If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Politics & ReligionWell Since every damn forum has one. Might as well leave it out there. This place is loosely moderated and should not be entered if you're weak of heart.
Posts: 9,283
Casino Cash: $18495
Sportbike: Katana - Sold 8/08
A Very Brady Second Amendment
Brady Campaign's take on the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution:
Quote:
What does the Second Amendment Mean?
How often have you heard someone argue against gun control laws by claiming: "Gun ownership is a constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment"? The assertion that the Second Amendment to our Constitution guarantees a broad, individual right to "keep and bear arms" and that it precludes any reasonable restrictions on guns is the philosophical foundation of the National Rifle Association's opposition to even the most modest gun control measures.
The NRA's constitutional theory is, however, divorced from legal and historical reality. It is based on carefully worded disinformation about the text and history of the Second Amendment and a systematic distortion of judicial rulings interpreting the Amendment. The result is a Second Amendment "mythology" which has been difficult to counter.
The History of The Second Amendment: Original Meaning And Intent
The Second Amendment states: "A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The NRA tends to omit the first, crucial, half of the Second Amendment - the words referring to a "well-regulated militia."
When the U.S. Constitution was adopted, each of the states had its own "militia" - a military force comprised of ordinary citizens serving as part-time soldiers. The militia was "well-regulated" in the sense that its members were subject to various requirements such as training, supplying their own firearms, and engaging in military exercises away from home. It was a form of compulsory military service intended to protect the fledgling nation from outside forces and from internal rebellions.
The "militia" was not, as the gun lobby will often claim, simply another word for the populace at large. Indeed, membership in the 18th century militia was generally limited to able-bodied white males between the ages of 18 and 45 - hardly encompassing the entire population of the nation.
The U.S. Constitution established a permanent professional army, controlled by the federal government. With the memory of King George III's troops fresh in their minds, many of the "anti-Federalists" feared a standing army as an instrument of oppression. State militias were viewed as a counterbalance to the federal army and the Second Amendment was written to prevent the federal government from disarming the state militias.
The Second Amendment Today
In the 20th century, the Second Amendment has become an anachronism, largely because of drastic changes in the militia it was designed to protect. We no longer have the citizen militia like that of the 18th century.
Today's equivalent of a "well-regulated" militia - the National Guard - has more limited membership than its early counterpart and depends on government-supplied, not privately owned, firearms. Gun control laws have no effect on the arming of today's militia, since those laws invariably do not apply to arms used in the context of military service and law enforcement. Therefore, they raise no serious Second Amendment issues.
There is more, but I don't want to get into court cases with the limited amount of time I have right now.
No these are not my views. If you don't know who the Brady Campaign is, research before replying.
I interpret the second amendment to give the people the means to restore order to their government if it gets out of control. Or to protect themselves if their government fails. "A Government for the people, by the people". It pisses me off when people relate it to hunting, personal protection (I guess it does have a little to do with that), etc.
If you look over many of the quotes of our founding fathers on the subject, it's pretty obvious that it means exactly that.
I think that all guns should be outlawed. Period. I mean, come on, no one is going to kill someone if the weapon they were using could get them in trouble
Actually, Brady is a simple-minded, gullible, two-faced Republican who routinely flops on issues. Perhaps at a frequency that would make even John Kerry blush.
Actually, Brady is a simple-minded, gullible, two-faced Republican who routinely flops on issues. Perhaps at a frequency that would make even John Kerry blush.
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh, burned!!! You "moded" her!! (anybody remember that word?)
__________________
"What? Thats no country I've ever heard of, do they speak English in What?"
Actually, Brady is a simple-minded, gullible, two-faced Republican who routinely flops on issues. Perhaps at a frequency that would make even John Kerry blush.
Negative, she has stated that her goal is a socialist America.
She was a Republican. I trust your Google is still working. He's not now of course, she's way to simple-minded and have succummed to the nonsense associated with the anti crowd.
She's also a flip-flopper on gun control. How can you support that she isn't? Of course as a big contributor to the strategic direction of Handgun Control Inc., she would never purchase a Remington .30-06 rifle for her son a few years ago (also an illegal 'straw purchase' per the gun law that share's the name of her disabled husband, James).
"In the 20th century, the Second Amendment has become an anachronism, largely because of drastic changes in the militia it was designed to protect. We no longer have the citizen militia like that of the 18th century."century
Fine. Change it, using the documented Constitutional procedure. Until then, quit infringing the right and abusing the language to fit your interpretation.
Fine. Change it, using the documented Constitutional procedure. Until then, quit infringing the right and abusing the language to fit your interpretation.
KeS
Actually, that wouldn't be fine either, since the Bill of Rights grants no rights; it only recognizes pre-existing "certain unalienable Rights", which all humans retain regardless of how unjust their governments may be. So even if they could get the support, through the prescribed process, for an Amendment that repealed the Second Amendment, it would *still* be unjust, wrong, and of no moral standing.
PhilB
__________________
'93 Ducati Monster 900
158,000 miles (so far)
She was a Republican. I trust your Google is still working. He's not now of course, she's way to simple-minded and have succummed to the nonsense associated with the anti crowd.
She's also a flip-flopper on gun control. How can you support that she isn't? Of course as a big contributor to the strategic direction of Handgun Control Inc., she would never purchase a Remington .30-06 rifle for her son a few years ago (also an illegal 'straw purchase' per the gun law that share's the name of her disabled husband, James).
She may have been a registered Republican, but her ideals definately don't follow suit-
"Our main agenda is to have all guns banned. We must use whatever means possible. It doesn't matter if you have to distort the facts or even lie. Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed."
Sara Brady
Chairman, Handgun Control Inc, to Senator Howard Metzenbaum
The National Educator, January 1994, Page 3.
I interpret the second amendment to give the people the means to restore order to their government if it gets out of control. Or to protect themselves if their government fails. "A Government for the people, by the people". It pisses me off when people relate it to hunting, personal protection (I guess it does have a little to do with that), etc.
If you look over many of the quotes of our founding fathers on the subject, it's pretty obvious that it means exactly that.
Sara Brady is a socialist.
I agree, the second Amendment being used for "sporting purposes" has always pissed me off as well.
__________________
Fitting race leathers link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEvk4...uctID%2F471734
Gear: AGV & HJC Helmet, Cortech Scarab & Teknic Speedstar gloves, Cortech advanced sport jacket, Cortech Jean pants, Cortech DSX pants, Alpinestars stage and SMX 3 boots. AGV sport Forza2 two piece leather suit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZXhunter
A nut job comes up with these theories. A 'gullible' person only follows the nut job without question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert_S_Hunter
Have you ever experienced a governmental department that did things in a common sense manner? If you have, that puts you "one up" on the overwhelming majority of the people on this planet
Actually, that wouldn't be fine either, since the Bill of Rights grants no rights; it only recognizes pre-existing "certain unalienable Rights", which all humans retain regardless of how unjust their governments may be. So even if they could get the support, through the prescribed process, for an Amendment that repealed the Second Amendment, it would *still* be unjust, wrong, and of no moral standing.
I have no idea why this is such a common perception. I know it used to be taught in school, but then maybe how government actually functions isn't deemed that important.
At any rate, it is absolutely correct that the Bill of Rights doesn't "grant" rights to individuals. The purpose of the Bill of Rights was to enumerate specific restrictions on Government power, including the States. Although I don't think it's entirely accurate to state the rest is left to individuals, as "the people" is more generally meant powers deferred to the states.
This is one reason why the issue of States' Rights can be a bit of a sticky issue. At least the politicians screwing up the states are closer to home.
__________________ There no need to ascribe to conspiracy that which can be attributed to indifference.
A Very Brady Second Amendment
