The second amendment grants us the right to bear arms. Our Founding Fathers wanted all the rights listed in the Bill of Rights to apply to all citizens.
Why won't the LEFT recognize the Second Amendment is no exception? It DOESN'T apply only to the National Guard!
May it be because our Founding Fathers wanted the citizen to handle their guaranteed rights responsibly and the Liberals don't trust us to be responsible? Could it be we each were EXPECTED to be held legally responsible for misuse of our rights? The Left doesn't want RESPONSIBILITY to apply ANYWHERE to any of the guaranteed rights. (Especially when applied to the freedom of speech.)
Please clarify!
2007-12-01 13:07:34 · 7 answers · asked by Philip H 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Kinda scary we have to defend the only piece of the Bill of Rights that says "shall not be infringed". Think about it, they REALLY thought it was that important!!
"without guns we are a nation of unarmed subjects"
2007-12-01 13:13:31 · answer #1 · answered by Ancient Warrior DogueDe Bordeaux 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We can debate indefinitely about that "well-regulated militia," but two awkward facts remain:
(1) The kinds of firearms available 200+ years ago were much harder to conceal or use, espcially on impulse, than the high-tech weapons available today. (Imagine trying to whisk an 18th century pistol, most of which were at least a foot long, out of your pocket, pour some powder out of the powderhorn, ram powder and bullet down the barrel, add a tiny additional amount ["dusting"] of powder to the pan, and THEN fire. Even if you went around with a loaded pistol on you, you'd still have had to prime it just before firing.) We can only surmise whether the Founding Fathers would have been so willing to grant that right if they had foreseen the kinds of firearms their descendants would have access to.
(2) Countries with strict handgun control laws usually have very low crime rates.
2007-12-01 14:53:11 · answer #2 · answered by aida 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The most efficient way to enslave a people is to disarm them. Think about it. If the conspiracy theorists are right, then a police state would be impossible with an armed population. He who has the guns makes the rules. Guns are the equalizer of the masses.
2007-12-03 13:47:42 · answer #3 · answered by speed__phreak 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Is this a question or a rant?
May people believe the 2nd amendment has a qualification in it regarding a "well-regulated militia." Of course the counterargument is that a militia can be any group of armed people, or even a militia of one. Though there's question as to whether or not that is "well-regulated."
Anyway.
2007-12-01 13:13:37 · answer #4 · answered by agentdenim 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
OK, perhaps Philip has a strong opinion, but . . .
Does anyone have any evidence that the founding fathers attempted to disarm the populous?
No? Isn't that somehow significant?
2007-12-01 13:22:33 · answer #5 · answered by G_U_C 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Vote for Huckabee and make you vote count, really that is all we can do, some have no clue that 'they' work for US! and the thing is that we have to make sure 'they' know it!
It is our RIGHT and duty, and pleasure to have, use and be ready...if and when we need to be...
boy Scout motto, Be Prepared!
2007-12-01 13:35:29 · answer #6 · answered by Blaze 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes you got it.
2007-12-01 13:22:36 · answer #7 · answered by Scrappy52 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋