact that you don't seem to know where the Shift key is on the computer, you got it pretty much right.

Answer 8

You have been misled by the right-wing rhetoric on ths issue. First of all, NO ONE is "trying to disarm" citizens who wish to own guns for legitimate purposes. In even the most restrictive jurisdictions (e.g. Washington DC) any bans are only on certain types of weapons known to be assiciated with criminal use--and even then a person can get a license for suc a weapon if they really want to.

Also--the right-wing , in their claims about right's to gun ownership, show their ignorance about the 2nd Ammendment they love so dearly. They equate any regulation of guns with "bans" or "gun control." They are so ignorant they don't even know the 2nd Ammendment specifically authorizes regulation of firearms.

Answer 9

I agree, but I'm not sure what my Ruger pistol is going to do against an Abrams tank, if it ever comes down to it...

Answer 10

They're trying to go around the system and now require less shelf life for ammo...