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

Discussion in 'Bill of Rights' started by ec451, Jan 19, 2020.


Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    That, too, is the point. We should have equivalent arms, and don't.

    So far as when I, myself, will take up arms, that is my business. You and others that I don't know WELL don't get to know that.

    If you missed it, SM is big on privacy issues. Be guided accordingly when you ask personal detail questions.
     
    Lancer likes this.
  2. ec451

    ec451 Monkey

    I don't think so. You arm, then the next time they come better armed, then.... better to just take it to court at the first injustice rather than escalate.
     
    Lancer likes this.
  3. ec451

    ec451 Monkey

    Why put words in my mouth? Why all the medical supplies and training etc you mentioned if you don't care about attempting to stay alive? Well me too.
     
  4. BTPost

    BTPost Stumpy Old Fart Snow Monkey Moderator

    I love my wife.... and keeping me around is her thing, of which I am not opposed...
     
    john316, Tully Mars and Seepalaces like this.
  5. ec451

    ec451 Monkey

    I was not asking you to incriminate yourself in some way. But with all the talk about fighting tyranny etc it seems a perfectly reasonable question to ask (in general) what would have to happen for things to reach a point where you would engage in armed conflict with the police, army, etc. A certain (happily small) percentage of the population are not responsible. If we allow everyone to buy any sort of arms they want massive conflicts will be inevitable. It will be the stereo-typed wild-west * 1,000,,000. is that really the sort of word you want to live in? not me.
     
  6. Ura-Ki

    Ura-Ki Grudge Monkey

    How does that 6 shot revolver stand up against 7 tangos, 8, 9, 10,............... entire angry crowd?
    Having been in actual combat ( 11 deployments) I can tell you with out doubt, your argument is completely false and would get good people killed! Fact of the matter is, No living man has the right to tell me How, When, Where, or IF I can carry, or how many bullets my gun can or should be limited to carrying! Thank you for playing, but I WILL be keeping my 18 round fire breathing death making fully semi automatic hand gun, and if it's your intent that I should not, then I invite you to come and take it from me!
     
  7. Bandit99

    Bandit99 Monkey+++ Site Supporter+

    "Perhaps you are that rare individual how objectively can asset their motives. But I'm skeptical (nothing personal) since humans are just not very good and such things."
    No problem, I understand, it's the way of the world, sad but true...

    "I don't really think the left wants to remove the right to own a weapon, just to regulate it."
    Well, you know what I'm going to say...'not be infringe'... but have you read these Bills for Virginia? Here is a video recently posted thats really good and points out everyone's concerns...these Bills go far beyond regulation even though they are presented for Public Safety, Public Good, Common Sense Controls, blah, blah, blah...this is a ban, it basically nullifies the 2nd. Remember, your own words "But, I'm skeptical" so yes, we are skeptical when they say one thing then put into print another...

    "What is the probability of having to use your weapon to protect yourself vs the probability of other possible life threatening events and what measures have you taken to mitigate those?"
    You will find on this forum almost ALL the people have made a great effort to protect themselves from other life threatening events, not just those threats that require a firearm...after all that's what this forum is all about.

    "Vietnam (where the US was fighting one group of Vietnamese) is a very different country and environment than the US where (n your example) we would be fighting each other."
    Yes, different country, different environment but still remains almost a perfect example, even more so since we would be fighting each other which basically was what the North vs South Vietnamese were doing.

    "I have also not seen any source that claims more than 50% (most much less) of citizens owned a firearm in early America. And a flint lock muzzle loader does not make for a very good self defense weapon (unless you can get your attacker to wait a moment while you load the pan)."
    Well, if we cannot agree that 50% is an extremely low number (given time period doubtful you will find a better document) then I think we will have a problem finding common ground elsewhere. Personally, I believe the only reason a person did not own a firearm in that time period would be the cost of one. And, a flintlock was an excellent weapon for its time but obviously not now which is why modern firearms are needed.

    But, in truth, your question remains...
    @ec451 "My OP was about why the 2nd amendment generates so much fervor while the 1st much less so."
    It doesn't...not really as I can recount incidences concerning the 1st this past year where people were really very angry such as the bakers in Portland getting sued. However, if I had to say why the 2nd "generates so much fervor" it's because of fear. Yep! Fear. The fear of not being able to protect ourselves and the ones we love. The fear of a government whose overreach has exceed to the point of nullifying a document the defines our country. Again, I quote your own words, "I am skeptical..." We're very skeptical and have good reason to be: corruption in our highest Federal law enforcement agency (FBI), Government agencies like the IRS used against political groups, Government agencies like the NSA used to spy on American citizens (Snowden)...on and on and on. So, that's my answer plus how falls the 2nd so falls the others...like dominos.

    "Under what circumstance would you be prepared to take up arms against the government."
    I thought it was obvious... If they take my means of self defense away, leaving me defenseless from those that wish to harm me and mine and leave me at their mercy... Well, that's that... In truth, they just don't understand this, in that, they will not leave us any choice...for when they take the 2nd they are also, in fact, taking all my Bill of Rights for I would have no means to resist, no means to force them to arbitrate - hell - no reason for them to do so and history shows what happens next when you fight bullets with voices... and that is what the entire Virginia rally really is about... becoming subjects instead of citizens.
     
    Lancer likes this.
  8. ec451

    ec451 Monkey

    from that video I don't see that pulling a gun was remotely justified. All he had to do was just walk away he was in no danger that I could see but he stayed and continued to get into it with everyone in the area. I think his arrest was reasonable.[/QUOTE]
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2020
  9. ec451

    ec451 Monkey

    I don't know about you, but I do not live in a war zone.
     
  10. hot diggity

    hot diggity Monkey+++ Site Supporter+++

    ...yet.
     
  11. hot diggity

    hot diggity Monkey+++ Site Supporter+++

    This is a survival oriented site. Planning to survive changing situations is what we are here for. Lots of law abiding, tax paying citizens that just want to be left alone.
     
    Bandit99, john316, Seepalaces and 3 others like this.
  12. Dunerunner

    Dunerunner Brewery Monkey Moderator

    Ask yourself what might have happened had the man in the video stood his ground, which he has a right to do. How many times have groups of protesters turned violent in recent years? Do you know for sure that he was not in fear for his life? I'll bet that had he fired on the crowd, he would not have reached a hospital alive. Yes he could have walked away in the face of intimidation, but should he have to?
     
    Ura-Ki likes this.
  13. ec451

    ec451 Monkey

    I don't think that is how it will happen at all. The 2nd amendment will survive but become irrelevant. Free speech will be eroded and trustworthy independent voices will vanish. Social media will continue to be weaponized particularly by the government to the point that no one can tell what is true any more. People will only believe in their preconceptions and the actual state of the world will be irrelevant to most and perhaps even unknowable. Few will vote so any fired up group will be able to gain a majority and the country's leadership will swing wildly from one pole to the other. The US will lose all international standing and the Chinese surveillance state will march across the developing world (trade with China is a big problem, not the Trump is helping, but their "smart cities" program is a much bigger danger). The economy meanwhile will continue to be ok as mega corps run the show so most people won't care. Blade Runner here we come.

    That is why information I think is the key. Protecting it, trying to stop falsehoods from taking over, protecting privacy, adding GDPR rights (the right to be deleted, the right to not be tracked) are key to protecting our way of life in this century. The freedom of speech aspects of the 1st amendment are the most important. What does a free press mean, the right to publish anything? I'm not so sure. How can we allow the truth to come out from any source but prevent it from being swapped by a torrent of falsehoods? I don't know, but I think these questions are far more important than the right to own a gun or how many bullets will fit into it.
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2020
  14. ec451

    ec451 Monkey

    Should he have walked away in the face of intimidation? yes. I agree if he had fired at the crowd he might have been swarmed and killed, or they might have run. I don't know. But why let it get to that point?
    "as he had a right to do"? maybe so, but why do it? even assuming he was facing rage (and it didn't look that way to me) why meet it with rage of your own instead of just walking away? meeting rage with rage will never change anyones mind or accomplish anything other than getting someone hurt. what is the point?
     
  15. BTPost

    BTPost Stumpy Old Fart Snow Monkey Moderator

    Ah, but the question REALLY IS, Are you willing to bet your life and the lives of those you Love, on that premiss? It is better to have the tools, and not need them, than to need them, and not have them, or be able to get them... When seconds count, the Police are minutes away......
     
    Seepalaces, Ura-Ki and 3M-TA3 like this.
  16. Lancer

    Lancer TANSTAFL! Site Supporter+++


    "I don't really think the left wants to remove the right to own a weapon"
    Bullshit to be quite blunt.
    They want the entire population completely disarmed, with the sole exception of their personal bodyguards and goon squads.
    Diane Feinstein is one of the dimtard Pols that has explicitly stated she want complete disarmament. There are others. I won't waste anymore time with researching the quotes - you can find them on your own.
    The fact of the matter is that ANY government that disarms is populace eventually becomes tyrannical. Yo may use Venezuela as a prime example: Once the most prosperous and wealthy country in the Americas barring the USA. Now it's an utter an complete shithole. Why? Because leftists were voted in and immediately disarmed the civilian population. Once that is accomplished the communists can do anything they want since the PEOPLE can no longer resist.
    And the NRA doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things regardless of what your masters at CNN may say. It is a representative organization, not a control center.
    What matters is established history and the tyrannical bent of ALL liberals.
    And id you don't like it here why don't yo pack up your hovel and move.
     
    john316 and Bandit99 like this.
  17. Lancer

    Lancer TANSTAFL! Site Supporter+++

    This is your opinion. Nothing more. And I really do not care a rat's @ss what your opinion is.
    Now be a good little Dim and go read the US Constitution, immediately followed by the Federalist Papers. You will learn, maybe, that the 2nd has precisely ZERO to do with hunting or personal self defense. It has EVERYTHING to so with keeping a tyrannical government in check.
     
    ghrit, john316, Ura-Ki and 1 other person like this.
  18. Lancer

    Lancer TANSTAFL! Site Supporter+++

    Yet.
     
    Seepalaces, Ura-Ki and hot diggity like this.
  19. HK_User

    HK_User A Productive Monkey is a Happy Monkey

    Ah well [​IMG]Lancer it's (He she it) is just another time waster playing games.
    Coffee time for me and mine and off to the DAV Office to help a Vet with disability papers.
    You recon the troll will draw extra pay for being on the Monkey and trying to play Provcactor?
     
    Ura-Ki and hot diggity like this.
  20. ec451

    ec451 Monkey

    amazing how you are so adept at discerning the thinking and motivations of others while you remain totally objective. Its always the others that are biased and lead astray and not correctly reading history. If you do not accept the possibility that you could be wrong (as I do) there is no point in discussing anything. Be well.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary
17282WuJHksJ9798f34razfKbPATqTq9E7