This is a discussion on Do Away With Guns within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by Janq "The rationale for citizen gun-ownership lies in the right to overthrow one's government." - David P. Baugh Wrong!!!1 The rationale is ...
as to the writer of the article
WOW! Dumber than Advertised!
ok ok sue me. was watching animanacts with the kids last night but it's the 1st thing that came to mind.
“The will to survive is not as important as the will to prevail... the answer to criminal aggression is retaliation.” Jeff Cooper
This guy said:
"The safety of our citizens is far more important than their selfish claim that their Second Amendment rights would be violated." Well me might as well give up all of are amendment rights then.
Well maybe we should start taking his rights away and watch him scream his head off. Like the people who do use a weapon for crime is going to turn thier weapon in to the police.
Some Anti's will never understand the facts, Michael J. Doust is a prime example of someone who dosn't get how the world works.
I believe in gun control...... Thats why I use TWO hands.
With much respect Ron, I disagree...emphatically.
Defense of life and more importantly life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness was primary, and still is. This was stated in the Declaration of Independence predating the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights addresses and attempts to prevent in the future the injustices committed against 'we the people' as very clearly itemized by Hancock in the DoI. In fact the BoR even goes so far as to borrow same words and phrases from the DoI in it's writing toward disallowed actions broadly and in specific.
Further the U.S. Constitution in it's preamble states;
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Note the above is about and oriented toward us, people, representing the individual and we the people on the whole.
The Framers established government as proposed and did exist (no comment toward how it exists today...thats a whole other thread subject) to support the ideas and ideals posited in that opening statement of purpose and establishment. It just doesn't get any simpler and more clear than that which had been stated.
The Second Amendment itself 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."
There is no statement about government muchless tyrannical government nor overthrowing of government.
The statement is about the security of a free State and the right of the people to keep and bear what shall not be infringed. The militia being persons or people of a mindset toward defense of their State. State being not an actual state like say Maryland, Pennsylvania, or Massachusetts but that of our nation overall including the lands there in under ownership of the individual and the collective overall. Examples of such include our embassies which reside in and amongst foreign lands. Those buildings, properties, and the land they sit on are owned by and protected by we the people as per management by our government, of the United States of America and Americans.
The Second Amendment does not give us right to overthrow government. It does not empower us to retain arms toward as much nor to defend ourselves subsequent to such actions. It's not even about government at all nor tyrannical government either.
The primary focus and goal of the founding fathers and their intent toward the Declaration of Independence, the subsequent establishment of the U.S. Constitution, and later the Bill of Rights with it's multiple constitutional amendments was to overall and in specific support that first sentence, the preamble, of the Constitution; "...in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this...".
The entirety of the Bill of Rights with all of it's amendments and not just the second supports and enables the preamble as a and the basic premise.
All of the rest be it denial and protection against a tyrannical and thus criminal groups and government, or tyrannical and thus criminal singular individuals and persons are just one of multiple possible situations and scenarios that may and might apply and be applicable secondarily and within the basis of the primary which was then and still is today most importantly to all Americans and man kind at large the defense of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
If only people, and persons, and groups, and 'States', and governments of past and present knew, understood, or had such capability.
People such as the two I detailed in my prior post would not have suffered as they have and not be the victims that they are...and will continue to be.
One of the key words in that is "Liberty" or freedom from oppression. Let's look at what some of the Founding Fathers stated.
"What country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?" Thomas Jefferson
"The militia, sir, is our ultimate safety. We can have no security without it....The great object is, that every man be armed. Congress, by the power of taxation, by that of raising an army, and by their control over the militia, have th sword in one hand, and the purse in the other. Shall we be safe without either?" Patrick Henry
"Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the state governments with the people on their side would be able to repel the danger." James Madison
There is more but I think you get the point. By the way, thanks for the great discussion.
The writer is off the wall, and has no sense of realty.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch; Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
-- Benjamin Franklin
My response ......
Mr. Doust –
I’ll make you a deal……you go out and collect the guns, knives, and other weapons from all the criminals, thugs, gang-bangers, rapists, robbers, car-jackers, terrorists, dope-dealers, serial killers & psychos. After doing so, all of us law abiding, honest, hard working, citizens will turn over our guns to you for destruction.
You obviously live in a fantasy world. The world is not flat; Santa Claus is not real; and the moon is not made out of green cheese.
"The story you are about to hear is true; the names have been changed to protect the innocent."
Let's get this perfectly straight...
Guns were NOT designed to kill, they were designed to defend.
Electric chairs, gas chambers, and gallows WERE designed to kill...
Stay armed...stay safe!
The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.
Certified Glock Armorer
NRA Life Member[/B]
The delegates attending the Continental Congress based their defense of liberty as a natural right granted to all men on the ideas of John Locke. Locke believed that such rights were natural, reasonable rights. In a "state of nature," all men seek to protect their life, liberty, and property. But as the strong can use their power to deprive the weak of liberty, governments are instituted to protect the rights of all. But, if the government becomes too powerful and does not protect these rights, then the people have the obligation to remove that government (revolt) and replace it with a government that does respect and protect the rights of all.
Thats a summary of why the 2a exsists. And why it says militia and individual. Its a check to keep federal govt. from evolving into a stalinist state.
I really wish they did a better job in teaching history in school. If they did then such uneducated drivel as Micheal Doust spouts would be recognized for what it is, a load of horsepucky as my father would put it.
Current collection: Too many according to the wife...
I am sorry but there is simply no way you can just make all the guns go away. There are far too many guns, even in countries where there is an outright ban on them, there are still guns. Our military and other military forces around the world use guns, and I can bet some of those guns make it onto the black market.
USMC rule # 23 of gunfighting: Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet.
I am the God fearing, gun toting, flag waving conservative you were warned about!
I'm not a "gun advocate." But I do value my life and the lives of my loved ones, and I value the right to defend it far more highly than anything, including anyone's thought to take it from me.The safety of our citizens is far more important than their selfish claim that their Second Amendment rights would be violated.
This ninny is right one one sense: the safety of myself and my loved ones is far more important than anyone's selfish claims. Damn right it is. That is exactly why I carry.
Value of life is why the right to defense and the right to carry is upheld in the U.S. Not everywhere is life valued highly enough that people are acknowledged the right to defend it. That core value should be cherished, not blindly maligned as if it were a sickness, merely out of fear of the weaponry or simply because it tends to be a murderer's chosen means of attacking citizens.
As mentioned, handguns are low-power weapons, designed for up close and personal encounters. They are, quite frankly, the only practicable defensive tool that can counter another firearm, which tends to be a murderer's choice of tools. The simple fact is that denial of this tool in the hands of upstanding citizens is to deny that life has value and to deny one's right to defend life.
Here was one of the responses:
FIREARMS REFRESHER COURSE
An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.
A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone.
Gun control is not about guns; it's about control.
If guns are outlawed, can we use swords?
If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words.
Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.
If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.
Those who trade liberty for security have neither.
The United States Constitution (c) 1791. All Rights Reserved.
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?
The Second Ammendment is in place in case the politicians ignore the others.
64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday.
Guns only have two enemies: Rust and Politicians.
Know guns, Know peace, Know safety. No guns, No peace, No safety.
You don't shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive.
9-1-1: Government sponsored Dial-A-Prayer.
Assault is a behavior, not a device.
Criminals love gun control; it makes their jobs safer.
If guns cause crime, then matches cause arson.
Only a government that is afraid of its citizens tries to control them.
You have only the rights you are willing to fight for.
Enforce the gun control laws we ALREADY have; don't make more.
THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION WOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED WITH GUN CONTROL
Preparing for the Zombie Apocalypse or Rapture....whichever comes first.
At its most basic, the Constitution assumes that government exists only by the consent of the governed. It was written by people who were very much aware of the general fear of a powerful central government, and its goal was to limit the authority of that central government.
While it is not explicitly written anywhere that we have the right to overthrow that government, I think it is a very clear assumption by the founders that the ability to react to tyranny (in this context, a government that fails to abdicate havign lost the consent of the people) needed to be protected. Most of the authors of the Constitution have remarks to this effect in their provate papers and diaries from the Convention. It was very much on their minds.
I think one can easily argue that the intention to "promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty" gives the people a right to reject tyranny, and I think the 2A was assumed to five the people the power to do so.
All that said, I still think this interpretation of the 2A is a mere contingency plan, and in practice is significantly less important than the right to protect life and property. In essence, the people being armed is a subtle deterrent against government tyranny in the same way that the presence of CCW holders in public places is a subtle deterrent to armed loonies when choosing their place to go out in a blaze of glory.
“What is a moderate interpretation of [the Constitution]? Halfway between what it says and [...] what you want it to say?” —Justice Antonin Scalia
SIG: P220R SS Elite SAO, P220R SAO, P220R Carry, P226R Navy, P226, P239/.40S&W, P2022/.40S&W; GSR 5", P6.
All of those quotes are statements of what is obviously toward discussion of oppression of government.
There are probably hundreds of such quotes by those persons and other founders, as related specifically to government.
Again though the second amendment does not state nor infer that it and the right to bear arms is specific to the over throw of government.
Further the definition of liberty is the following;
The definition of liberty has been the same for centuries and prior to the days of the founders and the writing of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. And the founders knew this. They knew what liberty means and it's definition, and with that that knowledge it was detailed as defined above in all three documents.
lib·er·ty Listen to the pronunciation of liberty
Middle English, from Anglo-French liberté, from Latin libertat-, libertas, from liber free — more at liberal
Date: 14th century
1: the quality or state of being free: a: the power to do as one pleases b: freedom from physical restraint c: freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d: the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges e: the power of choice
2 a: a right or immunity enjoyed by prescription or by grant : privilege b: permission especially to go freely within specified limits3: an action going beyond normal limits: as a: a breach of etiquette or propriety : familiarity b: risk, chance <took foolish liberties with his health> c: a violation of rules or a deviation from standard practice d: a distortion of fact 4: a short authorized absence from naval duty usually for less than 48 hours
Source - liberty - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
Liberty from oppression is again inclusive and just one amongst many secondary effects of having liberty, being liberated, and thus as per definition of the word having "the quality or state of being free".
You and I and others of America do not support the second amendment for reason of liberty from oppressive government.
You and I and We The People of America support the second amendment, and the Bill of Rights in total, and the Constitution as per once more the story as told clearly and succinctly in the Preamble to; "...establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity...".
The 2A is toward the support of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for us all. To which freedom from oppressive government is not a key item but just one amongst many inclusive conditions that result from the lack of freedom and with that recognition of the human right to bear Arms to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty.