Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com

Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/)
-   Legal and Activism (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/)
-   -   Feedback for Defining the 2nd Amendment (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/feedback-defining-2nd-amendment-78920/)

cjbubbadoc 12-19-2012 10:50 PM

Feedback for Defining the 2nd Amendment
 
As there are two parts to the amendment, and I believe that it has become very clear that the responsibilty of gun ownership is not clear to all. I live in Washington state and there is a organized militia of sorts there are 53 members in my county. What I am putting out for thoughts and concerns: Seperating the militia from the people, a militia being organized would require a regular meetings and training events. The right of the people to be able to defend themselves and property from realistic threats if they are not a member of the militia needs to be maintained. We could categorize the weapons for militia and for personal defense. I would like to get some feed back, I believe we have a short period of time before congress or the white house may do something that could affect us all in a bad way.
We need to give the Vice President something that would make sense the majority of people and still not lose out on what the 2nd amendment means to this country. Who knows if we get this right, the militias can be come more than just a few members strong, but what the constitution intended them to be. Maybe there is someone here that can get a electronic petition to VP Biden. President Obama said they would consider all good ideas and even look at the bad ones.

CA357 12-20-2012 01:07 AM

"Shall NOT be infringed" needs NO clarification. Screw the gun grabbing bastards, we shouldn't have to explain a damn thing. We don't have a gun problem, we have a crime problem.

cjbubbadoc 12-20-2012 11:16 PM

I agree with you, unfortunatley support is failing for the 2nd amendment as it is written. If we can't find a way to keep it as is, it is going to change to fit the people that are scared of guns. I'm just floating an idea that may help to keep it just the way it is, and get us past the political atmosphere of today.

CA357 12-21-2012 12:17 AM

I realize that and my response wasn't directed to you. I'm just tired of explaining "Rights" to asshats.

I'm at an age and a point in my life where I will no longer attempt to appease or debate the ill informed, the paranoid or the intentionally ignorant.

Axxe55 12-21-2012 12:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CA357 (Post 1058594)
"Shall NOT be infringed" needs NO clarification. Screw the gun grabbing bastards, we shouldn't have to explain a damn thing. We don't have a gun problem, we have a crime problem.

i have to agree with CA357 on this. too many people like to make it more difficult than it needs to be. i simply believe in the context that the founding fathers meant it to mean, "shall not be infringed" is what they meant. they wanted the power to be in the citizens control, not the government. so for people to want to redefine the 2nd admendment is rather stupid and arrogant on their part. the founding fathers and writers of the Constitution were men of vision and rather intelligent men who also possessed a vast amount of common sense.

fmj 12-21-2012 12:29 AM

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state

^^^ statement of fact^^^


The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

^^^ reminder to those in Govt and elsewhere^^^

Militia needs not be organized. A militia is understood to be any person that is old enough to use a weapon to defend his property, family or self.

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
needs no explanation...or shouldnt!:cool:

Axxe55 12-21-2012 12:35 AM

personally, i don't think the 2nd admendment needs defining or redefining, just many people need to be educated or re-educated!:eek:

IMO, the 2nd admendment is the protector of all our other admendments. if we ever were to lose the 2nd, there is quite the posibility we will lose all the others.

CA357 12-21-2012 12:55 AM

Well, these bastards "don't want to let a crisis go to waste". They're going to give it their best shot while many are ready to capitulate and the sheep are inflamed with self righteousness. Remember, the left just assumes it always has the high ground. Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes truth.

If you haven't read "Rules for Radicals", get it and read it now. It will explain the imperial presidency and its policies.

LarryinCo 12-21-2012 04:40 PM

The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting, or self-defense. The 2nd Amendment simply codifies the right of any people to oppose tyranny in their government.

Stillersfan 12-21-2012 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CA357 (Post 1058594)
"Shall NOT be infringed" needs NO clarification. Screw the gun grabbing bastards, we shouldn't have to explain a damn thing. We don't have a gun problem, we have a crime problem.


Or a mental illness problem that everyone seems to ignore. They have been shutting down mental hospitals for years and then they put the oweness on people who are not equipped professionally to handle it. Itís not fair, and itís only going to get worse.


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:51 AM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.