Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 36
  1. #21  
    gator
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by megimoo View Post
    A few quotes from Thomas Jefferson on the matter would be in order.Don't you think ?
    I am lazy and I think most people participating in this thread know the quotes as well as me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    Patent Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    1,784
    Quote Originally Posted by gator View Post
    I think you are mising something here. It is not only protection from the govenment but to enable the citizens to move against the government if the government becomes abusive.
    OK, I won't dispute that either. I have seen quite a few quotes on the intent of the founders when the amendment was passed. There seem to be a number of purposes for the amendment.

    I just don't think that the modern government would ever give the slightest nod towards armed revolt.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    gator
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by biccat View Post

    I just don't think that the modern government would ever give the slightest nod towards armed revolt.
    Of course you are correct. However, if the people have the right to keep and bear arms and are willing to revolt then what the govenment "nods" don't mean much, does it?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    Patent Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    1,784
    Quote Originally Posted by gator View Post
    Of course you are correct. However, if the people have the right to keep and bear arms and are willing to revolt then what the govenment "nods" don't mean much, does it?
    That's pretty much my point. The issue is moot, because the ruling preserves the right to own firearms and people aren't going to look to the government to revolt against the same.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #25  
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    Quote Originally Posted by biccat View Post
    OK, I won't dispute that either. I have seen quite a few quotes on the intent of the founders when the amendment was passed. There seem to be a number of purposes for the amendment.

    I just don't think that the modern government would ever give the slightest nod towards armed revolt.
    If there was an uprising against a tyrannical government how could you possible
    expect them to approve ?
    How would you feel is the SCOTUS ruled that we have no right to keep arms ?I would guess you would be 'UP IN ARMS " to quote an apt phrase .
    To quote our singular founder ,"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." and again,"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #26  
    Vepr
    Guest
    I was almost curious to see what the reaction would have been if the ruling had gone very badly for us. I am very glad it came out the way it did but if the court had said militia only I am wondering if, as a populous we would have had the balls to stand up and say "You can go to hell we are rebooting to constitution version 1.0".
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #27  
    Senior Member Molon Labe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Jihad Me At Hello
    Posts
    4,771
    Quote Originally Posted by megimoo View Post
    If there was an uprising against a tyrannical government how could you possible
    expect them to approve ?
    How would you feel is the SCOTUS ruled that we have no right to keep arms ?I would guess you would be 'UP IN ARMS " to quote an apt phrase .
    To quote our singular founder ,"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." and again,"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."
    And add to that our recent blind acceptance of government surveilance....add to that your guns and you make it easier for them to try to take them
    Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound - Unknown


    The problem is Empty People, Not Loaded Guns - Linda Schrock Taylor
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #28  
    Eyelids
    Guest
    There werent enough innocent people getting shot in this country, that shouldn't be a problem anymore.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #29  
    gator
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Eyelids View Post
    There werent enough innocent people getting shot in this country, that shouldn't be a problem anymore.
    The best way to stop innocent people from getting shot is for other people not to shoot them.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #30  
    Patent Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    1,784
    Quote Originally Posted by gator View Post
    The best way to stop innocent people from getting shot is for other people not to shoot them.
    Maybe we could pass laws prohibiting people from shooting eachother. Seems like that would work much better than prohibiting people from defending themselves against getting shot.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •