| Topic: Madison never meant Second Amendment to allow guns, The Times Are Changing | < Next Oldest | Next Newest > |
|
| Post Number: 1
|
wwwest 
Group: Members
Posts: 4064
Joined: Dec. 2002
|
 |
Posted on: Dec. 18 2012, 2:18 pm |
|
  |
Good article that analyzes what Madison had in mind when drafting the 2nd Amendment, and how the world has changed since 1789. By Aaron Burger of the Christian Science Monitor. Worth taking the time to read the whole article. Here are some salient excerpts:
The problem with these lines of thought is that in both we are refusing to frame this debate in the 21st century. Or even more appropriate, the year 2012 – whose multiple mass shootings included the massacre in Aurora, Colo. and last week's two tragedies in Happy Valley, Ore. and Newtown. If we truly wish to demystify the intentions of James Madison when he wrote the Second Amendment, we must reconstruct the environment in which he conceived it and recognize that it was a very different time, with very different circumstances, and very different weapons.
Now there is no citizen armament – and really, nothing short of military aircraft or an atomic weapon – that could match the US military. And even today’s Supreme Court would find it hard to permit the construction of backyard missile silos. Regrettably or not, we must concede that the conditions allowing for an armed revolution of the people have long since vanished.
While hunters and gun collectors may complain about the decrease in speed and variety of weapons, no person’s sport is worth another person's man’s life. There is no logical reason that anyone should have to fire dozens of shots without reloading – unless intending to deprive that many people of life and limb. The US government must make the distinction between a weapon of war, and one that could be legitimately used for sport or self-defense
http://news.yahoo.com/madison....cs.html
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 2
|
Tuffy2toes
Group: Guests
Posts: 107
Joined: Jul. 2012
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 18 2012, 3:04 pm |
|
 |
(wwwest @ Dec. 18 2012, 2:18 pm)
QUOTE Good article that analyzes what Madison had in mind when drafting the 2nd Amendment, and how the world has changed since 1789. By Aaron Burger of the Christian Science Monitor. Worth taking the time to read the whole article. Here are some salient excerpts: The problem with these lines of thought is that in both we are refusing to frame this debate in the 21st century. Or even more appropriate, the year 2012 – whose multiple mass shootings included the massacre in Aurora, Colo. and last week's two tragedies in Happy Valley, Ore. and Newtown. If we truly wish to demystify the intentions of James Madison when he wrote the Second Amendment, we must reconstruct the environment in which he conceived it and recognize that it was a very different time, with very different circumstances, and very different weapons.
Now there is no citizen armament – and really, nothing short of military aircraft or an atomic weapon – that could match the US military. And even today’s Supreme Court would find it hard to permit the construction of backyard missile silos. Regrettably or not, we must concede that the conditions allowing for an armed revolution of the people have long since vanished.
While hunters and gun collectors may complain about the decrease in speed and variety of weapons, no person’s sport is worth another person's man’s life. There is no logical reason that anyone should have to fire dozens of shots without reloading – unless intending to deprive that many people of life and limb. The US government must make the distinction between a weapon of war, and one that could be legitimately used for sport or self-defensehttp://news.yahoo.com/madison....cs.html
Left wing propaganda garbage designed to turn people into sheep.
The second admendement is there to keep the goverment scared of the people who will fight back against oppression and tyranny when and if they become drunk with their power.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 3
|
BillBab
Group: Members
Posts: 4500
Joined: Sep. 2008
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 18 2012, 3:07 pm |
|
|
Poorly written article by another brainwashed sheep
--------------
"Asking liberals where wages and prices come from is like asking six-year-olds where babies come from."
Thomas Sowell
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 4
|
wwwest
Group: Members
Posts: 4064
Joined: Dec. 2002
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 18 2012, 3:09 pm |
|
|
Did you miss this part, or just sticking to self delusion??
Regrettably or not, we must concede that the conditions allowing for an armed revolution of the people have long since vanished.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 5
|
|
|
| Post Number: 6
|
Land Rover
Group: Members
Posts: 6529
Joined: Sep. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 18 2012, 3:23 pm |
|
|
look at that... you said sheep in unison!!! LMAO
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 7
|
|
|
| Post Number: 8
|
Land Rover
Group: Members
Posts: 6529
Joined: Sep. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 18 2012, 3:27 pm |
|
|
(Tuffy2toes @ Dec. 18 2012, 3:24 pm)
QUOTE
(Land Rover @ Dec. 18 2012, 3:23 pm)
QUOTE look at that... you said sheep in unison!!! LMAO What are you on dude??? Or maybe are you off your meds again?
You don't even know why that's funny do you..... you overcompensate in other areas for being unarmed in a battle of wits.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 9
|
Montanalonewolf
Group: Members
Posts: 4808
Joined: Mar. 2010
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 19 2012, 8:42 am |
|
|
True that no one could stand against the US military "as is" but there's at least 2 very salient points being ignored.
1: A significant part of the active US military will refuse to fire on and fight its own citizens.
2: A significant part of the active US military, and most probably most of the states' NG, will "cross over" and take their equipment with them.
--------------
Ignorance is curable with education. Stupidity is refusing to be educated.
Those who don't read have no advantage over those who can't.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 10
|
Montecresto
Group: Members
Posts: 1874
Joined: Jul. 2012
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 19 2012, 8:57 am |
|
|
If you are going to start arguing that pieces of the constitution had relevancy in 1789 and not today, then soon you will have no constitution.
Why this refusal to acknowledge that 100 million responsible gun owners will not be punished for the behavior of 100 bad hats?
--------------
Killing one person is murder, killing a 100,000 is foreign policy
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 11
|
|
|
| Post Number: 12
|
|
|
| Post Number: 13
|
Land Rover
Group: Members
Posts: 6529
Joined: Sep. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 19 2012, 9:11 am |
|
|
We already established that
A) he never said that.
B) Japan never had the capability to invade the US.
Stop posting crap you pick up on e Internet.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 14
|
Land Rover
Group: Members
Posts: 6529
Joined: Sep. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 19 2012, 9:13 am |
|
|
Once seen to be losing the debate with the pretend it has nothing to do with guns, the whackadoodles then turned to it has everything to do with guns.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 15
|
Land Rover
Group: Members
Posts: 6529
Joined: Sep. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 19 2012, 9:13 am |
|
|
Guns don't defend freedom, people defend freedom!
Guess what, you don't get to have it both ways.
I mean I'm always hearing that if criminals don't have guns they'll just use something else, well we can use something else here. Kitchen knives perhaps?
What about cars. I mean I'm always being told that cars are the same or more dangerous than guns. Why don't we defend our freedom with cars?
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 16
|
Montecresto
Group: Members
Posts: 1874
Joined: Jul. 2012
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 19 2012, 9:32 am |
|
|
LR. Don't be so condescending. I realize you believe your right, but really, it's unbecoming.
Oh, Chicago has a very strict gun ban in place, and I shouldn't have to remind you of where it ranks in gun violence.
--------------
Killing one person is murder, killing a 100,000 is foreign policy
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 17
|
Montecresto
Group: Members
Posts: 1874
Joined: Jul. 2012
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 19 2012, 9:34 am |
|
|
Gun owners have been winning the debate since 1934, however, if the numbers of people continue to grow who wish to trade their civil liberties for safety and security, then we all shall have neither.
--------------
Killing one person is murder, killing a 100,000 is foreign policy
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 18
|
Montecresto
Group: Members
Posts: 1874
Joined: Jul. 2012
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 19 2012, 9:35 am |
|
|
(N2theWild @ Dec. 19 2012, 8:59 am)
QUOTE
(Montanalonewolf @ Dec. 19 2012, 8:42 am)
QUOTE True that no one could stand against the US military "as is" but there's at least 2 very salient points being ignored.
1: A significant part of the active US military will refuse to fire on and fight its own citizens.
2: A significant part of the active US military, and most probably most of the states' NG, will "cross over" and take their equipment with them. I guess the topic starter imagines the gun owners would be in formation out in the open receiving mortar shellings or something. There is a reason Urban warfare is so difficult for our troops to succeed at overseas.
A very good point!
--------------
Killing one person is murder, killing a 100,000 is foreign policy
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 19
|
|
|
| Post Number: 20
|
|
|
| Post Number: 21
|
Montecresto
Group: Members
Posts: 1874
Joined: Jul. 2012
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 19 2012, 10:00 am |
|
|
Their government god could even be the source of their harm.
--------------
Killing one person is murder, killing a 100,000 is foreign policy
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 22
|
gunslinger
Group: Members
Posts: 6031
Joined: Mar. 2007
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 19 2012, 10:12 am |
|
|
(wwwest @ Dec. 18 2012, 2:18 pm)
QUOTE Good article that analyzes what Madison had in mind when drafting the 2nd Amendment, and how the world has changed since 1789. By Aaron Burger of the Christian Science Monitor. Worth taking the time to read the whole article. Here are some salient excerpts: The problem with these lines of thought is that in both we are refusing to frame this debate in the 21st century. Or even more appropriate, the year 2012 – whose multiple mass shootings included the massacre in Aurora, Colo. and last week's two tragedies in Happy Valley, Ore. and Newtown. If we truly wish to demystify the intentions of James Madison when he wrote the Second Amendment, we must reconstruct the environment in which he conceived it and recognize that it was a very different time, with very different circumstances, and very different weapons.
Now there is no citizen armament – and really, nothing short of military aircraft or an atomic weapon – that could match the US military. And even today’s Supreme Court would find it hard to permit the construction of backyard missile silos. Regrettably or not, we must concede that the conditions allowing for an armed revolution of the people have long since vanished.
While hunters and gun collectors may complain about the decrease in speed and variety of weapons, no person’s sport is worth another person's man’s life. There is no logical reason that anyone should have to fire dozens of shots without reloading – unless intending to deprive that many people of life and limb. The US government must make the distinction between a weapon of war, and one that could be legitimately used for sport or self-defensehttp://news.yahoo.com/madison....cs.html
Madison and the founding fathers most certainly envisioned a tyrannical government and that's the reason they included it.
I agree with Scalia, the constitution is a dead document and means what it says.
The ever expanding power of the federal government would most certainly be counter to Madison's view of our government.
The power was meant to lie with the States....thus the 10th amendment.
--------------
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 23
|
Drift Woody
Group: Members
Posts: 5304
Joined: Feb. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 19 2012, 10:16 am |
|
|
Constitutionally, citizens can have military weapons as part of a well-regulated militia. I think it's safe to assume that militia will be regulated & commanded by the state (a term which includes the federal government).
Militia regulated & commanded by the state will be used to overthrow the state?
Besides being treasonous, US citizens going to war against the US is little more than paranoid delusion fed by anti-government rightwing propaganda and gun-nuttery.
There is no legitimate purpose (constitutionally or otherwise) for military assault weapons (rapid fire, large magazines) in the hands private citizens. Going beyond sports rifles & handguns for personal/home protection is not a need or a right -- it's an obsession.
--------------
We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.
-- Native American proverb
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 24
|
N2theWild
Group: Members
Posts: 1641
Joined: Feb. 2008
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 19 2012, 10:19 am |
|
|
I'm sure there were a lot of people like DW back in the day the US was fighting the red coats. Thank goodness we also had people who weren't cowards back then.
--------------
For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, (2 Timothy 4:3)
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 25
|
Montecresto
Group: Members
Posts: 1874
Joined: Jul. 2012
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 19 2012, 10:21 am |
|
|
(gunslinger @ Dec. 19 2012, 10:12 am)
QUOTE
(wwwest @ Dec. 18 2012, 2:18 pm)
QUOTE Good article that analyzes what Madison had in mind when drafting the 2nd Amendment, and how the world has changed since 1789. By Aaron Burger of the Christian Science Monitor. Worth taking the time to read the whole article. Here are some salient excerpts: The problem with these lines of thought is that in both we are refusing to frame this debate in the 21st century. Or even more appropriate, the year 2012 – whose multiple mass shootings included the massacre in Aurora, Colo. and last week's two tragedies in Happy Valley, Ore. and Newtown. If we truly wish to demystify the intentions of James Madison when he wrote the Second Amendment, we must reconstruct the environment in which he conceived it and recognize that it was a very different time, with very different circumstances, and very different weapons.
Now there is no citizen armament – and really, nothing short of military aircraft or an atomic weapon – that could match the US military. And even today’s Supreme Court would find it hard to permit the construction of backyard missile silos. Regrettably or not, we must concede that the conditions allowing for an armed revolution of the people have long since vanished.
While hunters and gun collectors may complain about the decrease in speed and variety of weapons, no person’s sport is worth another person's man’s life. There is no logical reason that anyone should have to fire dozens of shots without reloading – unless intending to deprive that many people of life and limb. The US government must make the distinction between a weapon of war, and one that could be legitimately used for sport or self-defensehttp://news.yahoo.com/madison....cs.htmlMadison and the founding fathers most certainly envisioned a tyrannical government and that's the reason they included it. I agree with Scalia, the constitution is a dead document and means what it says. The ever expanding power of the federal government would most certainly be counter to Madison's view of our government. The power was meant to lie with the States....thus the 10th amendment.
Great post!
--------------
Killing one person is murder, killing a 100,000 is foreign policy
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 26
|
|
|
| Post Number: 27
|
Land Rover
Group: Members
Posts: 6529
Joined: Sep. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 19 2012, 10:33 am |
|
|
Wellif the constitution is a dead document perhaps we need to consider that it applies to the weapons of the day. Trade in those AR-15s for Muskets.
Anyhow - Scalia is a lunatic. He is incapable to judging what frozen means as he is the product of a different era. He's already applying a modern interpretation on it.
He's arrogant to think he's capable of placing himself back in time - but then his arrogance is not in question is it. His sanity perhaps given his words in recent weeks and months.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 28
|
|
|
| Post Number: 29
|
Land Rover
Group: Members
Posts: 6529
Joined: Sep. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 19 2012, 11:01 am |
|
|
You're funny MC. You make the same pathetic tired arguments about why there are more dangerous things than guns. You get the idiocy of those arguments thrown back at you, and all you've got is that they are condescending?
I think she means right next to Militia btw.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 30
|
Land Rover
Group: Members
Posts: 6529
Joined: Sep. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Dec. 19 2012, 11:02 am |
|
|
It's almost as funny as watching you trying to point out the hypocrisy in official defense spending - all the while projecting the mirror image yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Survival Skills 101 • Eat Better
