Every time a gun control argument comes up, the discussion invariably comes down to the people’s supposed right to defend themselves vs. the safety of society as a whole. Reflecting on this issue recently, it occurred to me that personal safety vs. collective safety actually is actually a secondary consideration at best. The real value of the second amendment is not that it allows individuals to protect themselves against would-be criminals, but rather that it allows the citizenship to protect itself against the government.
When the founding fathers wrote the constitution, they were in the middle of a conflict with a tyrannical British government and they were keenly aware that the only way to avoid getting pwned by such a government is for the people to own guns. If not for the second amendment we would all be eating crumpets right now. Guns rights are the most fundamental component of a free society and are more important now than ever so that we can overthrow the Federal government when the masses finally wake up and realize how out of control things are. Amirite?
[quote]belligerent wrote:
Every time a gun control argument comes up, the discussion invariably comes down to the people’s supposed right to defend themselves vs. the safety of society as a whole. Reflecting on this issue recently, it occurred to me that personal safety vs. collective safety actually is actually a secondary consideration at best. The real value of the second amendment is not that it allows individuals to protect themselves against would-be criminals, but rather that it allows the citizenship to protect itself against the government.
When the founding fathers wrote the constitution, they were in the middle of a conflict with a tyrannical British government and they were keenly aware that the only way to avoid getting pwned by such a government is for the people to own guns. If not for the second amendment we would all be eating crumpets right now. Guns rights are the most fundamental component of a free society and are more important now than ever so that we can overthrow the Federal government when the masses finally wake up and realize how out of control things are. Amirite?[/quote]
That is why I say " you can have my tank when you pry my dead cols fingers off it’s controllers "
[quote]belligerent wrote:
Reflecting on this issue recently, it occurred to me that personal safety vs. collective safety actually is actually a secondary consideration at best. The real value of the second amendment is not that it allows individuals to protect themselves against would-be criminals, but rather that it allows the citizenship to protect itself against the government.[/quote]
You’re halfway there. It’s important to remember that there was much mistrust of the idea of a democracy maintaining a standing army but the Framers were well aware that the borders of their new nation would need to be defended on a moment’s notice.
The Second Amendment dovetails nicely with the original concept of the United States: both responsibility and liberty should accrue primarily to the individual. Sadly in shirking the former we’ve largely lost the latter.
People who have no weapons can safely be ignored by governing powers.
History shows that only when individuals attain weapons can they force governments to share power. That’s one reason the Nazis confiscated all guns. That’s why women never got to vote until handguns became cheap and available.
The handgun is the most liberating device ever invented. Having your own weapons means you can’t be ignored.
The handgun is the most liberating device ever invented. Having your own weapons means you can’t be ignored.
And that’s why we have the 2nd Amendment.[/quote]
Don’t forget that it also turns you into a psychopathic killer. And a redneck.
As far as I’m concerned, the Second Amendment exists for the purpose of ensuring that the Right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be Infringed. I’m fine with that. I’ve heard a lot of anti’s arguing that people can’t be trusted with firearms, but I think that’s a stance that’s taken too many times out of fear and lack of understanding. As in “I don’t know how to use guns, and they scare me, so nobody else should be allowed to use them either.”
Yes, that’s a caricature, but if you sat down with someone who wants guns banned and started asking them, you’d find out that they are basically afraid of people with guns, and are probably afraid of the thought of defending themselves as well.
“That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer’s cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.” - Eric Blair, aka George Orwell
And if you need a team to support in the NCAAs, how about George Mason? - “I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people … To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
I actually think the antis have a bad case of projection. About a month ago I went to a discussion on carrying on campus. Those students against it were much ruder than those for it. At the very end I was talking to my friend who was a panelist on the “for” side and a girl came over to him and started to bitch him out telling him that he needed to, “clean the wax out of his ears so he might learn something.” My wife interjected and this lady turned into a psycho bitch. She was on the verge of punching someone when her boyfriend had to actually pick her up and take her away.
I think people like this recognize that they are out of control and might shoot someone when they are angry…thus all people are this way.
The handgun is the most liberating device ever invented. Having your own weapons means you can’t be ignored.
And that’s why we have the 2nd Amendment.
Yes, that’s a caricature, but if you sat down with someone who wants guns banned and started asking them, you’d find out that they are basically afraid of people with guns, and are probably afraid of the thought of defending themselves as well.[/quote]
They are rodents who run at the sound of a raised voice. They probably read Rodent-Nation.
[quote]Shaved wrote:
“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.”
The right to bear arms is designed for a “well regulated militia,” or so it says. One person is certainly not a well regulated militia.
[/quote]
Yes, and the last I looked I was one of the people. What do you think the militia is made up of? Robots?
[quote]Shaved wrote:
“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.”
The right to bear arms is designed for a “well regulated militia,” or so it says. One person is certainly not a well regulated militia.
[/quote]
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
I see nothing in the second amendment that says arms are only for militia, it says militia is necessary for security of a free state. It also says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Not only do we have a right to keep and bear arms, we also have the right to a well regulated militia.
America was not “in the middle of a conflict with a tyrannical British government” when the constitution was being written. Check your dates…
As Mikeyali pointed out, at the time every male citizen was considered part of the state militia and they were expected to be ready to serve when needed. That includes bringing their own firearm.
Read what the Founders and what the proceeding generation wrote on the subject. I have no idea why everyone argues over the placement of a comma when those who were in a position to know what the original intent was have weighed in on the subject in other writings. They are unequivocal in their support of the idea of personal gun ownership.
I for one, feel a hell of a lot safer knowing that there are law abiding citizens out there that are carrying. Now if we can only have legal citizens carrying on campus, we wouldn’t be having all of these college shootings.
Mikeyali - the SCCC Students for concealed carry on campus which I believe is the organization you were talking about is having a national protest april 21- 25 where all participants carry around their empty holsters in regards to the no concealed carry guns on campus laws/policies.