The Second Amendment Was A Failure From The Start, And Should Have Been Repealed 200 Years Ago

[Tom Paine 1949]

Toddsterpatriot :

Sorry!
I’m an old senile fool for writing “IRA” and not “NRA” … Again!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Toddsterpatriot :

Sorry!
I’m an old senile fool for writing “IRA” and not “NRA” … Again!

You'll get it right next time.

 

[Friends]

Guns are disgusting. People who love guns are disgusting. I want the government to punish them by confiscating their guns.

 

[miketx]

Guns are disgusting. People who love guns are disgusting. I want the government to punish them by confiscating their guns.

Come get them young lady.

 

[miketx]

Laws about freedom of speech don’t just shift when it comes to content and context, they’re also constantly updated to address something else: technology. Radio. Movies. Television. The internet. Even comic books. All have sparked changes in what is permitted and how speech is regulated. But somehow, we pretend that guns are different; that words written when the most deadly weapon required a ramrod and black powder mean that we can’t make adjustments for a semi-automatic rifle and a 30-round clip.

The truth is that guns are different. Because the right to bear arms is a lesser right. A right that was never intended to exist at all.

What makes individual gun ownership a lesser right? It’s a right that only exists in the minds of a handful of hard-right Supreme Court justices who happen to be on the court at this moment. Until 2008, no federal court had ever ruled that the Second Amendment included a right to individual gun ownership. It was always understood as it was written: Guns were allowed in individual hands as a means to supply the armed forces.

Here’s the Milwaukee Independent looking at how Chief Justice Warren Burger discussed the Second Amendment.

That the Second Amendment exists at all is more an accident of timing than an attempt to put guns in the hands of every American.
The amendment grew out of a fear that having a standing army would leave the nation open to depredations by an authoritarian leader, or that the nascent democracy would be overthrown by a military junta. To that end, they explicitly inserted the Second Amendment as an alternative means of providing national defense.

There were multiple drafts of the Second Amendment. Every one of them includes text explaining that this amendment exists only because it’s needed to provide for the nation’s defense.
Just a year after the Constitution was ratified, George Washington nudged Congress to create an official U.S. military, but the still-fearful Congress limited that force to just few hundred soldiers and officers. It would be another six years before it was allowed to grow significantly. When war came in 1812 two things were immediately obvious: The number of soldiers then in the official U.S. military were far from enough to defend the nation, and the poorly organized civilian militias for which the Second Amendment was created were an absolute failure when it came to national defense.

In the next year, the professional military of the United States grew by over 300%. “Second Amendment solutions” were on their way out.
The Second Amendment is failure. It never worked for its intended purposes. It was born from the understandable fears of a new nation engaged in a radical new scheme. But it was a mistake. It may be the most costly mistake this nation has ever made other than failing to end slavery at the outset.

The right thing to do would be to recognize that mistake and pass a new amendment that simply ends the Second Amendment, just as the 18th Amendment was repealed by the 21st Amendment in 1933. (Take a drink.)

Instead, we get statements like this piece of profound ignorance. One that is wrong. Wrong. Wrong again. And then … still wrong.



Recognizing that an actual repeal of the Second Amendment—while absolutely just—isn’t likely, the next best thing is to simply recognize that the right to individual gun ownership is a lesser right, one whose appearance in that useless amendment subjects it to practical constraint.

The Second Amendment was a failure from the start, and should have been repealed 200 years ago

There is no such thing as an unconstrained right. Speech has limits. Religion has limits. Assembly has limits. The idea that any of these things can be completely “free” of government oversight is a pipedream, and everyone from the founders to the...

www.dailykos.com

Individual gun ownership rights are the result of a Supreme Court decision. Specifically Heller v DC

Just like abortion rights are the result of a Supreme Court decision. Specifically Roe v Wade

The current court is ready to take away Roe v Wade.

A future court can do the same with Heller v DC.

Laws about freedom of speech? But congress shall make no law...

 

[M14 Shooter]

Guns are disgusting. People who love guns are disgusting. I want the government to punish them by confiscating their guns.

Your opinion doesn't matter.

 

[Failzero]

Guns are disgusting. People who love guns are disgusting. I want the government to punish them by confiscating their guns.

Drugs are disgusting , people who do drugs are disgusting , they should be prosecuted and put in prison with their Pedo NAMBLA allies

 

[BlackSand]

Guns are disgusting. People who love guns are disgusting. I want the government to punish them by confiscating their guns.

.

I am sure there are some people in Congress and Society that would agree with you ...

Luckily ... There are also some folks at the FBI and ATF approving background checks for millions of new firearms purchases a month ...
That are more than happy to let their counterparts in the government know that might not be such a great idea.

.​

 

[Cellblock2429]

Guns are disgusting. People who love guns are disgusting. I want the government to punish them by confiscating their guns.

/———/ Abortions are disgusting. People who love abortions are disgusting. I want the government to punish them and confiscate their abortions.
Ditto Vegan diets, $6 burnt coffee, smart cars, clogs, man buns, Biden Tee shirts, kale, decaf …. (Feel free to add your own.)

 

[Rambunctious]

Guns are disgusting. People who love guns are disgusting. I want the government to punish them by confiscating their guns.

A gun is a tool like a hammer and chisel... tools can't be "disgusting" only people can and Americans that don't honor our constitution are disgusting....

 

[Failzero]

A gun is a tool like a hammer and chisel... tools can't be "disgusting" only people can and Americans that don't honor our constitution are disgusting....

Yep ( Socially Liberal Never Trumper / Never GOPer Turd party types who enable Democommies ...

 

[bripat9643]

Laws about freedom of speech don’t just shift when it comes to content and context, they’re also constantly updated to address something else: technology. Radio. Movies. Television. The internet. Even comic books. All have sparked changes in what is permitted and how speech is regulated. But somehow, we pretend that guns are different; that words written when the most deadly weapon required a ramrod and black powder mean that we can’t make adjustments for a semi-automatic rifle and a 30-round clip.

The truth is that guns are different. Because the right to bear arms is a lesser right. A right that was never intended to exist at all.

What makes individual gun ownership a lesser right? It’s a right that only exists in the minds of a handful of hard-right Supreme Court justices who happen to be on the court at this moment. Until 2008, no federal court had ever ruled that the Second Amendment included a right to individual gun ownership. It was always understood as it was written: Guns were allowed in individual hands as a means to supply the armed forces.

Here’s the Milwaukee Independent looking at how Chief Justice Warren Burger discussed the Second Amendment.

That the Second Amendment exists at all is more an accident of timing than an attempt to put guns in the hands of every American.
The amendment grew out of a fear that having a standing army would leave the nation open to depredations by an authoritarian leader, or that the nascent democracy would be overthrown by a military junta. To that end, they explicitly inserted the Second Amendment as an alternative means of providing national defense.

There were multiple drafts of the Second Amendment. Every one of them includes text explaining that this amendment exists only because it’s needed to provide for the nation’s defense.
Just a year after the Constitution was ratified, George Washington nudged Congress to create an official U.S. military, but the still-fearful Congress limited that force to just few hundred soldiers and officers. It would be another six years before it was allowed to grow significantly. When war came in 1812 two things were immediately obvious: The number of soldiers then in the official U.S. military were far from enough to defend the nation, and the poorly organized civilian militias for which the Second Amendment was created were an absolute failure when it came to national defense.

In the next year, the professional military of the United States grew by over 300%. “Second Amendment solutions” were on their way out.
The Second Amendment is failure. It never worked for its intended purposes. It was born from the understandable fears of a new nation engaged in a radical new scheme. But it was a mistake. It may be the most costly mistake this nation has ever made other than failing to end slavery at the outset.

The right thing to do would be to recognize that mistake and pass a new amendment that simply ends the Second Amendment, just as the 18th Amendment was repealed by the 21st Amendment in 1933. (Take a drink.)

Instead, we get statements like this piece of profound ignorance. One that is wrong. Wrong. Wrong again. And then … still wrong.



Recognizing that an actual repeal of the Second Amendment—while absolutely just—isn’t likely, the next best thing is to simply recognize that the right to individual gun ownership is a lesser right, one whose appearance in that useless amendment subjects it to practical constraint.

The Second Amendment was a failure from the start, and should have been repealed 200 years ago

There is no such thing as an unconstrained right. Speech has limits. Religion has limits. Assembly has limits. The idea that any of these things can be completely “free” of government oversight is a pipedream, and everyone from the founders to the...

www.dailykos.com

Individual gun ownership rights are the result of a Supreme Court decision. Specifically Heller v DC

Just like abortion rights are the result of a Supreme Court decision. Specifically Roe v Wade

The current court is ready to take away Roe v Wade.

A future court can do the same with Heller v DC.

There are no laws about freedom of speech, moron. You posted an oxymoron.

Where does the Constitution mention "lessor rights?" It doesn't. That's a term morons like you invented. If you want to amend the Constitution, then I suggest you get started on your campaign. Until then, you'll have to live with it.

 

[bripat9643]

Guns are disgusting. People who love guns are disgusting. I want the government to punish them by confiscating their guns.

Servile gun grabbers are disgusting.

 

[FA_Q2]

/———/ Abortions are disgusting. People who love abortions are disgusting. I want the government to punish them and confiscate their abortions.
Ditto Vegan diets, $6 burnt coffee, smart cars, clogs, man buns, Biden Tee shirts, kale, decaf …. (Feel free to add your own.)

This.

 

[2aguy]

Guns are disgusting. People who love guns are disgusting. I want the government to punish them by confiscating their guns.

Do you realize that in the 1920s the Europeans banned and confiscated guns from their citizens...citing that this would make them safer, and that the government would protect them?

By 1933, the German socialists, having disarmed Jews and the political enemies of the socialists, began the process of murdering 15 million innocent men, women and children...not criminals, just normal people.............they murdered these people all across Europe, in the countries they conquered, and countries that, in the 1920s, had taken guns away from their people. In 1939-1945, this is when the majority of the murders occurred....6 years.....

Do you understand that if you add up all the people murdered by guns in the United States, the majority of whom are criminals.....murdered by other criminals.....in 246 years of our existence, we don't even come close 15 million murdered.....

Guns keep that from happening again......do you understand this? Likely not....

 

[Friends]

Come get them young lady.

I like the saying, "When guns are outlawed they will take my gun from my cold, dead hand." It sounds like a good idea.

 

[miketx]

I like the saying, "When guns are outlawed they will take my gun from my cold, dead hand." It sounds like a good idea.

Come try it faggot.

 

[Friends]

Come try it faggot.

People like you are too mentally unbalanced to be permitted to own guns.

 

[Friends]

Viewpoints/ Mike Royko Columnist aims, fires criticism at gun owners​

​

Once again, it’s time to bestow one of the least-coveted honors in America this column’s Gun Owner of the Year Award. For reasons I don’t understand, this award upsets some gun owners and the National Rifle Association, who always remind me that the majority of gun owners are prudent and careful and seldom shoot anybody. Sure they are. But all I try to do is acknowledge the efforts of that tiny minority of gun owners who account for 35,000 gunshot deaths and countless woundings that occur each year.

Don’t they deserve some recognition? OF COURSE THEY do. That’s why, in past years, we’ve honored such winners as the sleepy man who picked up his gun, instead of his ringing phone, and shot himself in the ear. And the angry man who shot his girlfriend in the thigh because she cooked him string beans once too often.

Selecting the winner out of this year’s finalists wasn’t easy. As usual, there were the many hunters who mistook their peers for wild turkeys, deer, squirrels and possums. It’s amazing what a striking resemblance there is between the average person and the average wild turkey. So the Outstanding Achievement by a Deer Slayer Award goes to a New Hampshire man who saw what he thought was a deer coming over a rise in a road. He fired, and scored a direct hit. The deer turned out to be a truck, and the driver took a bullet in the shoulder. FORTUNATELY, the hunter realized his error in time and did not skin the driver or have the truck mounted.

In Rock Island, 111., a man put his rifle on the ground after shooting a passing bird. As he bent to pick up the bird’s carcass, his dog stepped on the shotgun trigger, causing it to fire and wound the bird-slayer. This confirms the NRA’s slogan; “Guns don’t shoot people dogs shoot people.”

Daily Kent Stater 15 January 1985 — Daily Kent Stater Digital Archive

Daily Kent Stater Digital Archive

dks.library.kent.edu

One winner of Mike Royko's Gun Owner of the Year Award thought he saw a burglar at the foot of his bed. He slept with a revolver under his pillow, and shot at the burglar. There was no burglar. Instead he shot his penis off. That was fitting, because guns are a phallic symbol.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Viewpoints/ Mike Royko Columnist aims, fires criticism at gun owners​

​

Once again, it’s time to bestow one of the least-coveted honors in America this column’s Gun Owner of the Year Award. For reasons I don’t understand, this award upsets some gun owners and the National Rifle Association, who always remind me that the majority of gun owners are prudent and careful and seldom shoot anybody. Sure they are. But all I try to do is acknowledge the efforts of that tiny minority of gun owners who account for 35,000 gunshot deaths and countless woundings that occur each year.

Don’t they deserve some recognition? OF COURSE THEY do. That’s why, in past years, we’ve honored such winners as the sleepy man who picked up his gun, instead of his ringing phone, and shot himself in the ear. And the angry man who shot his girlfriend in the thigh because she cooked him string beans once too often.

Selecting the winner out of this year’s finalists wasn’t easy. As usual, there were the many hunters who mistook their peers for wild turkeys, deer, squirrels and possums. It’s amazing what a striking resemblance there is between the average person and the average wild turkey. So the Outstanding Achievement by a Deer Slayer Award goes to a New Hampshire man who saw what he thought was a deer coming over a rise in a road. He fired, and scored a direct hit. The deer turned out to be a truck, and the driver took a bullet in the shoulder. FORTUNATELY, the hunter realized his error in time and did not skin the driver or have the truck mounted.

In Rock Island, 111., a man put his rifle on the ground after shooting a passing bird. As he bent to pick up the bird’s carcass, his dog stepped on the shotgun trigger, causing it to fire and wound the bird-slayer. This confirms the NRA’s slogan; “Guns don’t shoot people dogs shoot people.”

Daily Kent Stater 15 January 1985 — Daily Kent Stater Digital Archive

Daily Kent Stater Digital Archive

dks.library.kent.edu

One winner of Mike Royko's Gun Owner of the Year Award thought he saw a burglar at the foot of his bed. He slept with a revolver under his pillow, and shot at the burglar. There was no burglar. Instead he shot his penis off. That was fitting, because guns are a phallic symbol.