Gun Restrictions and Your Rights

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Right.

While I don't know how I feel either way. Just for a second imagine that handguns were made totally illegal in this country, do you think that deaths go UP or DOWN? Sure, people can say that they'll just use other things, but it's a lot easier to run from a knife than a gun.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

There is a pretty big difference between giving everyone the right to a musket and the right to an AK.

I would be all for limiting the right to bear arms to muskets. The laughs alone at watching someone try to commit a robbery, murder with a musket would be priceless.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Well, short of sounding like I live in a cabin in Wyoming working on my manifesto, our founding fathers discussed that same topic concerning the very government they themselves formed.

Governments made up of men are always capable of evil. Not saying we are at that point yet, but the 2nd amendment was instituted so that the citizens would always have the capacity to overthrow their government.

Thomas Jefferson said that the tree of liberty must be freshened from time to time with the blood of tyrants. That concept was never meant to be so foreign.

Wow, it's so refreshing to hear you say that. Most people think I'm crazy, or stupid, when I say things like that. You are a true patriot.

This is kind of off-topic, but I felt it was appropriate to say, given the nature of the discussion:
I would like to create a "people's army". This army would not be controlled by any government agency, and its focus would not be armed conflict. The focus of this army would be to prepare themselves to take power from the federal government at a moment's notice. Since the government derives most of its power from money, the people's army would focus there. I imagine that this army would be comprised mostly of computer experts who would always have their hands in the government's business. They would break into federal computer networks, and always be ready to strike. If the time came, they would start draining money out of government accounts.

The major effect of this army would be the increased caution of the federal government. You see, the idea is to never have to use the army. The idea is to make the government think twice about infringing on the people's liberties, due to their concern about how the people's army might react.

It's a crazy idea, and it would probably never work, but that is what I would like to see happen.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

I can just see someone rolling up into a bank with a ski mask on, Davy Crockett hat and a musket.

[MTK]

Can you imagine cops running down the street chasing criminals while they're re-loading their muskets like in the final scenes of Last of the Mohicans??!!

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

Wow, it's so refreshing to hear you say that. Most people think I'm crazy, or stupid, when I say things like that. You are a true patriot.

This is kind of off-topic, but I felt it was appropriate to say, given the nature of the discussion:
I would like to create a "people's army". This army would not be controlled by any government agency, and its focus would not be armed conflict. The focus of this army would be to prepare themselves to take power from the federal government at a moment's notice. Since the government derives most of its power from money, the people's army would focus there. I imagine that this army would be comprised mostly of computer experts who would always have their hands in the government's business. They would break into federal computer networks, and always be ready to strike. If the time came, they would start draining money out of government accounts.

The major effect of this army would be the increased caution of the federal government. You see, the idea is to never have to use the army. The idea is to make the government think twice about infringing on the people's liberties, due to their concern about how the people's army might react.

It's a crazy idea, and it would probably never work, but that is what I would like to see happen.

You said it yourself. Not to take anything away from your post, but I would think that sheer numbers alone of the public keeps the government in check. We ARE a People's Army and if the government were to all of a sudden try to suppress it's people by force, I don't think that most of the people IN said army are going to go along with it.

[MTK]

Another can you imagine scenario:

If our founding fathers could see us today what do you think they would say?

Something tells me they would think we are idiots with the way we cling so literally to the Constitution that was written for a completely different time.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Yup. The language was intentionally left vague so it could stand the test of time.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

You said it yourself. Not to take anything away from your post, but I would think that sheer numbers alone of the public keeps the government in check. We ARE a People's Army and if the government were to all of a sudden try to suppress it's people by force, I don't think that most of the people IN said army are going to go along with it.

True. However, it's not about suppression by force. Nobody would stand for that. The federal government has slowly taken away liberties since its creation. That is what I would like to see stop.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Another can you imagine scenario:

If our founding fathers could see us today what do you think they would say?

Something tells me they would think we are idiots with the way we cling so literally to the Constitution that was written for a completely different time.

I believe they would think we are wimps, and not true patriots. Most people don't care about government infringement as long as they have their Mercedes and Starbucks.

At the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, when queried as he left Independence Hall on the final day of deliberation, a lady asked Benjamin Franklin, "Well Doctor what have we got a republic or a monarchy?"

Franklin replied, "A Republic, if you can keep it."

[offiss]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Woah, hold on a minute here. Did you just say that people who are for gun control are anti-Christ? I can't say I agree there.

I don't know that it's fair or right to go back to our founding fathers everytime as the basis for an argument. For one thing, the right to bear arms doesn't even really mean the same thing anymore because the arms (or weapons) aren't even the same anymore. There is a pretty big difference between giving everyone the right to a musket and the right to an AK.

Actually no, I didn't say that, it happened to be in the article I pasted, I was going to take a few things out of it which maybe I should have, or put a little foot note, I don't neccasarily agree with that, nor have I read the book they recommended, it was just the basic premace of the article I was refering to. Sorry.

The type of weoponry is irrelevent, it's the spirit in which, and why, this law was brought forth in our constitution.

Any good con man relies on the trust of the person he is going to con.

With all these dictatorships in all these countries around the world, and with all these people being oppressed by them, you still think we are immuned to such a takeover? Maybe not tommorow, but there are people working overtime to try and make it happen.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

True. However, it's not about suppression by force. Nobody would stand for that. The federal government has slowly taken away liberties since its creation. That is what I would like to see stop.

What kind of liberties?

[offiss]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

I believe they would think we are wimps, and not true patriots. Most people don't care about government infringement as long as they have their Mercedes and Starbucks.

At the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, when queried as he left Independence Hall on the final day of deliberation, a lady asked Benjamin Franklin, "Well Doctor what have we got a republic or a monarchy?"

Franklin replied, "A Republic, if you can keep it."

nice post.

Thought you might like this.


War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.


John Stuart Mill

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

True. However, it's not about suppression by force. Nobody would stand for that. The federal government has slowly taken away liberties since its creation. That is what I would like to see stop.

I actually think our government provides FAR more liberties than the Founders envisioned. Just to name a few such liberties: (1) freedom for slaves (black people didn't fare to well under our Forefathers); (2) freedom for women (sex discrimination was sanctioned by the government in 1776 and women were treated as property of their husbands); (3) freedom for Native Americans (we haven't given them small pox ridden blankets in a little while); (4) the right to privacy (which, the Supreme Court only recently recognized); (5) substantive due process; (6) free public schooling; (7) social security and medicare; (8) the right to an abortion (regardless of what you think of it, it is a newly recognized constitutional right); (9) far more liberties for the press (read the Alien & Sedition Act); (10) the right not to be imprisoned for failing to pay debts; (11) the right to speech has been broadened in NUMEROUS ways (people used to be imprisoned for speaking out against WWI and the draft, it used to be a criminal offense in some states to distribute a pamphlet showing a woman's thigh, etc); (12) the right to unionize (unions used to be prosecuted under the Sherman Anti-trust Act as illegal conspiracies to restrain trade); (13) the right to workplace safety (see OSHA); and (14) the right for adults between the age of 18 and 21 to vote. Every Amendment to the Constitution (save Prohibition) since the 19th century (13th through 27th)expanded our rights. The list goes on and on.

Or, look at WWII when our government interned Japanese American citizens en masse in internment camps. And that was after a government attacked a military installation, it did not take place after "hidden" terrorists attacked civilian buildings. Can you honestly see our government doing that today? Our government also summarily executed "enemy combatants" who were U.S. citizens in WWII. Not so today, see the controversy over guys like Jose Padilla.

It is a myth is that we have fewer rights today than we did in 1776. But don't believe me, talk to any constitutional law scholar. The scope of rights provided by the Constitution and by acts of Congress has been consistently broadened.

Our rights have been expanded for many reasons. First, mass media jumps over infringements of civil liberties. Two, people expect a hell of a lot more today out of our government than they did 50, 100, 200 years ago. People think they have an inherent right to health care, subsidies, social security etc. Three, watchdog groups like the ACLU are fighting the government in court every day. As much as conservatives hate the ACLU, few of them realize that the ACLU is the epitome of a conservative organization.

[724Skinsfan]

SGG, you're awesome!