An anti-gun leftist sees the truth, and understands the vital importance of the 2nd Amendment to our freedom and safety....

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Agree 100%.

Also people prone to suicide should not possess guns.

Should assisted suicide be legal?

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Too bad logic passed you by.

Criminals will find a weapon to inflict harm.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

How do you intend to do that? Search every house and apartment in the USA...

That's exactly what they want. Under Communism, there's no private property.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

At one point guns did not exist anywhere in the world......what was the stand out feature of that world? The strong raped, tortured, beat and enslaved the weak....

Then guns were invented and
slowly civilizarion was
forces on the evil peple of the world.

God made man. Sam Colt made men equal.

 

[Elton]

Those who support guns are complicit in over 10,000 murders and over 20,000 suicides each year in USA.

Most murder and suicide attempts with cutting weapons are unsuccessful.

I disagree. I was pretty firmly anti gun till I researched the Norway and Paris shootings. Those countries have very strong gun laws. Yet both suffered horrible mass shootings. Shootings, that would not happen here in the USA except for places where guns are outlawed. Only lawful people follow gun laws. Criminals don't.

I am a LYFT driver, I don't like the fact that LYFT doesn't allow me to carry a gun to defend myself. There are some customers who are very unpleasant. So far I have had no problems, but I fear that the day is coming when i will wish I had a gun.

 

[2aguy]

Anyone who drives a car is complicit in 38,000 deaths each year

Actually over 39,000

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

I disagree. I was pretty firmly anti gun till I researched the Norway and Paris shootings. Those countries have very strong gun laws. Yet both suffered horrible mass shootings. Shootings, that would not happen here in the USA except for places where guns are outlawed. Only lawful people follow gun laws. Criminals don't.

I am a LYFT driver, I don't like the fact that LYFT doesn't allow me to carry a gun to defend myself. There are some customers who are very unpleasant. So far I have had no problems, but I fear that the day is coming when i will wish I had a gun.

I'd carry anyway.

 

[Man of Ethics]

I disagree. I was pretty firmly anti gun till I researched the Norway and Paris shootings. Those countries have very strong gun laws. Yet both suffered horrible mass shootings. Shootings, that would not happen here in the USA except for places where guns are outlawed. Only lawful people follow gun laws. Criminals don't.

France and Norway have much lower murder rate then USA.

 

[Man of Ethics]

Should assisted suicide be legal?

Absolutely not. It is a great sin.

 

[2aguy]

France and Norway have much lower murder rate then USA.

If only american criminlas in democrat party controlled cities would stop murdering people.

Murder is a choice......

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Brett Weinstein is still an anti-gunner......he thinks guns are more harm than good......

He is wrong...but that isn't the point of this post....

Even though he still sees guns as more harmful than good.....he sees them as more good than harmful in the long run.......

As a young man I regarded the second amendment as the founders’ biggest blunder. As we head into 2022, my position has flipped — I now believe history may well come to regard it as the most far-sighted thing the founders did, not in spite of its vagueness, but because of it. It’s like a mysterious passage from a sacred text that forces living people to interpret it in a modern context. The founders believed the people needed to be able to defend their free state — with deadly force — whether that refers to a geographical state, or a state of being, or both.

=======
Most of those stocking up on guns and ammo belong to a culture, and like every other culture, it has its beliefs, suppositions and fears. That culture believes that tyranny may descend on us, even here in the freedom-loving United States of America, and that privately held guns are the key to fending it off.


I’m not a member of this culture, but I believe they may well be right about this.

In a country where politicians are increasingly prone to withdraw or stand-down the police to curry favour with confused constituents, it is easy to see how things can quickly escalate as they did in Kenosha, Wisconsin the night Kyle Rittenhouse shot three men in self-defence at a riot. To be clear, I do not believe Rittenhouse, then 17-years-old, should have been there with his AR-15.

But I also don’t believe the streets of American cities should ever be ceded to violent ideological bullies — a now familiar pattern that set the stage for Rittenhouse’s actions
----
To understand why private guns may be decisive in a fight against tyranny, let’s take a moment to revisit what is assuredly the most inscrutable section of the United States Constitution, the Second Amendment: “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’s almost like a deliberate non-sequitur. In fact, after decades of pondering the question, I’m now fairly convinced that that is exactly what the founders gave us: an intentionally vague pronouncement designed to force the question into the future, to ensure it would be repeatedly reevaluated to keep up with changing weaponry and circumstances. Near as I can tell, it’s a place holder for a principle they could not tailor in advance.

They clearly didn’t want to give the legislature or the courts complete latitude. They tied our hands; our representatives are not allowed to disarm the public, even if a majority desires it. And the founders gave us a strong hint about why — something about the need to protect a “free state” from, you know… stuff. But they didn’t tell us how much firepower citizens should be allowed to have. And thank goodness they didn’t, because muzzle-loaded weapons are no better a model of modern weapons than a movable-type printing press is for an algorithmically personalised infinite scroll.

The liberal case for gun ownership

Liberty needs defending from the threat of tyranny

unherd.com

This fails as a hasty generalization fallacy.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

That culture believes that tyranny may descend on us, even here in the freedom-loving United States of America, and that privately held guns are the key to fending it off.

Wrong.

There is nothing in the text, history, or case law of the Second Amendment that endorsed insurrectionist dogma.

The Second Amendment codifies an individual right to possess a firearm pursuant to lawful self-defense, not to act as a ‘deterrent’ to government tyranny.

“…the insurrectionist interpretation of the Declaration of Rights is fundamentally flawed. An historically sound understanding of the Second Amendment's English heritage belies the proposition that the Second Amendment was intended to grant an individual right to keep or bear
arms against governmental tyranny.”

http://malvinartley.com/PDF%20Files/THE%20HIDDEN%20HISTORY%20OF%20THE%20SECOND%20AMENDMENT.pdf

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Wrong.

There is nothing in the text, history, or case law of the Second Amendment that endorsed insurrectionist dogma.

The Second Amendment codifies an individual right to possess a firearm pursuant to lawful self-defense, not to act as a ‘deterrent’ to government tyranny.

“…the insurrectionist interpretation of the Declaration of Rights is fundamentally flawed. An historically sound understanding of the Second Amendment's English heritage belies the proposition that the Second Amendment was intended to grant an individual right to keep or bear
arms against governmental tyranny.”

http://malvinartley.com/PDF%20Files/THE%20HIDDEN%20HISTORY%20OF%20THE%20SECOND%20AMENDMENT.pdf

Tyranny isn't restricted to just government oppression. What we see from ANTIFA and BLM using violence to intimidate the citizenry is tyranny, too.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

France and Norway have much lower murder rate then USA.

France and Norway are some of the whitest countries in the world.

 

[Blues Man]

Brett Weinstein is still an anti-gunner......he thinks guns are more harm than good......

He is wrong...but that isn't the point of this post....

Even though he still sees guns as more harmful than good.....he sees them as more good than harmful in the long run.......

As a young man I regarded the second amendment as the founders’ biggest blunder. As we head into 2022, my position has flipped — I now believe history may well come to regard it as the most far-sighted thing the founders did, not in spite of its vagueness, but because of it. It’s like a mysterious passage from a sacred text that forces living people to interpret it in a modern context. The founders believed the people needed to be able to defend their free state — with deadly force — whether that refers to a geographical state, or a state of being, or both.

=======
Most of those stocking up on guns and ammo belong to a culture, and like every other culture, it has its beliefs, suppositions and fears. That culture believes that tyranny may descend on us, even here in the freedom-loving United States of America, and that privately held guns are the key to fending it off.


I’m not a member of this culture, but I believe they may well be right about this.

In a country where politicians are increasingly prone to withdraw or stand-down the police to curry favour with confused constituents, it is easy to see how things can quickly escalate as they did in Kenosha, Wisconsin the night Kyle Rittenhouse shot three men in self-defence at a riot. To be clear, I do not believe Rittenhouse, then 17-years-old, should have been there with his AR-15.

But I also don’t believe the streets of American cities should ever be ceded to violent ideological bullies — a now familiar pattern that set the stage for Rittenhouse’s actions
----
To understand why private guns may be decisive in a fight against tyranny, let’s take a moment to revisit what is assuredly the most inscrutable section of the United States Constitution, the Second Amendment: “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’s almost like a deliberate non-sequitur. In fact, after decades of pondering the question, I’m now fairly convinced that that is exactly what the founders gave us: an intentionally vague pronouncement designed to force the question into the future, to ensure it would be repeatedly reevaluated to keep up with changing weaponry and circumstances. Near as I can tell, it’s a place holder for a principle they could not tailor in advance.

They clearly didn’t want to give the legislature or the courts complete latitude. They tied our hands; our representatives are not allowed to disarm the public, even if a majority desires it. And the founders gave us a strong hint about why — something about the need to protect a “free state” from, you know… stuff. But they didn’t tell us how much firepower citizens should be allowed to have. And thank goodness they didn’t, because muzzle-loaded weapons are no better a model of modern weapons than a movable-type printing press is for an algorithmically personalised infinite scroll.

The liberal case for gun ownership

Liberty needs defending from the threat of tyranny

unherd.com

How vague are the words "shall not be infringed"?

 

[2aguy]

How vague are the words "shall not be infringed"?

Words mean nothing to democrats and other leftists....which is why we need to keep them away from all forms of power....

 

[okfine]

Yeah, then all we have to worry about is pressure cooker bombs, diesel and fertilizer truck bombs, knives, clubs, cars, chains, skateboards. You're a moron.

With that I consider you the epitome of moron.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Nope...the issue is the democrat party releasing known, violent, criminals with long histories of crime and violence......

Why are they doing it? Can you explain that?

You doofus.

Because they dislike you?

 

[Concerned American]

With that I consider you the epitome of moron.

Oh Gee! Whatever shall I do? A message board idiot doesn't get logic. Woe is me, the insignificant one makes an irrelevant remark.

 

[okfine]

Oh Gee! Whatever shall I do? A message board idiot doesn't get logic. Woe is me, the insignificant one makes an irrelevant remark.

Makes you think, eh? Hmmm.