Ah, a law unto yourself.
2nd Amendment What the heck does it say?
- Thread starter wild eyed willy
- Start date
Ah, a law unto yourself.
wild eyed willy
New member
To all who read this thread, and think I am crazy for wrtiing it, read the first link above.
cc_ryder
New member
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
It is true that some try to confuse the meaning of the Second Amendment by claiming it is a "living document". They try to distort the meaning of militia to equate it to the National Guard, a government regulated military unit.
At the time, the militia was composed of armed male citizens. The United States had already declared there independence from England, so these citizens were not Englishmen. These armed citizens came together, organised themselves (not by the government), for the protection of there community.
The way I make sense of the Second Amendment is to envision the militia as all the guys in my neighborhood with rifles. If there is a threat to the community we all assemble and march out to meet the threat. So this is how I read the Amendment:
Self regulated groups of armed male citizens, being necessary to the security of our neighborhood, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
I think when militia is seen in this way, it all comes together in a unified statement.
It is true that some try to confuse the meaning of the Second Amendment by claiming it is a "living document". They try to distort the meaning of militia to equate it to the National Guard, a government regulated military unit.
At the time, the militia was composed of armed male citizens. The United States had already declared there independence from England, so these citizens were not Englishmen. These armed citizens came together, organised themselves (not by the government), for the protection of there community.
The way I make sense of the Second Amendment is to envision the militia as all the guys in my neighborhood with rifles. If there is a threat to the community we all assemble and march out to meet the threat. So this is how I read the Amendment:
Self regulated groups of armed male citizens, being necessary to the security of our neighborhood, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
I think when militia is seen in this way, it all comes together in a unified statement.
Grognard Gunny
New member
..... and if that is what it takes to keep the Government from holding itself above the Law... then that is the way it shall be.
GG
wild eyed willy
New member
I was hoping you would respond to this thread, I have read many of your posts and I respect your opinion. can you elaborate more on your thoughts?
BTW is that a confederate uniform? are you a re-enactor?
Grognard Gunny
New member
Without going into a rather involved and long discourse on the Constitution.... the quick and dirty of it is:
1) The Constitution is the document that allows (sic!) the federal government to organize, streamline and level the playing field between and amongst the (now) 50 States. It was supposed to be a "limited" Government. The Constitution outlining the areas of responsibility of the Fed and the Bill of Rights delineated those areas in which the Fed was to stay away from.
2) Said Constitution would NOT have been signed into Law had not that Bill of Rights been attached to it and the tacit understanding that the Fed would "play in it's own back yard."
3) Thus, the Bill of Rights was the contingent factor that allowed our federal government to even come into existance.
4) If and when, as many of us feel, the federal government has overstepped, by a considerable margin, it's "granted" power(s), as free men it is our duty to "turn out" that Government, if not at the voting booth, then by other means.
5) Therein lies the kicker.... there is an ever increasing number of citizens who wish nothing more than to trade their freedom (including economic freedom) for security. Both physical and financial. (...and "vote" thusly.)
6) When and if this "class" of citizen outnumbers those who wish to keep their freedom, with the inherent uncertainty of facing life standing on one's own two feet implied........ then our freedoms will be curtailed, taken from us, restricted.... "for our own good", you understand. Bill of Rights be damned!
7) It is at that point where those who would oppose that trend, noticing how few we are becoming, just throw in the towell. (Ain't worth the giving of my life to "save" the drones from their own failings.) The bad part of it is, generally it is the self reliant that are taxed to give "financial security" to those who want the Government to so provide.
Just my "take" on things as they stand at present.
The avatar is a "screen shot" of Jeff Daniels in his role in the movie "Gettysburg" of Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, CO 20th Maine. (Later Maj Gen, Governor of Maine, President of his Alma Mater College. Six "purple hearts" during the Civil War.) A Professor of Applied Rhetoric (Philosophy, in reality.) and a good writer. Sort of a "hero" to me.
GG
1) The Constitution is the document that allows (sic!) the federal government to organize, streamline and level the playing field between and amongst the (now) 50 States. It was supposed to be a "limited" Government. The Constitution outlining the areas of responsibility of the Fed and the Bill of Rights delineated those areas in which the Fed was to stay away from.
2) Said Constitution would NOT have been signed into Law had not that Bill of Rights been attached to it and the tacit understanding that the Fed would "play in it's own back yard."
3) Thus, the Bill of Rights was the contingent factor that allowed our federal government to even come into existance.
4) If and when, as many of us feel, the federal government has overstepped, by a considerable margin, it's "granted" power(s), as free men it is our duty to "turn out" that Government, if not at the voting booth, then by other means.
5) Therein lies the kicker.... there is an ever increasing number of citizens who wish nothing more than to trade their freedom (including economic freedom) for security. Both physical and financial. (...and "vote" thusly.)
6) When and if this "class" of citizen outnumbers those who wish to keep their freedom, with the inherent uncertainty of facing life standing on one's own two feet implied........ then our freedoms will be curtailed, taken from us, restricted.... "for our own good", you understand. Bill of Rights be damned!
7) It is at that point where those who would oppose that trend, noticing how few we are becoming, just throw in the towell. (Ain't worth the giving of my life to "save" the drones from their own failings.) The bad part of it is, generally it is the self reliant that are taxed to give "financial security" to those who want the Government to so provide.
Just my "take" on things as they stand at present.
The avatar is a "screen shot" of Jeff Daniels in his role in the movie "Gettysburg" of Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, CO 20th Maine. (Later Maj Gen, Governor of Maine, President of his Alma Mater College. Six "purple hearts" during the Civil War.) A Professor of Applied Rhetoric (Philosophy, in reality.) and a good writer. Sort of a "hero" to me.
GG
localgirl
New member
Why, Gunny! I have been laboring under the illusion that picture was you! Now I'm just not sure what to picture as I'm reading your posts, a single eyebrow raised inquisitively.
Grognard Gunny
New member
Let it just suffice to say that Jeff Daniels will never be "threatened" by me in "chasing the ladies". LOL!
Although I do say that I have a certain appeal that is only appreciated by my two cats and my wife. :sarcastic:
But.... given the choice between brains or beauty....... gee..... I'd settle for either! :cray:
GG
Grognard Gunny
New member
Besides, I've been trying to "match mustaches" for a couple of years now. (Getting close, except mine is pure white.) LOL!
GG
GG
wild eyed willy
New member
This is one of the best explainations of the situation I have ever read. Thank you for the time you spent to offer it to us.
I thought I recognized the photo, but chamberland was union wasn't he? I'm thinking culps hill the second days fight right?
wild eyed willy
New member
TOO funny
Grognard Gunny
New member
Thanks for the vote of confidence!
Chamberlain WAS Union. His "day" was on Little Round Top, FAR Left end of the Union Line. My wife's family is from around here, since before the CW. I'm just along for the great weather..... that and it was the best place to "bail out" to when I lost my job in Chicago. (Which marked the fourth time I had been required to "start over" in my lifetime. Gets old after a while. LOL!)
GG
wild eyed willy
New member
I,ve been to gettysberg 3 times now, I enjoy the town...My best friend is an expert on the civil war, but I have trouble remembering the details...LOL
The Constitution was ratified on September 13, 1788. The Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments to the Constitution) were not adopted until December 15, 1791, more than 3 years after ratification of the Constitution.
Next you'll be claiming that Paul Revere rode through the night firing shots and ringing bells warning the British not to take away our guns.
Grognard Gunny
New member
OK. The Bill of Rights WAS signed ex post facto to the Constitution. Anyone who has any knowledge of the history of the whole shebang knows that, and should also know that the proposal for them was presented PRIOR to adoption of the Constitution, finalized afterwords and, since everyone "knew" they were coming, signed off on them.
Good on you for being able, at least, to read dates and differentiate between them, time-wise.
Actually Paul Revere did not shoot at all, albiet armed with a "Tommy Gun" and a pair of LAWs. He DID, however, forget his radio and could not call in the "Arc Light" on the Brits, as planned. Exactly why he had to ride off to make the warning of the British movement. He DID, however, leave a couple of trip wire triggered Claymores in the most likely British avenue of approach, thereby earning himself the Bronze Star.
I have, bye the way, a couple of the hairs of the original horse 'ol Paul rode. I would be more than willing to sell them to you, for a proper price, of course. I'll even throw in a few shares of a Bridge I own interest in up NY way. (You old History buff, you!)
GG
Good on you for being able, at least, to read dates and differentiate between them, time-wise.
Actually Paul Revere did not shoot at all, albiet armed with a "Tommy Gun" and a pair of LAWs. He DID, however, forget his radio and could not call in the "Arc Light" on the Brits, as planned. Exactly why he had to ride off to make the warning of the British movement. He DID, however, leave a couple of trip wire triggered Claymores in the most likely British avenue of approach, thereby earning himself the Bronze Star.
I have, bye the way, a couple of the hairs of the original horse 'ol Paul rode. I would be more than willing to sell them to you, for a proper price, of course. I'll even throw in a few shares of a Bridge I own interest in up NY way. (You old History buff, you!)
GG
wild eyed willy
New member
Gunny, I love reading your posts... BTW if you ask sarah Palin, she will tell you that Paul revear rode out that night to warn the British...
I myself have a horse shoe from Pauls ride... It fell off in front of my great great great great grandparents house. I too would part with this prize for the right amount of gold.... I don't however own any bridge realestate, for barter or trade..not even some swampland in FLA... I have to start investing...
I myself have a horse shoe from Pauls ride... It fell off in front of my great great great great grandparents house. I too would part with this prize for the right amount of gold.... I don't however own any bridge realestate, for barter or trade..not even some swampland in FLA... I have to start investing...
Terminal Lance
New member
The amendment means that we have the right to keep and bear arms to protect ourselves from the government. Think about it. After revolting against the tyrannical king George, and his well regulated militia, they probably thought the time may come again where the American people will have to do it again. That's my interpretation anyways, in a nutshell.
BC1
,
I think much is lost in interpretation as our liberals seek to redefine its meaning in light of a different era. Perhaps our founding fathers would have been clearer if they wrote it like a text message for all the carpel-tunnel syndrome techno-critics. U GT WAT I MEN?
Our founding fathers intent can be found in the numerous writings of the time by everyone from the signers of the Declaration of Independence to Thomas Paine. They could not have foreseen a time when people wouldn't understand the vernacular used. In writing the bill of rights they wanted to ensure we would never be under the rule of a tyrant king/leader again so they created a form of government by the people. It was predicated on the principals that "what God gave me, no man shall legislate away" an "all freedom exist at the end of a gun." It was intended to ensure the people would never lose these precious protections of self governance and freedom to pursue life, religion, etc... free of persecution.
Now some people want to view the bill of rights as a "living breathing document," its interpretation subject to changing times. A new world order. This is a great vision belonging to the likes of George Soros, Dr. Evil himself.
twogunwilly
American
I am the militia:triniti:
New Threads
-
Recent TX Appeals Court declaration that ATF arm brace rule is unconstitutional
- Started by lw07
- Replies: 1
-
Hunter Constantine or Phlster Enigma, for running?
- Started by sigsag1
- Replies: 1
-
-
-
Members online
No members online now.