Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
The second amendment does not give a right to a gun. You can put up all the documentation you want for your side of this argument, and I can find an equal amount of documentation on my side. That's the trouble with the 2nd. It's written somewhat ambiguously. It has a qualification in it (the WELL REGULATED militia bit). If the qualification doesn't mean anything then why is it there?
|
You have to take in to account two things only, what the definition of 'militia' was back in the late 1700's and The Militia Act of 1792, which made no provision for any type of select militia such as the National Guard.
* U.S. Senate Subcommittee Report (1982). "In the Militia Act of 1792, the second Congress defined ‘militia of the United States’ to include almost every free adult male in the United States. These persons were obligated by law to possess a [military-style] firearm and a minimum supply of ammunition and military equipment. . . . There can be little doubt from this that when the Congress and the people spoke of the a ‘militia,’ they had reference to the traditional concept of the entire populace capable of bearing arms, and not to any formal group such as what is today called the National Guard."187
* Current Federal Law: 10 U.S.C. Sec. 311. "The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and . . . under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States . . . ."
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
Plus if the 2nd is meant to be interpreted your way, then I don't have the right to bear guns, I have the right to bear ARMS. It doesn't distinguish what KIND of arms. If I want to walk down the street with a samauri sword I should be able to. If I want to patrol my yard with a bazooka, I should be able to. If I want to park a missile battery in my driveway, I should be able to. Why can't I, if the 2nd should be interpreted your way?
|
you should be able to, you can't because a bunch of whiney pacifists were alarmed that people could walk down the street with a gun/sword/axe as a weapon out in public. We need to take that right back.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
You and I are not going to agree on this. I won't move you and you certainly won't move me. Perhaps we can agree on the fact that the 2nd has a LOT of people on both sides of the interpretation.
|
It's a shame we can't agree on what the 2A means, but i'll agree on the last part for sure.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
Well first off LEO's should have to train harder with their guns as well. And to answer your question, because LEO's spend all day every day facing the possibility of using their weapon. This is something they think about a lot. They're trained for it and they're mentally prepared to deal with situations in which the gun might become a factor. The average citizen rarely thinks of getting into a conflict. They're not going to spend a lot of time going over scenarios in which they will have to decide whether or not to pull their gun.
|
they do more than you think, granted not all of them, maybe not even half of them, but they do.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
As I said above, you will not defeat the government. Period.
|
another agree to disagree thing.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
A tyrannical government that's out to get its people is not concerned about political ramifications. And if you get in their way with your pea shooter, they'll mow you down.
|
They can't mow everyone down. Hell, they can't even stop a small guerilla force in iraq.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
A standing army of 3 million could easilly fight off 100 million. Bombers and cruise missles would easilly let 3 soldiers kill 100 people. You've got your ratio right there.
|
Having been a marine for 6 years, I can tell you that if given the order to kill their fellow citizens, almost half would rebel.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
I'm not a willing slave, but I AM a realist. If the other side has infinitely more sophisticated weapons, and infinitely better training than I do, I am not going to win.
|
They said the same thing about vietnam.