78Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
The tree shakers are working those nut tree hard.
This is a discussion on The Second Amendment was Ratified to Preserve Slavery within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; The tree shakers are working those nut tree hard....
The tree shakers are working those nut tree hard.
Retired USAF E-8. Avatar is OldVet from days long gone - 1978. Oh, to be young again...
Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield
Array
No. I disagree. Your born with them. We recognized that. And we then agreed to restate them again in our Constitution. We didn't create them there. Just because some other country or some other government doesn't agree or recognize it or takes them from you, doesn't erase them. Just because someone infringes upon them or denies them doesn't cause them to vanish. They exist. And they then should be fought for.Originally Posted by TX expat
I agree they should be fought for.
NRA Life Member
"I don't believe gun owners have rights." - Sarah Brady
Array
At least we agree on whats important! :)
Array
Cphilip, in the original post, the OP did not have paragraph quoted. Reading that paragraph as his own words, it appeared he was in fact endorsing the article.
On advice, he has since corrected this.
Mrreynolds, I hope you can see how that would be misrepresented. Sorry!
Array
Danny Glover wrote it ... yes Danny Glover I am not kidding.
"I believe that the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms must not be infringed if liberty in America is to survive." - Ronald Reagan
Array
silly man. the second amendment protects hunting. not slavery.
Array
I got better things to do than read that piece of
literature.
What did you think I was going to say?
Regards,
1MoreGoodGuy
NRA Life Member
GOA Life Member
Behave Like Someone Who is Determined to be FREE!
Array
My signature below states the real purpose, IMHO, without guns our present administration can do as they so choose.
Well, Jefferson might be.I love that founding fathers statement as it always makes me say none of those mainstream men were my father or grandfather, etc that's just reality.
A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.
Array
I'm not here to enforce what I believe let people make their own choices based on whatever actual facts exist. I'll tell you what I know back at that time those who were en-slaved had no rights. Once they were technically no longer en-slaved they were not allowed to own arms or even dogs for self defense. I have not yet researched the background of the article but I know that those who did en-slave people had no desire to arm them at any point or time. The en-slaved were the people who were infringed but history won't tell the story that way. I believe the Constitution and Amendments would reflect the era in which they were created and could have been slanted at that time.
Array
I had to laugh at that because that's the damn truth lol.Well, Jefferson might be.
Slavery - as a whole, every aspect of it, and everything about it - was (and is) repugnant, and beyond question the darkest stain on human (not just American, though we certainly were a stellar example of the worst of it) history. I don't think anyone is debating that.
However, it was not the motivation for everything that happened in the entire country (or even the South) from ol' Chris Columbus to Appomattox Courthouse. It may often be right to apply the critical eye of slavery/racial relations to historical decisions, laws, and events. But there is simply too much history about the 2A that suggests it was NOT about slavery to give that article any credence whatsoever. It is a hit piece, based on the flimsiest of "evidence," and does a disservice to actual examples of prejudice, subjugation, and outright evil.
A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.
Array
Want to talk History, the Democratic Party controlled the South, they did not want general "gun ownership" by blacks, either free - blacks nor enslaved blacks.... they wanted to be able to keep control and be the only one's in possession of the guns. Plus they did not want blacks to turn on their Masters, freed blacks to serve some retribution, nor trusted free blacks from giving the others guns. However, in the North..... blacks not only could, but did own guns. There were NO laws against it at all.
Now .... jump ahead , which party still wants to "ban guns" ? And what Party is it who controls DC and Chicago, and bans guns ? Is not DC and Chicago predominately black in terms of population ... and who's keeping them "still" from owning guns ? The Democratic Party . What "party" predominantly controlled all Southern politics ... the Dem's. So, let's keep on track... the founders did consider black men ... "as men"..... and had the same rights as anyone else..... per se. However, the SOUTH did not want that .... and fought against blacks having the vote, owning guns, etc.... and was / is the ancestor of the Democratic Party. In order to get the Constitution there were some gives and takes, but ..... only to get the Constitution passed. The 14th Amendment was to end any further discrimination on voting rights, etc. of blacks.
However..... blacks always had "VOTING" rights..... only in the South (Dem's) tried to push literacy laws, etc. for people to be able to vote.
My ancestors .... along 6 family lines have lived in America since the 1680's....... in one family line, they maintained an underground railroad from over 100 years, so please.... .. they were there for 100 + years fighting for the things that ended up being in the Constitution (most of these ideas began being generated in mid-1600's in England) , and fought for 'no discrimination ' of any man. One of my Great -XXXXXXX grandfathers, was shot in the back while trying to stop British soldiers from raping his wife and daughter, and as a result..... word got to the fields, and all of the men armed.... and went to town and ended up killing all of the British Soldiers. It was one of the first battles in the Revolution..... when people had decided, "enough is enough".
When people try to make our founders look like all bigoted slave owners, they could not be further from the truth. One of them, was one of my ancestors, and several of them thru several generations served in the Continental Congress from 1702 up to and after when the Constitution was done. I have read their personal letters that are still around, writings, etc.
YOU Sir, are WRONG ... Blacks could 'own' guns..... hate to disappoint you, but there were blacks who also fought in and served in the Continental Army during the Revolution.
I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts. --- Will Rogers ---
Chief Justice John Roberts : "I don't see how you can read Heller and not take away from it the notion that the Second Amendment...was extremely important to the framers in their view of what liberty meant."
Array
I am not wrong I never said that no freed man ever owned a gun I said the freed men I referred to were not allowed. Just because some did does not over ride that in certain places some could not. Every Black man of the era was not allowed to own weapons that's a fact of history watch the documentary I posted.
Article Link
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
