PDA

View Full Version : Reasons for the 2nd Amendment.



PeterSibley
07-08-2016, 06:57 PM
I've read here and elsewhere that one of the reasons for the 2nd Amendment is so Americans will have the ability to rise up and resist the overwhelming power of the State.

I wonder if the snipers in the police shooting see that as what they are doing? Resisting the power of police (the State) to randomly shoot citizens based on nothing more than individual whim .... extra judicial State executions.

CWSmith
07-08-2016, 07:11 PM
The shooter expressed a hatred for all white people. I think this is more civil war than revolution.

skuthorp
07-08-2016, 07:13 PM
There's a difference?

CWSmith
07-08-2016, 07:19 PM
There's a difference?

Huge. "Protecting our liberties from the government" sounds like patriotism and attracts other nutters who wrap themselves in the flag..

"Kill whitey" is seen for the hate it is.

Yes, I think there is a big difference.

skuthorp
07-08-2016, 07:22 PM
Depends on which side of the fence you are on. He was an american too, a still serving army veteran with OS service. Obviously the State was not protecting his liberties as he saw it.

ljb5
07-08-2016, 08:29 PM
I've read here and elsewhere that one of the reasons for the 2nd Amendment is so Americans will have the ability to rise up and resist the overwhelming power of the State.

This concept is discussed in the Federalist Papers, #46. Basically, they said you'd have to be a nutcase to think this is a legitimate argument.

I don't think they anticipated so many people would say, "Why yes, I am!"

jerryrichter
07-08-2016, 08:36 PM
I may be wrong but I seem to recall reading that the argument behind the second amendment was to provide a core of armed men to be called upon to DEFEND THE GOVERNMENT (COUNTRY), without the necessity of maintaining a standing army al la (not Allah) the European powers.

PeterSibley
07-08-2016, 08:43 PM
That seems rational Jerry but the "opposing oppressive government" argument is also one I've seen presented in all seriousness .

Arizona Bay
07-08-2016, 08:48 PM
I may be wrong but I seem to recall reading that the argument behind the second amendment was to provide a core of armed men to be called upon to DEFEND THE GOVERNMENT (COUNTRY), without the necessity of maintaining a standing army al la (not Allah) the European powers.

This is how I understand it as well. The Govt. was mostly composed of rich land owners, and the militia was to be on call to protect to protect them, and their interests.

They were afraid of the power of a standing army, and maybe equally, they didn't want to pay for one. They didn't even want to pay for, or supply Washington's army during the revolution.

Canoez
07-08-2016, 08:52 PM
This is how I understand it as well. The Govt. was mostly composed of rich land owners, and the militia was to be on call to protect to protect them, and their interests.

They were afraid of the power of a standing army, and maybe equally, they didn't want to pay for one. They didn't even want to pay for, or supply Washington's army during the revolution.

I think they worried about a standing army and a Coup d'Etat.

Arizona Bay
07-08-2016, 08:54 PM
That seems rational Jerry but the "opposing oppressive government" argument is also one I've seen presented in all seriousness .

Check out the Whiskey Rebellion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion

Arizona Bay
07-08-2016, 08:56 PM
I think they worried about a standing army and a Coup d'Etat.

Zactly!

Donn
07-08-2016, 08:57 PM
He was an american[sic] too, a still serving army veteran with OS service.

That's the second time you've mentioned his OS service, as if it was something magical.

He was a carpenter/mason, attached to an Engineer unit for an 8 month deployment.

So what?

PeterSibley
07-08-2016, 09:00 PM
From his perspective he was opposing extra judicial killings and oppressive government power. Fighting back .

BrianW
07-08-2016, 09:18 PM
Appears he was in the 284th Engineers...


A Department of Defense official told The Daily Beast (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/08/micah-johnson-dallas-cop-killer-was-black-nationalist.html)that Micah Johnson was a private first class in the Army Reserves. He was part of the 284th Engineering Company, which is based in Santa Fe, New Mexico.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v136/BrianW/screen-capture_zpsgq9muycg.jpg




Found a link that they were stationed at FOB Gamberi, which was a fairly mellow place. That said, I did take this picture while flying into Gamberi in 2013...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v136/BrianW/Afghanistan%202013/roof_zps12274d42.jpg

Rocket hit an ANA building.

Cuyahoga Chuck
07-08-2016, 09:31 PM
I've read here and elsewhere that one of the reasons for the 2nd Amendment is so Americans will have the ability to rise up and resist the overwhelming power of the State.

I wonder if the snipers in the police shooting see that as what they are doing? Resisting the power of police (the State) to randomly shoot citizens based on nothing more than individual whim .... extra judicial State executions.

That's NRA propaganda. The colonists here abhored standing armies and thought citizen militias were a viable alternative in the wilds of North America. And having a weapon made good sense in a vast land with a scattered population.

PeterSibley
07-08-2016, 09:58 PM
Then the NRA should be praising this man's stand against the forces of tyranny !

BrianW
07-08-2016, 11:13 PM
Then the NRA should be praising this man's stand against the forces of tyranny !

Except the police actions for which Johnson felt the need to retaliate, had nothing to do with national security or a political movement.

So, the NRA would not be interested in singing his praises.

Gerarddm
07-08-2016, 11:16 PM
#7: DING DING DING we have a winner!

jerryrichter
07-09-2016, 05:12 PM
The right wing blabbosphere is constantly explaining the Constitution as being in response to British oppression before the Revolution. In my opinion, it was at least as strong a response to the totally ineffectual and weak federal government of the Articles of the Confederation.

Phil Y
07-09-2016, 06:19 PM
Is it the Swiss who require every citizen to do a year or two of service, in order that everyone can handle a weapon? Seems to work out a bit differently over there though.

Chip-skiff
07-09-2016, 06:48 PM
Despite the "originalist" BS, the activist Supreme Court decisions on the second amendment are very far out of line with the intentions of the framers of the Constitution. In the process of trying form a working government, they obviously would not enable heavily-armed individual challenges, of the sort our present crop of gun-sick loonies regard as a sacred right.

Interesting how many US terrorist shooters and bombers are military veterans. Our violence overseas comes home to roost.

B_B
07-09-2016, 07:04 PM
... I wonder if the snipers in the police shooting ...
Just to be clear -there was a single shooter, he wasn't on rooftops.