A question about The Second Amendment

[Skwim]

It formed on emergency situations.

Yeah sure.

.

 

[Skwim]

RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS
The text of the Second Amendment reads in full: “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 framers of the Bill of Rights adapted the wording of the amendment from nearly identical clauses in some of the original 13 state constitutions.

During the Revolutionary War era, “militia” referred to groups of men who banded together to protect their communities, towns, colonies and eventually states, once the United States declared its independence from Great Britain in 1776.

Many people in America at the time believed governments used soldiers to oppress the people, and thought the federal government should only be allowed to raise armies (with full-time, paid soldiers) when facing foreign adversaries. For all other purposes, they believed, it should turn to part-time militias, or ordinary civilians using their own weapons.

STATE MILITIAS
But as militias had proved insufficient against the British, the Constitutional Convention gave the new federal government the power to establish a standing army, even in peacetime.

ADVERTISEMENT
However, opponents of a strong central government (known as Anti-Federalists) argued that this federal army deprived states of their ability to defend themselves against oppression. They feared that Congress might abuse its constitutional power of “organizing, arming and disciplining the Militia” by failing to keep militiamen equipped with adequate arms.

So, shortly after the U.S. Constitution was officially ratified, James Madison proposed the Second Amendment as a way to empower these state militias. While the Second Amendment did not answer the broader Anti-Federalist concern that the federal government had too much power, it did establish the principle (held by both Federalists and their opponents) that the government did not have the authority to disarm citizens.
https://www.history.com/topics/united-states-constitution/2nd-amendment

Looks like they felt it may be necessary for citizens of the states to band together to defend the sovereignty of the state against any oppressor up to and including the Federal government. They didn't want the Federal government to have the ability to disarm the citizenry.

Sorry, but your blue font is just to difficult to read.

.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You are just injecting a premise of what and why a collector collects. Completely subjective point. You are just asserting a motive from thin air.

No, because I have known gun collectors and people who collect guns like some people collect used magazines. People who "collect guns," for example, often do not have guns of historic significance. They are big into fire power and rate of fire, however. "Gun collectors," on the other hand, often have 19th century Colts and Remingtons as a piece of Western American history in their collection, along with "war guns" like guns used in the Civil war or WW1/2.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Do you dislike guns or do you just dislike the unlawful use of guns?

I dislike irresponsible and illegal usage of guns.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I find this very funny amongst lefties. They assume that it's the gun lovers that will have to face the military. Newsflash, it is the anti-gun folks that are revolting against the U.S. Military troops don't come from ivy school families. Soldiers come from mostly poor and rural areas. Do you think the troops would turn against their own families to defend rich upper class folks who are anti-gun? Meh always a very amusing assumption most lefties always take. Just more evidence how out of touch with reality most are.

I was just reading a few of the statistics and most recruits come from middle class neighborhoods from families that make between $40,000 and $80,000 per year. California, Texas, New York, Florida and Georgia are the states producing the most recruits. I would say that the two groups (soldiers and anti-gun) come from similar demographics, though I have no statistics on the anti-gun crowd and just anecdotal evidence.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I dislike irresponsible and illegal usage of guns.

That was my take on it, but it was mentioned that you did not like them by an unreliable source and I wanted to get the facts straight.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I dislike irresponsible and illegal usage of guns.

People seem much more quick to turn to a gun to resolve an argument these days. We used to get into fist fights as a youth. Now days you get into fist fight and some guy has a gun.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That was my take on it, but it was mentioned that you did not like them by an unreliable source and I wanted to get the facts straight.

Reactionary, knee-jerky Snowflake Rightist often think I don't like guns and support banning them just because I utter the phrase "gun control" and start talking about "needed regulations" and "safety." Almost essentially everyone I've talked has an overall pretty similar view to guns as I do, but a "test of Reactionary Rightness" is to see how they react and if they even give me a chance to explain my positions or not. If it happened in this thread I missed it or I would have addressed it..

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Reactionary, knee-jerky Snowflake Rightist often think I don't like guns and support banning them just because I utter the phrase "gun control" and start talking about "needed regulations" and "safety." Almost essentially everyone I've talked has an overall pretty similar view to guns as I do, but a "test of Reactionary Rightness" is to see how they react and if they even give me a chance to explain my positions or not. If it happened in this thread I missed it or I would have addressed it..

I saw one of those on here tonight. Very reactionary and needy.

Chad mentioned that you did not like guns. I had not gotten that impression. Since he seems a bit confused about a number of things, I thought I would check.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

People seem much more quick to turn to a gun to resolve an argument these days. We used to get into fist fights as a youth. Now days you get into fist fight and some guy has a gun.

Yup. And I can't say I'm surprised with the cultural narratives behind needing a gun to defend oneself and the idea of a good guy with a gun swooping in to save the day. If it were only that simple. A few people have told me I need to get a gun since I drive for Lyft. But I don't know why because no matter what it won't be a convenient or easy to get to option for defense. People insist I need one though, even though I explain the logics to them of how a keychain fob of mace would work a hundred times better all round, because in most situations that will be at least a million times easy to access. "No, you still need a gun" I've been told. I needed a gun on my paper route also, but I never figured out why. For the most part it's too late and too remote for any reasonable expectation of trouble, and even the part in town it's late enough that even the neighborhood hoodlum "wanna be gangs" are at home asleep for school. But I needed a gun for the remote parts, where in the absolute worst case scenario if I have to interact with another human being the person who greets me at the door in the middle of the night will probably have a gun nearby, because of the time and remoteness and all that, and in that case having a gun on me will only and certainly make things worse on me. If it ends up being my lucky night and my car breaks down in the middle of the night in a remote part of rural Indiana and someone gives me trouble, either I mace them and threaten them and scare them off, or they're very drugged out in a very bad way and I might be screwed anyways because I don't think I could reflexively/instinctively shoot to kill, and my mind would know how deliberate my shot was. I'm threatened enough I don't doubt I'll blow someone's knee off or make them lose some shoulder function, but a kill shot I'm not sure about. And that's when hesitation comes in.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I saw one of those on here tonight. Very reactionary and needy.

Chad mentioned that you did not like guns. I had not gotten that impression. Since he seems a bit confused about a number of things, I thought I would check.

Just after I posted in this thread remembered I'd be getting tons of alerts and online I really just don't care anymore because so few people are interested in actually having a discussion about it. If you mention certain "trigger words," you're one of them, you either support gun bans entirely or are aiding and abetting in gun violence directly somehow, I've been a bourgeois puppet for not supporting everyone be armed. I've been a fascist Commie for not supporting everyone be armed. It does extent in real life, but at least in real life conversation is more organized and you most people will let you finish when you request they allow you to do so, so even knee-jerky reactions are easier to calm over in real life. Some people will claim I want to get rid of guns and I hate guns, but I'm utterly unashamed of the fact learning to shot was something I learned to do very early in life. Most people in those rural settings, boys and girls alike, do learn to shoot at a young age. Anymore teaching the kids to shoot with a rifle doesn't actually serve any pragmatic function overall in society like it used to, it's just tradition. And I love rubbing it in the faces of people who try to put everything in a box either-or, this-and-that. I don't hate or love guns, but whether I or do or not really just depends on who you ask.

 

[We Never Know]

Yup. And I can't say I'm surprised with the cultural narratives behind needing a gun to defend oneself and the idea of a good guy with a gun swooping in to save the day. If it were only that simple. A few people have told me I need to get a gun since I drive for Lyft. But I don't know why because no matter what it won't be a convenient or easy to get to option for defense. People insist I need one though, even though I explain the logics to them of how a keychain fob of mace would work a hundred times better all round, because in most situations that will be at least a million times easy to access. "No, you still need a gun" I've been told. I needed a gun on my paper route also, but I never figured out why. For the most part it's too late and too remote for any reasonable expectation of trouble, and even the part in town it's late enough that even the neighborhood hoodlum "wanna be gangs" are at home asleep for school. But I needed a gun for the remote parts, where in the absolute worst case scenario if I have to interact with another human being the person who greets me at the door in the middle of the night will probably have a gun nearby, because of the time and remoteness and all that, and in that case having a gun on me will only and certainly make things worse on me. If it ends up being my lucky night and my car breaks down in the middle of the night in a remote part of rural Indiana and someone gives me trouble, either I mace them and threaten them and scare them off, or they're very drugged out in a very bad way and I might be screwed anyways because I don't think I could reflexively/instinctively shoot to kill, and my mind would know how deliberate my shot was. I'm threatened enough I don't doubt I'll blow someone's knee off or make them lose some shoulder function, but a kill shot I'm not sure about. And that's when hesitation comes in.

Fist fights was the way it was years ago. Then came along the weak offended generation that can't handle much, are offended by everything and want to pull a gun because they get offended and can't handle it.
Hell when one can be arrested for threats because he won't put up with BS and puts his foot down, and then one can shoot someone because his offended, that's all a product of society.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I really should get a blog and maybe video thingy so I can see people's reactions when they see someone is most definitely not a Conservative talk about supporting gun ownership and having a general sense of pride, and definitely not Liberal talk about civil equality and drugs. But I could ride a wave of "reactionary hatred" to fame. Before I vanish because I wouldn't mind the wealth of being famous I just don't want to be actually famous and well known.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Then came along the weak offended generation that can't handle much, are offended by everything and want to pull a gun because they get offended and can't handle it.

You say that, but how many generations, especially men, turned to the bottle because they couldn't handle their problems so they drown them in drink instead?

 

[We Never Know]

You say that, but how many generations, especially men, turned to the bottle because they couldn't handle their problems so they drown them in drink instead?

Strawman. The newer generations are weak and offended by everything. That is fact.

 

[Curious George]

.

The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads: "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."



My question: What is the significant difference between:

"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."​

AND

"The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

​

.​

The first protects the militia as well in highlighting one of the most important reasons we ought not infringe the people's right to keep and bear arms. The latter simply preserves the right to keep and bear arms.

 

[We Never Know]

You say that, but how many generations, especially men, turned to the bottle because they couldn't handle their problems so they drown them in drink instead?

What you fail to realise is if you threaten the easily offended, they report you.
If you just scare the easily offended, they report you.
If you cuss the easily offended, they report you.
If you discipline your child, the easily offended report you.
If etc etc.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Strawman. The newer generations are weak and offended by everything. That is fact.

I really doubt it. My grandparent's generation, to them Elvis' hips and John Lennon saying "We're bigger than Jesus" was just too much for them and they were absolutely outraged. My parents? That generation was told and started telling people if you play Zeppelin backwards they tell you to worship the devil, Dungeons and Dragons taught people witchcraft and demon summoning, and we know Tipper Gore has an easily shattered paper-glass sensitivity to the world and a very dirty mind to boot. My parents, that generation is so damn snowflakey they thought Bart Simpson was an affront and all out war against god and the values of decent Americans and their families. You're generation even. So snowflakey and fragile they are that the non-sense backwards rubbish rumbles of the Rolling Stones and Judas priest offend them deeply because they hear commands of devil worship and suicide that it shatters their worldview and a simple cartoon angers them like the Twitter Mob when they see a picture of someone with a feather in their hair and there must be an end put to it!

 

[We Never Know]

I really doubt it. My grandparent's generation, to them Elvis' hips and John Lennon saying "We're bigger than Jesus" was just too much for them and they were absolutely outraged. My parents? That generation was told and started telling people if you play Zeppelin backwards they tell you to worship the devil, Dungeons and Dragons taught people witchcraft and demon summoning, and we know Tipper Gore has an easily shattered paper-glass sensitivity to the world and a very dirty mind to boot. My parents, that generation is so damn snowflakey they thought Bart Simpson was an affront and all out war against god and the values of decent Americans and their families. You're generation even. So snowflakey and fragile they are that the non-sense backwards rubbish rumbles of the Rolling Stones and Judas priest offend them deeply because they hear commands of devil worship and suicide that it shatters their worldview and a simple cartoon angers them like the Twitter Mob when they see a picture of someone with a feather in their hair and there must be an end put to it!

Wow! You've been here since you were 18 and 14 years later you're still just as naive as the day you arrived here.
No offence but think that over. You been here from 18 to 32. That speaks loads of your generation.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What you fail to realise is if you threaten the easily offended, they report you.
If you just scare the easily offended, they report you.
If you cuss the easily offended, they report you.
If you discipline your child, the easily offended report you.
If etc etc.

And you think I care? You think I would never reply to that with with *****iness and sarcasm? "Oh, she cussed and, and, her demon pictures scare me!!" Discipline your child? I'm the one reminding parents they are the parents and discipline doesn't mean a bruised butt. I usually don't care if I offend someone over dumb stuff. But sometimes, depending on my mood, I care enough to hurt their feelings more and salt the wounds. And throw the knife back in them as I depart.
I realize all that. You fail to realize I don't care and I'm prone to lashing out.