I spent a little bit of time reviewing the official platforms of the GOP candidates today. Not too thrilled with what I found, being that they're mostly all liars. As you choose whatever it is you'll be voting for, please help me to educate America, one citizen at a time that
THE SECOND AMENDMENT ISN'T ABOUT HUNTING OR HOME DEFENSE OR TARGET SHOOTING.
To me the 2nd Amendment is proof that the right to bear arms pre-dates the Constitution. Does not the fact that it says the government cannot infringe on the right imply that it already existed?
The Bill of rights does not give us anything. It only reminds the Government that they cannot take away the rights we have not given up voluntarily to them in the Constitution.
This view conflicts with what is thought now days.
They take something that is perfectly clear to most people and they chop/cut/misunderstand/misinterpret/distort/lie/embellish/leave out/twist/ and rape the English language into something that no one can recognize as to what the original intent was.
I recently found a very good definition of HotGun's thoughts on politic-speak and politicital-correctness.........
POLITICALLY CORRECT (adjective or verb) – The skillful art of substituting words of a factual statement with other words similar in general meaning, but different enough in specific meaning, to produce a creative new word combination which is designed to completely warp the factual concept of the original statement to the point that many of lesser intelligence will not only be convinced that it is possible to pick up a turd by the clean end, but to also purvey the turd itself as being a valuable asset.
About the only way anyone can figure a politician's position on anything is to look at their past track record (if one can be found) on any subject because they are all going to dance around any hot topic during election periods to keep from turning away potential suckers...... errr, voters.
Ron Paul is as close to legitimate as there is in the field. I truly believe his libertarian views are genuine...just wish the "machine" would allow him to be the contender he actually is.
I would argue that the 2A is about all of the above, and a couple more. The best way to become familiar with arms is to target shoot or hunt with them. And the main point of the 2A is to have a public that is versed in the use of firearms. And the founders, and several state constitutions, specifically mention self or home defense. The protection from tyranny part generally gets some folks worked up though, even though it's arguably the main reason for the 2A.
So here is a question for you. Why would you want to alienate folks that are only interested in hunting, target shooting, or self defense? And before you get too worked up, telling someone they are wrong is a good way to alienate them. In my world, I want those folks on my side too.
The second amendment for at least the last generation or so has continually been presented as the backdrop for hunters rights and keeping a gun to defend your castle. I believe in all shooting sports, hunting and personal defense. But along with these endeavors, we shouldn't lose sight of the reset mechanism the second amendment was intended to be. Tyrannical government and all that.
I too believe that the 2nd-A was intended to ensure that a reset switch to the system be in the hands of the people. Given the context of what the document authors had lived through, I believe this to be intuitive. Until roughly, post WW2 and the cultural + societal changes, guns were a common tool and way of life. This has been largely lost in current urban society with the result being what we see today.
So here is a question for you. Why would you want to alienate folks that are only interested in hunting, target shooting, or self defense? And before you get too worked up, telling someone they are wrong is a good way to alienate them. In my world, I want those folks on my side too.[/QUOTE]
I'm nor alienating anyone. I hunt, target shoot and have friends active in sporting clays, practical shooting, etc... I only meant that these are not the preeminent reasons the founders stated our right to keep and bear arms. When elections come around, the "conservative" candidates used to don their new duck hunting bibs and blaze caps for the pictures about how they support the "sportsmen" they wanted to court. The second amendment doesn't mention duck hunting and the right to keep guns for sporting purposes. That's all I was trying to convey.
I'm nor alienating anyone. I hunt, target shoot and have friends active in sporting clays, practical shooting, etc... I only meant that these are not the preeminent reasons the founders stated our right to keep and bear arms. When elections come around, the "conservative" candidates used to don their new duck hunting bibs and blaze caps for the pictures about how they support the "sportsmen" they wanted to court. The second amendment doesn't mention duck hunting and the right to keep guns for sporting purposes. That's all I was trying to convey.
While I'm not a big fan of the politicos that pander to a crowd and act like they are part of it; we, as gun owners, still need the duck hunters. Maybe saying the 2A is about MORE than hunting, target shooting, and self defense is the better way to go. Telling folks that it's not about their favorite pastime might not fire them up for helping support the 2A cause. Kind of like the "hunters" mouthing off about the "black rifle" crowd. We do a disservice to the cause if we divide it up so precisely that we leave out large groups of gun owners.
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." -- Jefferson's "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764
-- Thomas Jefferson
“The great body of our citizens shoot less as times goes on. We should encourage rifle practice among schoolboys, and indeed among all classes, as well as in the military services by every means in our power. Thus, and not otherwise, may we be able to assist in preserving peace in the world. The first step – in the direction of preparation to avert war if possible, and to be fit for war if it should come – is to teach men to shoot!” Theodore Roosevelt
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." -- Alexander Hamilton
A pretty open ended statement.
While we can't afford to fall for the "2A is about hunting", we can neither afford to strictly reduce it to only opposing a tyrannical government. It's gonna take all of us.
When discussing the original intent of the 2A, I dont think we can bring hunter rights or target shooting or any of that into the mix as those were not issues at the time of the founding fathers. It had to do with 1 thing and 1 thing only...allowing people the means to protect themselves from tyranny. Today there are other fringe benefits such as hunting rights and things of that nature...but at its core the 2A is the recognition of the right to self defense from everything....including government.
How is Ron Paul a liar? Ron Paul lost all credibility with me, when he stated he would be willing to appoint congressman Dennis J. Kucinich Ohio 10th district, to a cabinet level position in a Ron Paul administration. Can someone show me how Dennis J. Kucinich is a defender of the second amendment? Can you find evidence in the congressional voting record, showing were Kusinich has voted for gun rights? You may think Ron Paul is not a liar, but is he credible? More important is he quilified for the office of the President? Ron Paul and Dennis Kusinich where among only 6 congressman who voted against H.R. 5552 later becoming H.R. 510 signed into law of all people President Obama, which allowed manufactorers of ammunition to pay the sales taxes on their sales, every three months (like every other business) as opposed to every 15 days. The NRA-IL lobbied for this law. Amoung others opposing this measure were Maxine Waters, D-CA John Conyers,D-MI. Can you get any further left than these folks?
I am not familiar with the law mentioned but is this the only thing that it deals with? Most legislation has added on crap that has nothing to do with the original purpose. Sometimes a person will disagree with that small part and so must vote against the whole thing. I am not a Ron Paul supporter as I think his foreign policy ideas go too far towards protectionism. We are involved around the world as the only military superpower and the rest of the world needs our economy, even if it is not currently performing. You cannot un-ring those bells by pulling out of everywhere and closing off trade with people you don't like. If your only criteria is that he is willing to appoint people to cabinet positions that don't have your view of the 2A you will not be able to vote for anyone ever again. Ron Paul is planning to close many Govt agencies but maybe he thinks Kucinich would be a good person to run Health and Human Services, Transportation, or some other similar department. How does his opinion on 2A matter in HHS or DOE. As far as I am concerned moving him out of congress takes away his vote and may help us in our cause.
The law passed on a vote of 412-6 and the law only dealt with that item, Nothing else. In addition Congressman Paul also voted against the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act that shields firearms manufacturers and firearms dealers from frivolous, politically-motivated lawsuits. So the only two recent bills aiding the firearms industry were opposed by Congressman Paul; a man hailed by many as a “true pro-gun Congressman.”
These laws protected, in your own words "The firearms dealers", "firearms manufacturers" The owners of these buisness and corporations should not be granted any special privilages not allowed to you or I, should they? Are you suggesting for some reason that any manufacturer or buisness even outside the firearm industry should have more personal freedoms than me? Congressman Paul is a libertarian with verry conservitive views, He fights for YOUR freedoms, not the lobyists, buisness, corporations, ect.. Why would Paul vote for the lawful commerce in arms act? He is a libertarian fighting for YOUR constitutional rites. He is not into protecting the relationships between Govt. and corporations (Firearm manufacturers and firearm dealers are buisness and corporations and should not get any special umbrella coverage that is not afforded to any private citizen). Its nothing personal, he wouldnt limit our rites to support any buisness or corporation outside of the firearm industry either. He dosnt like kickback, lobyist driven, corrupt laws that limit our personal freedom, or allow special interests to get there foot in the door. Believe it or not some laws that contain the word "firearm" are bad laws. Ron Paul voted no because it limited YOUR personal freedom and the law was unconstitutional. Ron Paul is for constitutional carry.... Any questions??? You can go after Ron Paul on a lot of things, but not on gun rites, or the constitution for that matter, Ron Paul strictly interprets the constitution and makes his decisions acordingly to protect and regain our personal freedoms the best one man can. Feel free to atack the guy on some of his loopty-loop, alice in wonderland ideas, or possibly on forigne policy, but when it comes to his voting record in acordance with the constitution and protecting your freedom, sorry, you are going to get owned.
The law did not deal specifically with ammunition for starters. Here is the bill text - "H.R.510 - To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require that the payment of the manufacturers' excise tax on recreational equipment be paid quarterly.". Ron Paul probably also opposed the original tax code requiring those businesses to pay every 15 days. The man hates taxes. This bill was also not aimed at helping the firearms industry....it was aimed at manufacturers of recreational equipment.
You say the 2nd Ammendment isn't about hunting, home defense, or target shooting. I would like to politely disagree, to me it is about that and great deal more. It is just perspective. To me it is about freedom from fear of violent crimes in the home and on the street. It is about putting meat on the table (for those super educated hambuger does not come from the supemarket it comes from a cow and is sold in the supermarket). It is about having fun putting holes in a piece of paper, popping ballons, bouncing tin cans, busting clay pegions. It is about all this and more. It is about tradition, freedom, safety, fun and appreciation of sometimes beautiful pieces of art made from steel, wood, ivory, and other materials just to name a few. Stay safe.
To me its not just about the second amendment, but it is all the amendments and freedoms we are afforded in the constitution.
Government is suppose to fear the people, but I am seeing that being turned the other way around. The people are now fearing our government with all the powers they are affording themselves. I talk about the patriot act, illegal wire tapping, water boarding, indefinite detentions (now for American citizens too), etc etc etc. Now just recently, most Americans have lost all of our financial power. Our homes are being foreclosed on because of predatory lending, all of our jobs are being shipped abroad for mere corporate profit, and this country's major export is refined fuel.
Now to add insult to injury, corporations are now people and money is speech?
But what really gets my hide is the "sheep" that follow in lock step with this stupid ideology that somehow if we keep feeding the greedy and destroying our environment where our own children are getting sick, homeless, and starving....that somehow it will "trickle down" (like crumbs from the dinner table) for all the rest of us!!!
When you feed a plant, you don't just sprinkle water on the leaves. You water the ROOTS!!!!
To say that I don't like Ron Paul and believe he is neither qualified not intelligent enough to be President of the USA is a monumental understatement. Are you upset that Obama wants to cut the military as drastically as is currently being reported? That is nothing compared to what Ron Paul has said he wants to do to it.
Ron Paul also doesn't agree that Israel should exist. Our best ally and the bastion of real democracy in the Middle East and he doesn't think it is anything we need to show support for.
I'm not a big fan of any of the current GOP candidates but Ron Paul is way down on the list of those running.
To say that I don't like Ron Paul and believe he is neither qualified not intelligent enough to be President of the USA is a monumental understatement. Are you upset that Obama wants to cut the military as drastically as is currently being reported? That is nothing compared to what Ron Paul has said he wants to do to it.
Ron Paul also doesn't agree that Israel should exist. Our best ally and the bastion of real democracy in the Middle East and he doesn't think it is anything we need to show support for.
I'm not a big fan of any of the current GOP candidates but Ron Paul is way down on the list of those running.
All I keep hearing is "anyone is better than Obama" and then I look at the republican field and say "really?"
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Defensive Carry
5.4M posts
117.5K members
Since 2004
A forum community dedicated to defensive firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about everyday carry, optics, holsters, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!