Quick Vote on US Second Amendment (the gun one): Good/Bad/Other?

Question

Just curious what everyone else here thinks. I can think of 5 of the most popular answers. I’d like to know which ones people agree with, and why if you like Especially if you have another reason (short and to the point please) list that as well. Or just vote.

a) stupid pointless thing that doesn’t apply today because we have no need for militias
b) stupid pointless thing that doesn’t apply today just because no one needs a gun anymore
c) so people can hunt, defend themselves…the outdoors, heritage, traditionalists point of view
d) designed so the people can always have a way if all else fails, wait for it: to overthrow the government!
e) I agree with answer D but I’m too scared to put it down because the alphabet soup gang is reading this.

Answer 1

the point is to be able to protect ourselves from all enemies foreign & domestic. it is to ensure that, '...the right of the people petition the government for a redress of grievances'. if the 1st is taken away, which it has been, the 2nd ensures it.
a) it seems to apply more than ever with enemies BOTH foreign & domestic. b) armed rebellion against the gov would only bring martial law, the use of military against civilians & civil war. c)true enough that the hunting thing im ify about but the ability to feed & cloth oneself should never be infringed upon. d) yeh e) i agree, any entity that strives for such control cant be trusted with it. the loss of posse comitatus & habeas corpus should be enough for any patriot.

Answer 2

A lot of the amendments were badly drafted, if the Constitution had been superior to the Magna Carta it wouldn't have needed so many amendments, one of its prime functions was to enable slavery to remain legal long-term and have apartheid right up to the 1960's. The second amendment in particular is a classic example of a missing comma changing its entire meaning, had someone competent proof read it only the militia would have been armed since and 10's of thousands of lives would have been saved over the years. The Constitution isn't outdated, merely inferior to what it replaced.

Answer 3

The answer is D, in my opinion. In most areas I'm fairly liberal, but I disagree with the left on this one. Whether or not the answer is relevant to today, given the advanced nature of our military is moot: I think its clear what the intention behind the second amendment was.

However, if you think about it, look at how well the poorly armed insurgency is doing in Iraq right now, if you're wondering whether or not having the ability to posses guns can keep a superior force hopping--something to chew on.

Answer 4

D.
It is our right and our duty to tear down a tyrannical government. Without guns, we can't defend any of our rights and we can't overthrow a tyrannical government. It is, by far, the most important amendment.

Answer 5

The term "Right of the People' should mean the same in any Amendment in which it appears. My feeling is that an armed man is a citizen, an unarmed man is a subject.

Answer 6

The rights of the people to keep and bear.... belongs to the individuals --- the phrase "of the people" has being used by the Court for the rights of the individual.

Answer 7

Read the Federalist Papers

Answer 8

None of your answers are worth a crap, the only one that should matter is a man has the god giving right to protect his family and property and guns do just that ! If ya don't like guns, don't buy one and don't piss anybody off that has one if you don't !

Answer 9

this gun ammendment, like any other, can be repealed if the PEOPLE want it repealed. Prohibition was an ammendment, and it WAS REPEALED, so the system works. This is the law of the land until changed.

Answer 10

C
the FACT is that if guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.