Why the fervor over the 2nd ammendment but not the 1st?

Cynic that I am, that question sounds like one an Agent of any of a number of many Government Agencies or someone wanting to take advantage of Red Flag Laws would ask so as to go Gestapo on your ass. Each and every MAN or WOMAN has to make that personal choice, just like they would have to in a dangerous situation where the decision and distinction between use of force or deadly force is used.
I will not try to explain it any clearer for you, and where I might make that decision if forced to, is no ones damned business but mine! I will again state just a few facts. The government has done extensive invasive background checks on me and I have proof that at one time I held a Top Secret Clearance for things I did in military service of the USA. I also trained security forces in use of several weapons to include use of force and deadly force. I also am a Oath Keeper. Many people are. If you don't understand that, I have questions for you before I will bother to explain. IMHO some folks have no right whatsoever to question what I do, or why, or when. Your position in that remains to be seen, and at this point I do not trust you. I do not trust others easily.

 

That's not strange. If you jump into a website devoted to journalism advocating restrictions on the press, you'll get a right warm welcome. And they won't even fart about restrictions on firearms. Preach to the choir of choice, laddie.

 

The second amendment was designed to be a deterrent to a tyrannical government. Most people have no interest in going to war with their government any more than we want to slug out a nuclear war with Russia. However, history has proven a deterrent to tyranny is necessary.

I think you are grossly misinformed. Currently you can buy most any weapon you want, full auto, silenced, 50 caliber machines if that is what your heart desires. It takes a little more paperwork and a $200 fee which is not a significant amount of money for most people. According to the ATF there are 422.9 million guns in america and 17,740,000 of them are AR-15s. There are enough AR-15s sold each year to arm the entire marine corps and yet more people are injured by bunk beds and Prius cars than weapons in the US.

 

Dave Chappelle explains the first and second amendment:

 

Why do I feel this thread to be a social experiment in someones classroom?

Bless their hearts

 

Actually, this is a very good post and worthy of serious consideration; furthermore, we might be closer than you think.

"The 2nd amendment will survive but become irrelevant."
LOL! But, if the 2nd Amendment becomes 'irrelevant', which in my opinion is coming closer day-by-day, it doesn't survive. I think I understand your point but the reality is if any law is irrelevant then in truth it ceases to exist. Also, please understand, most of us consider the Right to defend our home, family and self to be God given and it matters not what some party controlled government says - let's keep in mind the words of the Declaration of Independence along with the Constitution. The Bill of Rights is there for nothing more than to ensure, under law, the people's law, that those God given Rights are protected...but the government cannot give/take those Rights.

As for the rest of your post, I'm quite in agreement. I too think 'information is key', 'Social media weaponized', 'GDPR rights'...how could a person not be in agreement?

However, I still believe the 2nd Amendment is the lynchpin for all the other Rights, as history has proven time and time again. The world you wrote about (above post) is an ugly one, one that I and others believe is coming if we lose the 2nd or, as you stated, it becomes irrelevant, but it cannot be changed by words alone (Free Speech) however when tied with the deterrent of the 2nd Amendment - in simple terms - 30 million armed and angry Americans - well those odds are impossible for ANY government to simply ignore. And, while many believe the government has complete control of the military, after close to 40 years in and around the military, I would be surprised if even half would follow illegal orders by enforcing government orders that specifically contradict their oaths.

So, I believe the 1st and 2nd are tied together and in truth trying to determine which is more important is an impossible task and highly subjective by each individual. My view is I don't want to live in a world without the 1st and I must have the 2nd to ensure that doesn't happen. As a student of history, I know that is the right course.

And, in the immortal words of Dave Chappelle, "The 1st is first for a reason. The 2nd is there if the 1st doesn't work out." LOL!

EDIT: In the future, I hope you write more about GDPR rights... More and more, I feel it is a topic that needs discussion and support.

 

Not a problem, that is what the ignore button is for.

 

Fringe groupies abound.
Most are setting in Grannies Basement.

 

Actually, Oregonians can own semi-auto firearms, without restrictions on capacity and ammo. We can even own full-auto and suppressors, unlike in some other states. Now, that doesn't mean the democrats in power don't want to impose those restrictions. Just that they haven't been able to. Yet.

 

The key word is YET! Look at Washington State, yes, you are allowed to purchase and own some things, but not all, and you must go through major hassles to do so and/or comply! Coming to OryGun soon!

 

Pretty sure that's what they told Martin Luther King Jr when they denied him a gun permit. I think we can meet in the middle on this. If you have no desire to defend yourself, don't.

 

We were in Redmond last year and I kept thinking, I want to see some video of them trying to disarm this bunch. Up here close to the capital, I assure you that several bills are on the agenda to make "assault" weapons illegal, with the definition of assault being quite malleable. In Redmond, I saw several people open carrying, out here, you'd be questioned, in Portland, you'd get mobbed.

 

The next time I screw up and make the nurse mad-I'm using your line

 

Do we stay in trouble much Tully?

 

I spend several times as much for health insurance, fire insurance, car insurance, etc than I ever spend on preps and firearms. At my age I am using the health insurance, but have never needed the car insurance nor the fire insurance. I would be many many thousands of dollars a head it I hadn't bought it all these many years, but if I need them, I am going to really need them bad or the system will break me. I haven't needed my second rights and pray that I never will, but like insurance, it is there for when things fall apart.

 

It seems to be a talent...

 

@ec451 Since you failed to respond to my last post to you, I will ask you a few questions straight out.
1. Have you ever taken an oath where you stated under oath to protect the Constitution of the USA against all enemies foreign and domestic?
2. If not, in general terms, what is your chosen occupation?
3. Do you live in which of the following.
a. In a City --- b. a small town --- c. close to a.or b. --- d. quite rural
4. Do you own a firearm?
5. What is your main reason for owning a gun?
6. If confronted with an unknown armed man inside you house or
apartment at 2am what would you do?
7. Do you live alone or are there others who would depend on you to protect them?

I think it only fair that I ask these questions, since I don't know you, nor you me, and yet you want me to tell you when exactly I would consider taking up arms against the government.

 

I'll look there. Thanks. All I remember seeing was something about being a programmer or whatever. My bad.

 

Sorry Bruce, I think he answered almost none of those questions. Just one, almost retired Programmer.
My memory was working fine.