Anyone out there who is PROUD to have the 2nd Amendment?

[str8manwithadickinhisass]

Here in West by God Virginia you don't need a permit to carry a handgun as long as it is holstered and in plain view. You have to have a permit to conceal it. We have one of the lowest crime rates in the nation.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

So? Can´t I use a tank or a rocket launcher to shoot stuff?

"Whether it's a lead ball and musket or a black talon coming through a cop's Spectre vest, they saw this coming, bullets are bullets."

How can you possibly say that? How do you know? Just because you´re intelligent doesn´t mean you can see through time.

You finish by saying that "bullets are bullets." This is not so. There´s no way the founding fathers when thinking of the word "bullet" were capable of conjuring up images of "body armor piercing rounds." Body armor didn´t even exist!

Someone asked me why I should care about American´s rights and freedoms. I thought it was a silly question so I gave a silly answer. Here´s a more serious one. Why shouldn´t I be interested? Aren´t any of you ever interested in the world outside the US? There is one, you know.

Actually I very much appreciate your repsonse. The reasons I say that our forefathers saw the future coming when they wrote the Bill of Rights is because they were the best educated men of the time.

If we were starting over today, an American leader may want to assembpe a think tank composed of say Alan Greenspan on economics, Bill Joy on computers/technology, Craig Ventner on Biology, and other leaders in their fields, they could get a pretty good understanding of where things were headed. Could they see the future, of course not. But they could put a document together which would anticipate a lot of what was to come.

OK - the founders of the US didn't have teh technology available to them: no computer modeling, no collected data, etc. But they did have an understanding of the past as well as America's place in the present (late 1700's) and future.

Based on that, I am sure they were able to visualize expansion, improvements in technology, etc. Throughout history, was has driven technological imrpvement. Even the Internet is a prodcut of teh US Dept. of Defense. So they saw a lot of this coming.

We (Americans) do our founders a great disservice when we look at these documents with eyes only for the present. They are not meant to be revised, only amended.

As to your other point: there is a lot of validity to the criticism of Americans knowing nothing else. I think, though, that Spetember 11th changed that, and over time, Americans will get more informed.

 

[aurelius]

In the early 19th century Mercedes Benz engineers deduced that the world market for automobiles would never exceed 1 million because of the limits regarding the number of qualified chauffers in the world. These men were brilliant and look at this ridiculous assertion. The same men also believed travel in excess of 25 miles an hour to be impossible.

Education doesn´t mean you can anticipate the future at all. The world of 1776 bears little relation to today´s world. Its no fault of the founding fathers. Be careful not to endow these men with mystical supernatural levels of understanding.

You say we do a disservice when looking at a nearly 250 year old document with only eyes for the present. I would suggest that everything needs a context, including the Constitution. Without it, words are meaningless, like saying "bullets are bullets."

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

In the early 19th century Mercedes Benz engineers deduced that the world market for automobiles would never exceed 1 million because of the limits regarding the number of qualified chauffers in the world. These men were brilliant and look at this ridiculous assertion. The same men also believed travel in excess of 25 miles an hour to be impossible.

Education doesn´t mean you can anticipate the future at all. The world of 1776 bears little relation to today´s world. Its no fault of the founding fathers. Be careful not to endow these men with mystical supernatural levels of understanding.

You say we do a disservice when looking at a nearly 250 year old document with only eyes for the present. I would suggest that everything needs a context, including the Constitution. Without it, words are meaningless, like saying "bullets are bullets."

You're right, IBM in the late 1940's said we would never have a use for more that 10 computers. In 1980 IBM also said "No Mr. Gates, we don;t need your operating system".

Smart people can misjudge things, and the American "founding fathers" were not supernatural. But a lot of the things in the Bill of Rights are timeless, like protection against illegal search and seizure, or free spech and assembly.

The Second Amendment often comes under scrutiny becauise a musket and lead ball of today has become the Glock and black talon that shreds Kevlar. Various interpretations of this amendment abound.

Many say that teh Second Amendment was needed to protect against Indian attacks and to live a "frontier" lifestyle, so that the 2nd Amendment is now outdated. One could safely conclude that the Amendment was intended for Americans to be able to protect themselves when the government couldn't be there to do it.

Our founders did not want a government that focused on protecting citizens - the price of security from the government is decreased liberty. Certainly they knew that.

Even today, there are threats to Americans' safety that the governement cannot and should not protect us from. The threats are not Indians anymore, but there is still crime etc., and teh government simply cannot (and should not) be there.

The 2nd Amendment was designed so that Americans could protect themselves, in order that teh governement would not have to. That has not fundamentally changed.

 

[Prometheus]

This thread should serve as a reminder to thinking people that rights and freedoms are only as strong as their defense. There are plenty (a majority?) of ignorant people more than willing to give up their rights without a whimper, so long as it doesn't affect their MTV viewing habits.

The 2nd Amendment is in keeping with the goal of the other 9 Amendments in the Bill of Rights - to limit government power. Abuse of power by government is a constant theme of history, and a sure way to increase that power is to render the abused defenseless. (another way might be to make them quasi-slaves by taxing them so heavily that they work 6 months out of the year to earn taxes to feed entitlement programs, but that's another thread)

As to crime rates - if you look at the highest crime-rate areas, you'll see a direct correllation between violent crime and gun-control laws - the cities with the toughest laws have the highest crime rates, over long periods within which the laws were in place (ie, the high rates occur after the laws were passed): D.C., NYC, Detroit, LA, Johannesburg, etc. And areas with the most lenient gun laws have, you guessed it, low crime rates (Vermont, Idaho for example). Johannesburg is a good example of crime literally exploding after gun-owners were made into criminals - it has become the murder capital of the world over the last decade, and banning guns doesn't seem to have prevented it, much to the dismay of socialists everywhere.

My question to RyanH is: can you identify a single instance where a measured violent crime rate in a specific area was significantly reduced by passing gun-control laws?

 

[aurelius]

Sushi X to answer your question, yes. i'm worried europe is headed towards a new form of socialism and what's worst is they'll see it as the new way, or the new world oder and try to convince americans it's the best way. they've already convinced the U.N.

Interested in European politics, are you? Can you explain what you mean by your statement. How is Europe headed "towards a new form of socialism." What is going on the make you think this?

 

[aurelius]

The 2nd Amendment was designed so that Americans could protect themselves, in order that teh governement would not have to. That has not fundamentally changed.

Why does America have armed police then?

With regards to the Constitution. I wouldn´t use a map just because George Washington used it. "Good enough for him so it must be good enough for me." Nonsense. You have to check it first.

I know what some people are thinking already... HERESY!

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

Why does America have armed police then?

With regards to the Constitution. I wouldn´t use a map just because George Washington used it. "Good enough for him so it must be good enough for me." Nonsense. You have to check it first.

To answer your first question, we have armed police tp protect citizens as best they can. In a "free" society, it is unrealistic to expect police tp protect us from every eventuality. We could surely trade freedom for security, and have poice living with us, on every corner....hell, we could increase income tax to 90% and have 50 million police. They could be everywhere. Crime would drop to near nothing.

That's called martial law. Isn't that great? Founders realized that to ensuire a free society, there must be police, but a good deal of responsibility for the society's freedom rests with the inddividual.

I don't think too many Americans would tell you that we are using the "map" because the founders drew it. I believe in it because it contains the principles for a free society in any day and age.

 

[chesty]

Yes, I do, and all the bill of rights. You are only fooling yourself if you think disarming the law abiding will lower the crime rate. Notice, law abidiing, meaning we obey the laws whether or not we believe them. Why, because we believe in our country. The criminals, the non-law abiding, do not believe in this country, do not follow the laws and will always be able to be armed. Makes the rest of us easy prey, especially for the gov't.

 

[Sushi X]

socialist believe in disarming people. guns are being outlawed in many european nations. the formation of the euro-dollar, and all the socialized healthcare and other programs i keep hearing about from my european friends. then you all look at america and see we have the rights and freedoms to carry guns and that insurance here in america is part of a capitalist society and you all don't like it. it scares you to think that a country can still remain "free" and you seemed worried we will oneday try to take over by forcing our way of life on you, that's what scares me about europe heading into a new socialist society.