On guns, where does one draw the line
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-02-2013, 05:30 PM
RE: On guns, where does one draw the line
(04-02-2013 05:12 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 05:01 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  I'd hope not.

Especially in context, that wouldn't make much sense and would be insanely ridiculous.

But it is historically accurate.

I doubt that's the case.

The 2nd Amendment, specifically states a purpose, and that purpose absolutely fails to mention tyranny, oppression or government. I can't really see how it implies that, either. So, in what way is it historically accurate?

I really can't see how it makes any reasonable sense. They might have been stupid and paranoid, but I doubt they were, as a whole, to that extent.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2013, 05:34 PM
RE: On guns, where does one draw the line
(04-02-2013 05:30 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 05:12 PM)Chas Wrote:  But it is historically accurate.

I doubt that's the case.

The 2nd Amendment, specifically states a purpose, and that purpose absolutely fails to mention tyranny, oppression or government. I can't really see how it implies that, either. So, in what way is it historically accurate?

I really can't see how it makes any reasonable sense. They might have been stupid and paranoid, but I doubt they were, as a whole, to that extent.
You need to read the authors' writings, the debates about the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and especially the Federalist Papers.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2013, 06:08 PM
RE: On guns, where does one draw the line
(04-02-2013 05:34 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 05:30 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  I doubt that's the case.

The 2nd Amendment, specifically states a purpose, and that purpose absolutely fails to mention tyranny, oppression or government. I can't really see how it implies that, either. So, in what way is it historically accurate?

I really can't see how it makes any reasonable sense. They might have been stupid and paranoid, but I doubt they were, as a whole, to that extent.
You need to read the authors' writings, the debates about the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and especially the Federalist Papers.

I would if I liked to do things irrelevantly, or thought it would be fun.

Like I said, some of them could have been paranoid and stupid, and I doubt to an extent large enough to have thought the purpose of the amendment to be what you seem to be implying, or agreeing, it is. Even if they were, however, that is not what is evident with what they had actually gotten passed as Constitutional law.

It states, as clearly as need, that it's for militia purposes, and state, sovereignty, security purposes.

It's a completely irrational, and idiotic purpose if it's against an oppressive, tyrannical government. I guess, you can point out a relevant excerpt from those writings, if you feel it shows some of them were really that idiotically paranoid, but besides showing that, I can't see it showing anything more. I can't see an oppressive, tyrannical government as being the core and legitimate reason behind the amendment, and that especially isn't shown by the actual amendment text.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2013, 06:13 PM
RE: On guns, where does one draw the line
(04-02-2013 06:08 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 05:34 PM)Chas Wrote:  You need to read the authors' writings, the debates about the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and especially the Federalist Papers.

I would if I liked to do things irrelevantly, or thought it would be fun.

Like I said, some of them could have been paranoid and stupid, and I doubt to an extent large enough to have thought the purpose of the amendment to be what you seem to be implying, or agreeing, it is. Even if they were, however, that is not what is evident with what they had actually gotten passed as Constitutional law.

It states, as clearly as need, that it's for militia purposes, and state, sovereignty, security purposes.

It's a completely irrational, and idiotic purpose if it's against an oppressive, tyrannical government. I guess, you can point out a relevant excerpt from those writings, if you feel it shows some of them were really that idiotically paranoid, but besides showing that, I can't see it showing anything more. I can't see an oppressive, tyrannical government as being the core and legitimate reason behind the amendment, and that especially isn't shown by the actual amendment text.


You have every right to hold an uneducated, willfully ignorant opinion.

I will ignore it because it is willfully ignorant. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2013, 06:21 PM
RE: On guns, where does one draw the line
(04-02-2013 06:13 PM)Chas Wrote:  You have every right to hold an uneducated, willfully ignorant opinion.

I will ignore it because it is willfully ignorant. Drinking Beverage

As you can withhold any legitimate argument and/or points toward your view(s).

Just to add: To say that the Bill of Rights, was, in general, to prevent oppression from government, is kind of obvious; but from my perspective, to say that as the purpose of the 2nd Amendment, in a specific way, like I'm inferring that you seem to be doing now, is total absurdity. That's would be either from a Founding Father or a modern citizen.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2013, 06:28 PM
RE: On guns, where does one draw the line
(04-02-2013 06:13 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 06:08 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  I would if I liked to do things irrelevantly, or thought it would be fun.

Like I said, some of them could have been paranoid and stupid, and I doubt to an extent large enough to have thought the purpose of the amendment to be what you seem to be implying, or agreeing, it is. Even if they were, however, that is not what is evident with what they had actually gotten passed as Constitutional law.

It states, as clearly as need, that it's for militia purposes, and state, sovereignty, security purposes.

It's a completely irrational, and idiotic purpose if it's against an oppressive, tyrannical government. I guess, you can point out a relevant excerpt from those writings, if you feel it shows some of them were really that idiotically paranoid, but besides showing that, I can't see it showing anything more. I can't see an oppressive, tyrannical government as being the core and legitimate reason behind the amendment, and that especially isn't shown by the actual amendment text.


You have every right to hold an uneducated, willfully ignorant opinion.

I will ignore it because it is willfully ignorant. Drinking Beverage

You wanna know another document written by a small number of people ages ago that people can't just let go of because it's irrelevent in a modern world?

The bible.

I don't talk gay, I don't walk gay, it's like people don't even know I'm gay unless I'm blowing them.
[Image: 10h27hu.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes earmuffs's post
04-02-2013, 06:29 PM
RE: On guns, where does one draw the line
(04-02-2013 06:21 PM)TrulyX Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 06:13 PM)Chas Wrote:  You have every right to hold an uneducated, willfully ignorant opinion.

I will ignore it because it is willfully ignorant. Drinking Beverage

As you can withhold any legitimate argument and/or points toward your view(s).

Just to add: To say that the Bill of Rights, was, in general, to prevent oppression from government, is kind of obvious; but from my perspective, to say that as the purpose of the 2nd Amendment, in a specifically way, like I'm inferring that you seem to be doing now, is total absurdity. That's would be either from a Founding Father or a modern citizen.
Yes, don't let anything get in the way of your opinion.

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove
that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington - First President of the United States

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
Co-author of the Second Amendment during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788

"Those who hammer their guns into plowshares will plow for those who do not."
Thomas Jefferson - Third President of the United States

"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."
Richard Henry Lee
American Statesman, 1788

"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; …"
Samuel Adams
quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, "Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State"

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2013, 06:30 PM
RE: On guns, where does one draw the line
(04-02-2013 06:28 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 06:13 PM)Chas Wrote:  You have every right to hold an uneducated, willfully ignorant opinion.

I will ignore it because it is willfully ignorant. Drinking Beverage

You wanna know another document written by a small number of people ages ago that people can't just let go of because it's irrelevent in a modern world?

The bible.


Does that apply to every country's constitution?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2013, 06:35 PM
RE: On guns, where does one draw the line
(04-02-2013 06:30 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 06:28 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  You wanna know another document written by a small number of people ages ago that people can't just let go of because it's irrelevent in a modern world?

The bible.


Does that apply to every country's constitution?
It applies to any piece of legislation that dictates future governments actions.

I don't talk gay, I don't walk gay, it's like people don't even know I'm gay unless I'm blowing them.
[Image: 10h27hu.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2013, 06:47 PM
RE: On guns, where does one draw the line
(04-02-2013 06:35 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
(04-02-2013 06:30 PM)Chas Wrote:  Does that apply to every country's constitution?
It applies to any piece of legislation that dictates future governments actions.


So, no government can ever be founded on a defining document. What, then, defines a government?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Do guns cause Rape? What do you think is the leading cause of rape? LostandInsecure 96 1,450 31-05-2014 03:26 PM
Last Post: Metazoa Zeke
  Guns. Yee haw! Drunkin Druid 64 1,035 26-05-2014 04:09 PM
Last Post: Anjele
  The problem with storing guns/ammo at a range Phaedrus 2 63 28-04-2014 06:25 PM
Last Post: Phaedrus
  Polite discussion on guns itsnotmeitsyou 10 200 24-04-2014 11:26 AM
Last Post: itsnotmeitsyou
  Kids and Guns Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver 6 265 13-02-2014 10:01 AM
Last Post: Unknown
  Anarchists, Guns, and 3D Printing houseofcantor 43 2,353 16-11-2013 09:31 AM
Last Post: Chas
  Boys Expelled From School for Toy Guns at their Home Dark Light 18 803 26-09-2013 06:36 PM
Last Post: I Am
Forum Jump: