A Message From Lucianne  







S-G1




























ST-GC



        
 

 
Home Page | Latest Posts | Links | Must Reads | Update Profile | RSS | Contribute | Register | Rules & FAQs
Privacy Policy | Search | Post | Contact | Logout | Forgot Password | Search Using Google


  Topic: The Real Second Amendment
Change your user profile.
If you are having trouble posting, please take the time to register.
Your User Name :
Your Password
  I forgot my password
Your Reply  :
Preview Reply     Post Reply
The Real Second Amendment
American Thinker, by Bart Wilburn

Original Article

Posted By:LittleRedHen1, 12/8/2012 11:41:54 AM

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 As simple as these word are, we have been arguing about what they mean for a long time. Part of the problem is that many people engaged in the argument do not interpret the 2nd Amendment with respect for its historical context, but rather in light of what they want it to mean in support of their purposes.

      


Post Reply  

Reply 1 - Posted by: Neanderthal, 12/8/2012 12:28:02 PM     (No. 9055352)

Hogwash! A militia iS all the a ble bodies men between certain ages , usually 15 - 60. Armies were composed of selected men from the militia. A state is a political unit with absolute soverainty, such as Germany or Ohio before the civil war. Now,go read the second amendment again.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    22 persons like this.


Reply 2 - Posted by: Evocatus, 12/8/2012 12:41:29 PM     (No. 9055374)

Excellent article with its historic ties. This assumes that all able-bodied men (and willing women), of a certain age, who comprise the various States´ "militia" of the people, have their own private military grade firearms and are proficient in their use.

At one time, the various local elements of "the militia" would be mustered and inspected to ensure their were ready and properly equipped. The citizens of Lexington and Concord and those along The Battle Road would be the most familiar to us now.

It is a similar system to what has kept Switzerland free.

Whether we are mustered from time to time, and therefore "well-regulated" or whether we are not mustered, able-bodied citizens retain their right to keep and bear arms.

It´s the difference between a Citizen and a Subject or a Slave.



  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    20 persons like this.


   

 

R-G1
  
R-VAR_AD


 
Reply 3 - Posted by: Gallo3, 12/8/2012 1:06:47 PM     (No. 9055407)

It is my belief that we should have universal conscription at age 18 with no deferment whatsoever, and that everyone be trained in the use of firearms and general military discipline for two years.
Those that conscientiously object can go wipe butts in a VA nursing home for two years instead.
We would accomplish many things.
We could station a goodly portion along the Mexican border. They would get good experience dealing with infiltration and interdicting them- in a desert environment.
It would be a method of breaking up gangs.
They would all know how to handle a firearm, and in the process be subject to two years of non-liberal, non-union education.
Many would take the unlikely turn to republicanism.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    21 persons like this.


Reply 4 - Posted by: Nutmegger, 12/8/2012 1:19:20 PM     (No. 9055418)

Hi folks. This 91 year old military veteran from 1942-1972 has a personal interest in the 2nd Amend. In researching my ancestors (paternal), I learned that 10 generations ago, my grampa was fined 1/2 shilling for having a dirty musket!. I am sure that he must have just returned from a hunting trip, where he almost saw a rabbit. Oh my.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    21 persons like this.


Reply 5 - Posted by: lazlototh, 12/8/2012 1:27:30 PM     (No. 9055422)

I think the author of the article is guilty of what he accuses others of in his second sentence. Nevertheless, the article is interesting.

If you go to the NRA museum in Virginia you´ll see a lot of the state constitutions that preceded the US Constitution and in many cases they define the militias as being the people - not a pre-organized army of some sort. Taken in that context, my sense is that the term "militia" at the time meant the general population - albeit a population capable of organizing quickly into a fighting force - and the better argument is the one that conservatives have today on the meaning of the second amendment.

Another thing - lots of state constitutions grant more explicit and perhaps broader gun ownership rights than does the US Constitution. People should pursue state constitutional amendments guaranteeing gun ownership if they want to protect against federal laws. The Constitution´s Supremacy Clause can dilute their impact but the words of state constitutions should not be overlooked as another barrier to tyranny.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    27 persons like this.


Reply 6 - Posted by: IdSpud, 12/8/2012 1:31:01 PM     (No. 9055428)

A well written article that makes the real point of the 2nd Amendment. I know nothing about making a long-bow so I can´t argue whether or not it takes 4years. I also know that hitting what you are aiming at with a bow is not an easy skill to learn as I hunt with a compound bow. But that´s not even the point. The real point of the article can be summed up in Dr. Suzzana Hupp´s testimony before congress on the 2nd amendment back in 2010. It is a compelling testimony and I encourage all to view it. The purpose is not to protect our rights to hunt. The real purpose is to protect the citizens from their government.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    20 persons like this.


Reply 7 - Posted by: paulfromTexas, 12/8/2012 2:00:21 PM     (No. 9055446)

The Second Amendment means we get to shoot back.
I personally believe that gun ownership should be mandatory....and the "list" that gets madeshould be composed of those who opt out of such.
Tables turned, and the gun ban crowd will shut up.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    14 persons like this.


   

 

  


 
Reply 8 - Posted by: wendybird, 12/8/2012 2:09:34 PM     (No. 9055449)

As a youth, I belonged to an archery club. We made our own bows, usually from lemonwood staves purchased through an archery supply catalog. We made our own strings of linen thread or sometimes bought hemp string on a roll. We made our own arrows out of birch or cedar dowels and turkey feathers. The point is, it may well take four years to “make” a bow, if you cut and age the wood, then shave it into shape. I think the English used Yew but I may be wrong. Just as making a pencil would be easy if someone handed you all the components, making a bow wouldn’t take long if you have the tools and are handed the components. It only took me a minute to “make” my present Bear Grizzly, but Amazon helped me out.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    24 persons like this.


Reply 9 - Posted by: strike3, 12/8/2012 2:30:51 PM     (No. 9055468)

The right to defend one´s own life and that of his family is God-given. The rest is just technicalities.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    16 persons like this.


Reply 10 - Posted by: metalman2, 12/8/2012 2:52:28 PM     (No. 9055482)

I just returned from a week in Mexico where I have some customers (soon to be most of my customers). I feel so intensely naked without a handgun that it is unnerving. There is a movement in Mexico to change gun policies so people can protect themselves. I hope so, they are left nearly helpless against the gangs and the same would be true here with out the 2A.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    18 persons like this.


Reply 11 - Posted by: MissouriMan, 12/8/2012 3:17:16 PM     (No. 9055504)

#1 wikipedia is not a credible source of information. At times it can tack up to 4 years to craft an English Long Bow.
http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/smallarms/p/englongbow.htm

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    19 persons like this.


Reply 12 - Posted by: curious1, 12/8/2012 3:33:01 PM     (No. 9055520)

#3, back in the day it was written, the phrase "well-regulated" referred to someone who knew their trade and was competent, such as, "The blacksmith, Mr. Jones, is well-regulated". So a "well-regulated militia" was men who knew their ´trade´ with regard to militia weapons (including artillery at the time) and tactics, and could hit what they aimed at. It had nothing to do with government control or bureaucracy of any sort. The men who wrote it were not in the mood to give the federal government powers it couldn´t be trusted with, given what they had just gone through.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    12 persons like this.


   

 

B-G1


 
Reply 13 - Posted by: Michaelus, 12/8/2012 4:01:13 PM     (No. 9055558)

..and of courses everyone forgets the Third Amendment - which was really a ban on having a standing army in times of peace. It had nothing to do with putting soldiers in people´s homes.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    16 persons like this.


Reply 14 - Posted by: capt scurvey, 12/8/2012 4:08:28 PM     (No. 9055568)

Try making one out of green wood, #1...

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    17 persons like this.


Reply 15 - Posted by: St. Pitbull, 12/8/2012 4:20:14 PM     (No. 9055584)

An excellent article with some really fine comments after it, also.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    21 persons like this.


Reply 16 - Posted by: dvc, 12/8/2012 4:36:46 PM     (No. 9055601)

Tracing back to the situation in England is useful. The author makes important points. It was unique that the English barons trusted their common men to own the powerful longbows, and that they wanted the common man to be armed for the common defense of the country. The longbows had shockingly high pull weights, 100-150 lbs - much doubted in modern times, but verified from bows recovered from Mary Rose. Without years of training and continuous work these bows were useless, the untrained could not pull them or hit anything.

Developing this trust of the commoner to have weapons powerful enough to kill the armored nobles was a unique situation. These commoner archers enabled the great victory at Agincourt which slaughtered the French nobility and ultimately shifted the power towards the people, recognized by the Magna Carta.

The concept of trusting the populace with powerful military weapons (as the musket was in the day) is now limited to a few countries, the US and Switzerland may be the only remaining countries.

We must guard this right closely, it is exceedingly rare in the long sweep of human history that the commoner can be armed and have the right to protect himself. If lost, it will not soon return.

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    19 persons like this.


Reply 17 - Posted by: wyoyo, 12/8/2012 7:20:23 PM     (No. 9055751)

Most of the arguments about the Second Amendment made by both sides revolve around a single assumption - that the Second Amendment grants a citizen the right to bear arms. What both sides fail to understand is that the Second Amendment grants no such right, in fact, the Constitution grants no rights at all!

What the Constitution does do is identify what powers the people grant to the government. This is the whole purpose of the Constitution - to tell the government what it can and cannot do.

That is why Marxists Democrats like Obama hate our Constitution because it is a limitation on Government not a limitation on We The People.....the right to keep and bear arms was considered a ´´Natural Right´´ by our forefathers.

Read the Second Amendment closely, it doesn’t say the people have a right to bear arms but rather that the
government cannot infringe on that right.

I don’t know about you, but I sure as heck don’t want to live in a country where the only ones with guns is the government.

Amendment II

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.

Thet’s it, that is the whole 2nd Amendment...where does it say that the government gives us any right? It doesn’t, it only says that the government cannot infringe on our rights.



  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    22 persons like this.


   

 

R_DBL_B
  


 
Reply 18 - Posted by: wakizashi1, 12/8/2012 7:39:49 PM     (No. 9055775)

New rule for neighborhoods:

All dwellings will have 1 of 2 signs in front stating
(1) This is a gun free home or
(2) This is a 2nd amendment friendly home.

Where will the criminals go first?

  Click Here if you Like this Comment

    15 persons like this.



Post Reply   Close thread 714911




Below, you will find ...

Most Recent Articles posted by "LittleRedHen1"

and

Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)




Most Recent Articles posted by "LittleRedHen1"



Cronyism, incompetence cited in failure
of healthcare.gov site
American Thinker, by Rick Moran    Original Article
Posted By: LittleRedHen1- 10/15/2013 12:40:57 PM     Post Reply
A report by a private foundation on how the Obamacare website was designed reveals that cronyism and sheer incompetence is at fault for the spectacular failures of the rollout. InfoWorld summed it up: "It was built by people who are apparently far more familiar with government cronyism than they are with IT." "All but one of of the 47 contractors who won contracts to carry out work on the Affordable Care Act worked for the government prior to its passage," the report reads.

Will the Last Religious Politician
Please Turn Out the Lights?
American Thinker, by Fay Voshell    Original Article
Posted By: LittleRedHen1- 5/5/2013 2:06:30 PM     Post Reply
If at one time being a member of a church was almost a requirement for anyone running for office, that time has long since passed. These days, portraying a candidate as a "fine, upstanding Christian" is enough to send any potential office seeker to the political graveyard. Due to constant stereotyping by liberals, such a description now conjures an image that is a combination of Boss Hogg, Huey Long, and Elmer Gantry. The result, among others, is that the openly Christian candidate is out of favor with the political establishment here and abroad.

Gay sex rings, ´The Filth´
corrupting the Vatican...
and why the Pope Really quit
Daily Mail [UK], by John Cornwell    Original Article
Posted By: LittleRedHen1- 3/2/2013 11:30:18 PM     Post Reply
The former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger wrung his hands above his head in triumph as he emerged as Pope on to the balcony of St Peter’s eight years ago. He had won! He had longed to be Pope. He has loved being Pope. He expected to die as Pope. (snip) The real reason he has quit is far more spectacular. It is to save the Catholic Church from ignominy: he has voluntarily delivered himself up as a sacrificial lamb to purge the Church of what he calls ‘The Filth’. And it must have taken courage.

   

 



 
Pope Benedict’s Legacy:
Beware The Secular State
Human Events, by Benjamin Wiker    Original Article
Posted By: LittleRedHen1- 2/28/2013 6:30:13 AM     Post Reply
The announcement by Pope Benedict XVI that he will be “retiring” as of the end of February does not signal the end of his influence. Pope’s aren’t presidents. Their influence does not end with their pontificate, as a president’s does with the end of his term. Their pontificates ensure their legacies to the Church. (snip) He is leaving us a warning. In the West, and now especially in the U.S., the state is increasingly pushing a secular agenda, and pushing that agenda through means pushing the Church out. The threat to religious liberty is very, very real.

The Real Second Amendment
American Thinker, by Bart Wilburn    Original Article
Posted By: LittleRedHen1- 12/8/2012 11:41:54 AM     Post Reply
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 As simple as these word are, we have been arguing about what they mean for a long time. Part of the problem is that many people engaged in the argument do not interpret the 2nd Amendment with respect for its historical context, but rather in light of what they want it to mean in support of their purposes.

The GOP and the New Culture
American Thinker, by Alan M Aszkler    Original Article
Posted By: LittleRedHen1- 11/23/2012 10:37:31 PM     Post Reply
Obama won re-election in one of the worst economic periods in American history. Collectively the GOP brain trust is correct in their analysis of why Romney lost yet has missed the most fundamental point. The new America Culture just didn´t feel good voting Romney. [snip] Government monopoly of public education has facilitated a cultural shift since the era of the Great Society. Schools teach students to feign rational approaches to problem solving and filter decisions through emotions. How does it make you feel implementing your solution? Public education rewards effort over results,

Roman Catholic Bishop who compared
the President to Hitler and Stalin
orders priests to read anti-Obama
letter at Sunday Sermons
Daily Mail (UK), by David McCormack    Original Article
Posted By: LittleRedHen1- 11/3/2012 2:58:01 PM     Post Reply
A Chicago bishop who has previously compared President Barack Obama to Hitler and Stalin has ordered his priests to read a letter at weekend mass explaining that politicians who support abortion also reject Jesus. With just days until the presidential election, Peoria Bishop Daniel Jenky’s letter warns that the President will not reconsider the mandate that would require employers, including religious groups, to provide free birth control coverage in their health care plans. ‘This assault upon our religious freedom is simply without precedent in the American political and legal system,’ Jenky wrote



Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)



Has Rush Limbaugh Finally
Reached the End Of The Road?

46 replie(s)
Forbes Magazine, by Rick Ungar    Original Article
Posted By: EveningStar- 4/16/2014 7:24:05 PM     Post Reply
Like him or hate him, there is no disputing that Rush Limbaugh’s very special brand of mixing right-wing politics with his flare for entertainment has produced one of the most successful radio programs in the medium’s long history. Whatever the burning political question of the day, millions of Americans have relished the opportunity to tune into Rush’s program, knowing that he would quickly take that hot potato, throw a few gallons of verbal kerosene into the mix and elevate the matter into a five alarm fire with a just a few well-chosen words spoken in the style only Rush Limbaugh could

Biden Tells Boston Bombing
Survivors, ´It Was Worth It´ (Video)

41 replie(s)
Breitbart´s Instablog, by Debra Heine    Original Article
Posted By: KarenJ1- 4/15/2014 9:28:18 PM     Post Reply
Less than a minute into his speech at the Boston marathon bombing memorial on Tuesday, Vice President Joe Biden went tragically off script and told the crowd of Boston bombing survivors that "it was worth it." After expressing how impressed he was with the tribute, he said somberly, "let me say to those ´quote survivors,´ my God, you have survived and you have soared. It was worth it. I mean this sincerely - just to hear each of you speak. You´re truly, truly inspiring." The audience sat in stunned silence until Biden declared, "I´ve never heard anything so beautiful than

Casual marijuana use linked with
brain abnormalities, study finds

40 replie(s)
Fox News, by Loren Grush    Original Article
Posted By: KarenJ1- 4/15/2014 6:12:53 PM     Post Reply
Casual marijuana use may come with some not-so-casual side effects. For the first time ever, researchers at Northwestern University have analyzed the relationship between casual use of marijuana and brain changes – and found that young adults who used cannabis just once or twice a week showed significant abnormalities in two important brain structures. The study’s findings, to be published Wednesday in the Journal of Neuroscience, are similar to those of past research linking chronic, long-term marijuana use with mental illness and changes in brain development. Dr. Hans Breiter, co-senior study author, said he was inspired to look at the effects of casual

Which Actor Portrays The
Best James Bond?

38 replie(s)
American Spectator, by Jonah Goldberg and Taki Theodoracopulos    Original Article
Posted By: Drive- 4/16/2014 11:20:22 AM     Post Reply
Look, everyone loves Sean Connery, particularly Sean Connery. That’s why he plays Sean Connery in every movie he’s in. People love that Scottish brogue so much, they don’t mind that he has it when he plays Juan Sánchez Villa-Lobos Ramírez, an immortal Spaniard in Highlander. The guy even won an Oscar for playing an Irish cop with a Scottish accent. Talk about sexist double standards: Meryl Streep has to master foreign dialects to get her golden statuettes. Connery just has to show up on time. In economics you devalue a currency by printing too much of it. In film you

Michelle Obama Riverdances
Through Dublin to the Tune
of $7,921,638

36 replie(s)
Breitbart Big Peace, by Tom Fitton    Original Article
Posted By: JoniTx- 4/17/2014 6:45:16 AM     Post Reply
When it comes to tracking the cost of Obama family vacations, there are two primary challenges. First, the Obamas are prolific jet-setters, so there are many details to track. Second, the Obama administration, clearly embarrassed by these lavish and frequent family vacations, stonewalls the release of records at every turn. But we have been relentless in pursuit of this information. Our attorneys file the lawsuits and make our case, and our investigators pour through pages of records and crunch the numbers. And the information we’ve uncovered – information that would otherwise remain under lock and key – shows that the

White babies just 15 months old show racial
bias when picking playmates, study found

35 replie(s)
Daily Mail (U.K.), by Staff    Original Article
Posted By: Desert Fox- 4/15/2014 10:23:35 PM     Post Reply
Toddlers show racial bias when picking playmates, a study reveals. They also take account of how fairly others behave. Researchers tested the reaction of white 15-month-olds as toys were distributed. Two white adults divided the toys, one equally and the other unequally. Seventy per cent of the toddlers chose to play with the researcher who distributed the toys fairly. But in a second test, when one researcher favoured a white recipient over an Asian one, they picked the ‘fair’ researcher less often, the journal Frontiers in Psychology reports. And the babies are more likely to help those who share the same ethnicity, which is known as

Why is US Senator Harry
Reid so concerned with
a local Nevada rancher?

35 replie(s)
Fox News, by Wayne Allyn Root    Original Article
Posted By: KarenJ1- 4/16/2014 9:37:12 PM     Post Reply
I live in Las Vegas. I live and breath Nevada politics. Something is very wrong. Something smells rotten in the Nevada desert. And Senator Harry Reid’s fingerprints are all over it. I am of course referring to the Bundy Ranch siege. This was a dispute between a Nevada ranching family with rights to the land in question for 140 years and the BLM (Bureayu of Land Management). The government claims they haven’t paid grazing fees for 20 years. The result was a government assault on the ranch- including snipers with assault rifles, SUV’s, helicopters, airplanes and over 200 heavily armed troops. No

   

Post Reply   Close thread 714911





Home Page | Latest Posts | Links | Must Reads | Update Profile | RSS | Contribute | Register | Rules & FAQs
Privacy Policy | Search | Post | Contact | Logout | Forgot Password | Search Using Google


© 2014 Lucianne.com Media Inc.

~~~c~~~