Can you lefties explain to me why our founding fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment?

Question

If you understand why... Why would you support a ban against those rights?

Thank you.... some of you got the answer correct. Power to the people... It is to prevent the government from becoming a dictatorship allowing the people to overthrow the government and maintain our freedom. Also, our enemies really think twice about attack us on our soil, as they would be fighting more then just our military.

Thanks for the answers!

Answer 1

I'm a leftist, a socialist, actually.

And I think MILITARY weapons SHOULD be in the hands of the people. And THAT'S what the 2nd Amendment was written for. While I think hunting is a perfectly legitimate activity, the 2nd Amendment ain't about hunting!

I'm not gonna whine about "assault rifles" because the ignorant liberals and their conservative enablers have a FAKE definition in law of what an "assault rifle" IS.

REAL assault rifles are covered by the National Firearms Act of 1934. They are strictly controlled, very few people have them, and it's been like that for 73 years. I think it's wrong, it shouldn't be like that, but it IS a fact that it IS like that.

Try telling anti-gunners that, though. They've got this phobia that anything black with scary bumps and protrusions on it that they don't understand is an "assault rifle" and should be banned.

Sounds a little Freudian, if you ask me.

All that talk about "the amendment only means the militia" is bunk - in the days the amendment was written EVERY free male white citizen was considered PART of the militia. The only updating that's needed is to remove race and gender from the definition.

And to the people that say "but they only meant muskets, not modern military weapons" -- in that time, muskets WERE modern military weapons!

Historically, "gun control" in America has been based on racism and attacking poor whites, too, and no amount of talk about public safety will erase that connection. The first "gun control" laws in the USA were designed to disarm freed black ex-slaves and radical left poor white militias in the post-Reconstruction South.

In other words, these laws were designed to protect the KKK by preventing their victims from shooting back! And I would argue that the purpose of such laws haven't changed much since then.

Another one of the waves of such laws, in the 1920s and 1930s, came as unions were getting stronger, and were fighting back against company goons bent on destroying working people's rights.

Do I have to tell people what was happening in America when the Gun Control Act of 1968 was passed?

These laws are ALWAYS an attack on minorities, poor whites, and leftists, no matter WHAT excuse is given.

While I realize that my rifle or handgun will not hold off a satellite-guided missile or an Army helicopter, I think that if the presence of so many arms in civilian hands makes a George Bush or a Bill Clinton hesitate even ten seconds before instituting his more repressive measures, than it is worth any trouble they MIGHT cause in society.

As a socialist, and an advocate for working people, I could not look myself in the mirror if I didn't fight against working people being disarmed.

Those who argue to do so MAY be liberals, but they sure as heck ain't LEFTISTS! Those who pretend to be leftists but are against gun rights would do well to ponder THIS quote:

"There are no circumstances imaginable, not even victory, under which the proletariat should give up its possession of arms." -- Karl Marx

I think those are fine words. And I intend to live by them.

Answer 2

You need only look at dictators all over the world to understand the importance for individuals to be able to defend themselves. The first thing dictators do is unarm the populous so they can not fight back against the monopoly of force held by the government.

Our Founding Fathers understood that an unarmed populous and an over arching central government were two things that had to be dealt with. Both were dangerous to the long term success of the new nation they were building.

The first 10 amendments to the Constitution, otherwise known as the Bill of Rights, are all about individual rights & freedoms. There are no "collective" rights. We don't have to get a group together in order to speak, or form a group in order to own weapons, etc. Individual freedom is what the Founding Fathers were describing.

There are many things today that the government controls & bans that they have no Constitutional right doing. The federal government has too much power and much of it should be returned to the individual states (ie, the people) as the Founding Fathers intended. The federal government only has a few powers granted to it by the Constitution and all other rights are left to the states.

Remember that everything in our country revolves around individual freedom. Without that we have nothing.

Answer 3

LOL, I thought you meant left-handed people for a second. Anyways, it is pretty stupid that liberals want to ban guns. Every American is entitled to own a firearm. As long as it is handled properly and is only used for hunting or target shooting, it is innocent. I am not sure who said it, but someone made a comment that using an assault rifle on a hunt will leave little of the animal left. That is BS. Unless you are unloading a mag into the poor thing in full auto, ARs are totally useable in hunting.
(NOTE: Typically, assualt rifles utilize either 5.56x45mm or 7.62x51mm rounds. Those are the rounds used in hunting rifles.)

Answer 4

Not only does it say to we have the right to own a weapon. It also says that if the Government gets out of control. We have the right to over take the Government with our arms. Need to read the whole Amendment. Great question.

Answer 5

Hey I'm what would probably be considered a "leftie" and I'm all for the right to legally own a gun to protect yourself,

what is with all this generalization of what "lefties" think, come on and argue the real issues not just which one of two parties everyone expects you to perfectly fit into and why everyone in the other party must be wrong.

Answer 6

Well the main point of argument from the left is that it was written in a time where a good shot could get off 3 rounds a minute, and local/state militias made up the good deal of policing and armed forces across the country hence the amendment is no longer relevant. But power in the hands of people is always relevant.

Answer 7

Simply put, it allows citizens to own a gun...and permits states to have a "militia" (National Guard).

No, I wouldn't support banning these rights. If guns were banned, only the law abiding citizens would comply. Thugs, criminals and gansters certainly wouldn't....they aren't allowed to have them now.

I wouldn't want to live in a society where only the crooks, thugs, law enforcement and military were the only ones armed... No Thanks.

Answer 8

They wrote it to allow people to always have the right to hunt for game or target shoot. They did not intend for ordinary people to have efficient weapons like "assault rifles"

In the same way that the first amendment was written only to allow for freedom of speech when it comes to entertainment or against conservatives. The founders also never intended for ordinary people to have efficient communications such as the internet, that could allow ideas and unsafe information to be communicated so efficiently.

So support Gun Control, Support only government approved websites, support the Democratic Party.

They only want to protect you from you. They have only your best interests in mind.

Answer 9

A well-regulated state militia apart from federal govt's control is what we need!!!

Answer 10

the second amendment to the constitution says that anyone has the right to own a weapon for self defence