Do you support the second amendment?

  • Thread starter Thread starter thephilosopher6
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
MonteRCMS said:
I keep thinking about the massacre at Waco.
Click to expand...
And I think about the internment of Americans of Japanese origin. If government can intern large numbers of Americans without cause or due process, how far is it from there to violence against them.
I think about the violence in the Democrat-ruled south against American blacks under Jim Crow and other segregation laws.

At least the argument from the gun ban proponents has changed, though. I used to hear the argument that government would never oppress the citizens in the United States, so you don’t really need guns. Now they just say that fighting against tyranny if/when it happens is really just a fantasy, so you might as well give up your guns.
 
JonNC said:
Why would it worry you?
Click to expand...
The rhetoric has been heated. A lot has been said about the reason for the right to bear arms being grounded in the need for violent revolution. It is the one argument that won’t go away. The only reason we have not seen more small violent rebellions is that terrorism has replaced the model of uprising.

It is no stretch to suggest the right to bear arms is needed so we can conduct acts of violent terrorism when the government is deemed oppressive or evil.
 
Last edited:
="pnewton, post:817, topic:452415, full:

The rhetoric has been heated. **
** It is the one argument that won’t go away. The only reason we have not seen more small violent rebellions is that terrorism has replaced the model of uprising.
Click to expand...
That’s not the reason given! The reason given is the security of a FREE state. It is, effectively, to prevent revolution, either violent or nonviolent.
It is no stretch to suggest the right to bear arms is needed so we can conduct acts of violent terrorism when the government is deemed oppressive or evil.
Click to expand...
Okay, now we are speaking of fantasy. American citizens have exercised the inherent right to arms since the existence of the republic, and nothing of the sort has taken place.
 
It is no stretch to suggest the right to bear arms is needed so we can conduct acts of violent terrorism when the government is deemed oppressive or evil.
Click to expand...
In the history of the United States, as brilliant as our founding documents are, the vast majority of violence has been by government toward citizens. In addition to the aforementioned Waco and Internment of Americans of Japanese origin, the Trail of Tears, Wounded Knee, Jim Crow laws, and numerous other instances. One might even include the unjustified police shootings over the last few years, such as the one in South Carolina.

And as far as the rhetoric, the overwhelming threats of violence are from extremist groups like Antifa, BLM, neo-Nazis and the like, not from law abiding loyal American gun owners. And we would all do well to oppose these groups
 
Last edited:
Hi, Jon!

Jon, the straw man has been proven by the last century’s acts of states/governments annihilating around 250 million of its own citizens.

The militia dream was possible back when the military mechanism at the disposal of those bent on destroying their own citizens was limited to numbers, not the articulation of their weaponry.

Ever watch those martial arts movies where hundreds surround the hero/s with equal or compatible skills and weapons but they simply take turns facing him/them two or three at a time? That’s when the militia worked.

Look at N. Korea–it would take but a sniper shot to topple the monarch/dictator; yet, if the people were to attempt to arm themselves against the military they would succeed in committing seppuku.

Do you and your militia want to defeat the US military machinery?

It’s simple!

Become actively involved in your local, regional, and national government; get involved in the political arena; get involved in civic groups that can be both watchdogs (gov. military) and leaders of their respective communities.

…and, as it was implied on a previous reply, get involved with Yahweh God!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Last edited:
Hi!

Yeah, that’s that hollowood’s romanticism… it’s been proven allover the world that when an empire is toppled the ensuing atmosphere is not one of kum ba yah; rather, it’s the survival of the wretched and the gruesome as self-proclaimed kings/lords mobilize to eradicate their opposition, these would include children and the elderly (hey, was that not Hillary’s promise during her presidential campaign?).

That hollowood dream persists only in the mind of those who believe that evil can be conquered by force of will–well, dosed with a ton of ‘hope that it goes our way’ and ‘just at the right moment and at the right place (goldilocks’ syndrome), karma.’

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Last edited:
“So, can you point to something in the constitution that is specifically anti-Catholic?”

I never claimed there was. Thanks anyway for the straw man though.

“But I think you actually put your finger on the “render unto Caesar” verse.”

Nope. That has nothing to do with any critique of either Enlightenment philosophy, the Founders thinking, or the deification of the Founders and the Constitution by many Americans.

You need to look into what the Enlightenment was and how it was incredibly anti-Catholic and anti-Scholastic. This sort of philosophy influenced the Founders almost exclusively.

The American system of government may not be actively anti-Religion like the Communists, but it’s certainly passively anti-Catholic insofar as it is inherently secular and has fostered the compete breakdown of society. We see this in the legal basis for abhorrent human behavior like homosexuality, transgenderism, assisted suicide, abortion. In it’s attempt to safeguard religious freedom, it has denied the existence of any religious truth or mortality. It vaguely acknowledges human rights as endowed by a deity, yet fails to elaborate on those rights (save for another vague statement about life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness).

Whatever good the Constitution has been, and I believe it has been fairly effective in some respects, it’s clearly the result of a philosophy which has abandoned Scholastic teleology for sentamentalism deprived of moral truths.

-Owen Riley
 
Last edited:
omgriley, post:804, topic:452415"]
I never claimed there was. Thanks anyway for the straw man though.

It wasn’t a straw man. Here’s what you said:
Sometimes people forget that the philosophy of the Founders was based on Enlightenment-era thinking, which was both unenlightened and anti-Catholic.
Click to expand...
If youre going to put the "anti-Catholic " thing out there in the same breath as the founders, then you ought to expect the next question, which I asked, and you chose not to answer. Its simple, did their enlightenment manifest itself in the constitution as anti-Catholicism? If it did, where? If it didn’t, just say it didn’t. No straw man there.
 
No.

They use brute force to raze those who oppose them.

This is why the militia is a dream.

In a world where the military can raze a whole sector of the geographical population (people, infrastructure, plants, natural resources), it is a fallacy to think that “goodwill” and “guns in their hands/homes” will be organized into an effective counter paramilitary body.

As, I offered above, the only “prayer” that you and the militia have is to join the confederacy (a little nudge or wink, wink) in sustaining a government of the people and for the people… stockpiling weapons for the romanticized ‘the militia takes back the land and holds the constitution supreme’ will be a blood-bath nightmare.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
JonNC said:
That’s not the reason given! The reason given is the security of a FREE state. It is, effectively, to prevent revolution, either violent or nonviolent.
Click to expand...
The country was founded by an act of revolution, as in, The American Revolution. From the point of view of the British, right to bear arms was not a good thing. The rest of your point seems self-contradictory to me. It is almost like this right to oppose the government and the oppression of government depends on one’s political beliefs.
 
jcrichton, post:820, topic:452415, full:true"]
The militia dream was possible back when the military mechanism at the disposal of those bent on destroying their own citizens was limited to numbers, not the articulation of their weaponry.
Click to expand...
Okay. Tell that to the French resistance. It isn’t a matter of whether you think it is possible or not. If you don’t think it’s possible, you don’t want to own a gun, don’t. I couldn’t care less. But it isn’t an argument that will sway Americans from owning firearms.
Do you and your militia want to defeat the US military machinery?
Click to expand...
It isn’t the military machine anyone should worry about. It is political philosophies that place the state ahead of the individual. I don’t think the vast majority of American military personnel would turn their weapons inward.
Become actively involved in your local, regional, and national government; get involved in the political arena; get involved in civic groups that can be both watchdogs (gov. military) and leaders of their respective communities.
Click to expand...
Of course. That’s how the republic works. It is idiotic to think that the millions of Americans who own firearms are planning on a revolution. The whole idea is to keep the politicians honest so it’s not necessary.
Talk about a straw man…
Again, your hyperbole doesn’t help your argument
…and, as it was implied on a previous reply, get involved with Yahweh God!
Click to expand...
Amen
 
pnewton said:
The country was founded by an act of revolution, as in, The American Revolution. From the point of view of the British, right to bear arms was not a good thing. The rest of your point seems self-contradictory to me. It is almost like this right to oppose the government and the oppression of government depends on one’s political beliefs.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you forgot about the fact that the colonists were British citizens who were being denied the right as such.
The constitution was written, in part, in response to that attempt to restrict the rights of citizens.
 
Jon, the French revolution, is that even near the last century?

Please, understand. The military is not going to be swayed by the millions of weapons on the hands of the millions of Americans; however, just hundreds of Americans working in the bureaucracy that is our government can continue to uphold the premise of the constitution and provide Americans with rights and liberties.

You want to own a gun, fine; the constitution grants you that–just don’t say that it is your gun that is keeping the constitution alive.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
jcrichton said:
Please, understand. The military is not going to be swayed by the millions of weapons on the hands of the millions of Americans; however, just hundreds of Americans working in the bureaucracy that is our government can continue to uphold the premise of the constitution and provide Americans with rights and liberties.
Click to expand...
Why do you keep coming up with comments unrelated to the conversation? Where did I say they would be swayed by the militia? And again, why you think that your opinion of the plausibility of a citizen militia matters?
The SCOTUS affirms the militia is one of the reasons for the second amendment. It also affirms other reasons, including self defense. It further affirms that the right is antecedent to government and that it is an individual right.
So, even if you think the militia implausible, even if you believe people do or don’t need multiple firearms, the right to them is affirmed.
 
Last edited:
I thought we were talking about domestic resistance… and didn’t they come up of an anti-colonization agreement/pact?

Maran atha!

Angel
 
I concur, there’s a 2nd amendment.

I do not agree that using the 2nd is a real argument for the stockpiling and owning of progressively more and more destructive weapons nor allowing their availability where guns keep being manufactured and finding their way into oblivion–till crimes are committed and they are traced to distributors and manufacturers that play the 🙈🙉🙊 game.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top