The loss of the 2nd Amendment and its consequences

[RetiredGySgt]

If the Government manages to strip us of our second amendment rights the following will occur in my opinion.

After they remove the right to be armed, which is where this is going, the 1st will fall, first assembly will be restricted followed by free speech. Then the right to religion will be stripped.

After the 1st is gone the 4th will be stripped, we already don't really own our homes, you must pay taxes every year or have them confiscated. This will just accelerate into out right confiscation as allowed by the Supreme Court a couple years ago. No right to property except where the Government decides they don't want it. As for search and seizure, hell one can make a stink about that just like they have about "the children" and guns.

With no right to arms, no freedom of speech or assembly and property rights stripped, what follows in quick succession is Amendment 6, then 7 and 8.

It won't happen over night. But once we start down this road that is where we are headed.

The argument that because 20 kids got killed 320 million must be disarmed is going to to be repeated if it works. next time it will be assembly, for the sake of the children we must not allow groups to assemble and spew what ever rhetoric they are currently allowed to. Of course only the fringe groups will be mentioned but the new laws will encompass ALL assembly, for the CHILDREN.

And what can I tell you about free speech? Hell that one is a serious pain in the ass for the Government. Once again for the Children we need to restrict all kind of speech. FOR THE CHILDREN, of course.

Religion? The left already has a long laundry list of reasons Religion is bad. They will simply update them and apply them to some minority group and demand religion not have freedom to infringe on this or that groups feelings any more.

These three will be slow in coming but come they will.

As for private property rights? The Supreme Court already ruled that a State can confiscate your property using imminent domain for the simple reason some other person or group will pay them more for it or pay more in taxes.

Once the 1st and 2nd are gone no more worry about the pesky population going postal if we start seizing their property.

Speedy trial? Hell that is already a joke in some cases. Once the Government has throttled the people and the press they will just take as long as they need to fabricate, err I mean build a case.

This will of course involve that pesky 5th amendment too. I mean think of the criminals that get off cause they have the right to face their accusers? Or that pesky right to not incriminate ones self? Think of all the children we can save if molesters, kidnappers and murderers could not stay quiet?

This doesn't happen over night but it is a steady progress.

Meanwhile we have posters on this board salivating at the idea of 5 or 6 Liberal Supreme Court Judges.

Legally and Constitutionally the current attempt to grab guns and restrict them are unreasonable and violate case law and precedent. But note carefully the left does not CARE.

So the debate is who thinks the fraction of a fraction of a percent of murders that occur and the even smaller number of children murdered and the extremely even smaller number of mass killings justifies the removal of Constitutional rights?

 

[whitehall]

If the Hussein administrations manages to turn the Bill of Rights into 9 Amendments it won't be long until we are down to one or two.

 

[PaulS1950]

It happened in England... the "one step" process took away the guns one type at a time until all the guns were taken. The common statement through it all? "We don't want all the guns just..."
The people there even forgot about the Magna Carta that provided at least some rights.
Now they don't even have the right to defend themselves and if they do they are arrested and sent to prison.
What makes you think THAT won't happen here if we let it?

 

[Dr Grump]

It happened in England... the "one step" process took away the guns one type at a time until all the guns were taken. The common statement through it all? "We don't want all the guns just..."
The people there even forgot about the Magna Carta that provided at least some rights.
Now they don't even have the right to defend themselves and if they do they are arrested and sent to prison.
What makes you think THAT won't happen here if we let it?

There were hardly any guns in the UK to begin with....so your argument is superfluous....

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It happened in England... the "one step" process took away the guns one type at a time until all the guns were taken. The common statement through it all? "We don't want all the guns just..."
The people there even forgot about the Magna Carta that provided at least some rights.
Now they don't even have the right to defend themselves and if they do they are arrested and sent to prison.
What makes you think THAT won't happen here if we let it?

This isn’t England.

There is no political will in Congress to enact a new AWB. That leaves the matter mostly to the states and residents of those states to deal with, either through the legislative process in an effort to prevent additional restrictions, or in state and Federal courts.

 

[S.J.]

Our commie in chief isn't wasting any time stripping us of our constitutional rights, is he? He only has 4 years in which to achieve absolute power over the United States.

 

[PaulS1950]

When the gun restrictions began in England the population had quite a few guns. But that was back when revolvers were new on the scene. They were the first guns banned because they had high capacity that was dangerous. Five rounds in a muzzle loading revolver was dangerous...
Now, due to their astronomically high violent crime rate they want to ban long kitchen knives.

You either learn from history or you are doomed to repeat it.
It was never an outright ban of all guns in England but it really was - just one little step at a time. You wonder why people here recoil when not so little steps are suggested?
Now the folks in England are starting to try to get their guns back, to regain the right to defend themselves and get some of their heritage back. They are telling us to fight for our guns - the English subjects are saying that and so are the Australians. The American "gun nuts" are being supported by the people who have had their rights removed by attrition. Look around at the rest of the world. China wants the American population disarmed; The UN wants the American people disarmed; The Middle east wants Americans to be disarmed. Look even closer at the world and you see that the populations that are being wiped out across the globe are people that have been disarmed. Those populations with the highest guns per capita are the ones with the lowest violent crime rates. The countries with the most gun controls are the ones with the highest violent crime rates.

Go ahead, dismiss it as just more "gun nut" talk. That is the exact thing that "progressive" populations have done throughout history. Then they watched as their neighbors were carted off, then it was friends and then it was them.

 

[Katzndogz]

You are wrong. Stripping away the bill of rights will happen overnight.

 

[eots]

If the Government manages to strip us of our second amendment rights the following will occur in my opinion.

After they remove the right to be armed, which is where this is going, the 1st will fall, first assembly will be restricted followed by free speech. Then the right to religion will be stripped.

After the 1st is gone the 4th will be stripped, we already don't really own our homes, you must pay taxes every year or have them confiscated. This will just accelerate into out right confiscation as allowed by the Supreme Court a couple years ago. No right to property except where the Government decides they don't want it. As for search and seizure, hell one can make a stink about that just like they have about "the children" and guns.

With no right to arms, no freedom of speech or assembly and property rights stripped, what follows in quick succession is Amendment 6, then 7 and 8.

It won't happen over night. But once we start down this road that is where we are headed.

The argument that because 20 kids got killed 320 million must be disarmed is going to to be repeated if it works. next time it will be assembly, for the sake of the children we must not allow groups to assemble and spew what ever rhetoric they are currently allowed to. Of course only the fringe groups will be mentioned but the new laws will encompass ALL assembly, for the CHILDREN.

And what can I tell you about free speech? Hell that one is a serious pain in the ass for the Government. Once again for the Children we need to restrict all kind of speech. FOR THE CHILDREN, of course.

Religion? The left already has a long laundry list of reasons Religion is bad. They will simply update them and apply them to some minority group and demand religion not have freedom to infringe on this or that groups feelings any more.

These three will be slow in coming but come they will.

As for private property rights? The Supreme Court already ruled that a State can confiscate your property using imminent domain for the simple reason some other person or group will pay them more for it or pay more in taxes.

Once the 1st and 2nd are gone no more worry about the pesky population going postal if we start seizing their property.

Speedy trial? Hell that is already a joke in some cases. Once the Government has throttled the people and the press they will just take as long as they need to fabricate, err I mean build a case.

This will of course involve that pesky 5th amendment too. I mean think of the criminals that get off cause they have the right to face their accusers? Or that pesky right to not incriminate ones self? Think of all the children we can save if molesters, kidnappers and murderers could not stay quiet?

This doesn't happen over night but it is a steady progress.

Meanwhile we have posters on this board salivating at the idea of 5 or 6 Liberal Supreme Court Judges.

Legally and Constitutionally the current attempt to grab guns and restrict them are unreasonable and violate case law and precedent. But note carefully the left does not CARE.

So the debate is who thinks the fraction of a fraction of a percent of murders that occur and the even smaller number of children murdered and the extremely even smaller number of mass killings justifies the removal of Constitutional rights?

RGS..you are starting to sound like one of those so called "conspiracy theorist"

 

[Mad Scientist]

You either learn from history or you are doomed to repeat it.
It was never an outright ban of all guns in England but it really was - just one little step at a time.
Look around at the rest of the world. China wants the American population disarmed; The UN wants the American people disarmed; The Middle east wants Americans to be disarmed. Look even closer at the world and you see that the populations that are being wiped out across the globe are people that have been disarmed. Those populations with the highest guns per capita are the ones with the lowest violent crime rates. The countries with the most gun controls are the ones with the highest violent crime rates.
Go ahead, dismiss it as just more "gun nut" talk. That is the exact thing that "progressive" populations have done throughout history. Then they watched as their neighbors were carted off, then it was friends and then it was them.

Great post!

Typical Ignorant American: "What's a 'Magna Carta?' Some kinda condom?"

 

[52ndStreet]

All part of a larger conspiracy to confiscate Guns and assault rilfes from Americans and people from all over the entire world. The Newton masacre was just an excuse, but the agenda and plan has been there all the time. Obama and Cuomo , and all those anti Gun politicians should all be barred from politics for the rest of their lives.

The United Nations, and the New World Order people are all behinde this. Obama is a member of this council on foreign relations. Get it?

 

[1Templar]

Paranoid much?

 

[PaulS1950]

New york was spanked hard by the supreme court and then they turn around and pass this law? How long will it take for this one to be turned around?

If the AWB is passed - how long do you think it will be before the supreme court overturns it?
Anyone who has read the briefs following any of the supreme court's rulings on guns can see that these are the types of guns that are protected by the second amendment according the the court.

I know this is not only a bad piece of legistalation but also an unconstitutional law.
First it adderesses none of the concerns of those who are promoting it. It is a punishment to people who have not been convicted of any crime. it is beyond the powers granted to the federal government by the constitution. It is a direct attack on the G_d given rights protected by the second amendment. It is a grievous attack on the Republic of the USA in an effort to make it into a democracy which is in inself an act of treason.

"I pledge alliegence to the flag of the United States of America, and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands..."

That is why I will not comply with it.

 

[SayMyName]

No one is going to be disarmed accept for those that would never have been allowed into the militia of Washington's day in the first place, namely, the felon, mentally ill, or the malcontent and traitors. No reason that can't be held fast to this day with universal background checks, including at gun shows.

 

[Sactowndog]

If the Government manages to strip us of our second amendment rights the following will occur in my opinion.

After they remove the right to be armed, which is where this is going, the 1st will fall, first assembly will be restricted followed by free speech. Then the right to religion will be stripped.

After the 1st is gone the 4th will be stripped, we already don't really own our homes, you must pay taxes every year or have them confiscated. This will just accelerate into out right confiscation as allowed by the Supreme Court a couple years ago. No right to property except where the Government decides they don't want it. As for search and seizure, hell one can make a stink about that just like they have about "the children" and guns.

With no right to arms, no freedom of speech or assembly and property rights stripped, what follows in quick succession is Amendment 6, then 7 and 8.

It won't happen over night. But once we start down this road that is where we are headed.

The argument that because 20 kids got killed 320 million must be disarmed is going to to be repeated if it works. next time it will be assembly, for the sake of the children we must not allow groups to assemble and spew what ever rhetoric they are currently allowed to. Of course only the fringe groups will be mentioned but the new laws will encompass ALL assembly, for the CHILDREN.

And what can I tell you about free speech? Hell that one is a serious pain in the ass for the Government. Once again for the Children we need to restrict all kind of speech. FOR THE CHILDREN, of course.

Religion? The left already has a long laundry list of reasons Religion is bad. They will simply update them and apply them to some minority group and demand religion not have freedom to infringe on this or that groups feelings any more.

These three will be slow in coming but come they will.

As for private property rights? The Supreme Court already ruled that a State can confiscate your property using imminent domain for the simple reason some other person or group will pay them more for it or pay more in taxes.

Once the 1st and 2nd are gone no more worry about the pesky population going postal if we start seizing their property.

Speedy trial? Hell that is already a joke in some cases. Once the Government has throttled the people and the press they will just take as long as they need to fabricate, err I mean build a case.

This will of course involve that pesky 5th amendment too. I mean think of the criminals that get off cause they have the right to face their accusers? Or that pesky right to not incriminate ones self? Think of all the children we can save if molesters, kidnappers and murderers could not stay quiet?

This doesn't happen over night but it is a steady progress.

Meanwhile we have posters on this board salivating at the idea of 5 or 6 Liberal Supreme Court Judges.

Legally and Constitutionally the current attempt to grab guns and restrict them are unreasonable and violate case law and precedent. But note carefully the left does not CARE.

So the debate is who thinks the fraction of a fraction of a percent of murders that occur and the even smaller number of children murdered and the extremely even smaller number of mass killings justifies the removal of Constitutional rights?

So the base of the 2nd Amendment is the people should have the firepower to overthrow the federal government. Basically I agree with this assumption. The fear I have is technology has advanced to the point that having assualt rifles will do little to deal with a government that has spent the last 15 years training how to deal with asymetric conflicts.

I would be more comfortable if drone technology and some of the other technology in fighting asymetic wars were transferred to the states and under the power of the governors and national guard. I would also like to see assault weapons biometrically coded to the person so they can't be used by the mentally ill or criminals.

I think a rational middle ground is possible if we keep in mind the intent of the 2nd admendment which is to insure military firepower can't and shouldn't be concentrated in the federal government.

 

[Katzndogz]

The goal of the left is to strip away the now useless Constitution.

 

[Spoonman]

No one is going to be disarmed accept for those that would never have been allowed into the militia of Washington's day in the first place, namely, the felon, mentally ill, or the malcontent and traitors. No reason that can't be held fast to this day with universal background checks, including at gun shows.

so if we are making sure everyone is safe to own with these background checks, why limit what can be owned and how much ammunition?

 

[S.J.]

It always starts out by taking them away from those who "shouldn't have them", and eventually ends up being "everyone except the government". It's called incrementalism.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Paranoid much?

Blind much?

 

[PaulS1950]

The loss of the second amendment would only remove the mandate to protect our rights. It would do nothing to remove the right to keep and bear arms because the amendment does not provide the right, it mearly protects it. The right is given at birth and is, as far as it goes, a universal right, meaning that it extends to all persons until they use it to interfere with the rights of others.