What Does The Second Amendment Mean For Liberals?

[Road Runner]

I'm asking this question because in another one of my threads, when we started discussing the possibility of an upcoming war (or wars) when people were talking about that they would kill them if needed they took it to mean death threats instead of the true meaning of "I would only kill you if provoked and you were a threat to me."


So that's where I get lost as if they don't know that then what do they think the second amendment means? I know that they can't stand it, but it also seems like they don't have a clue what it's actually talking about.

 

[candycorn]

I'm asking this question because in another one of my threads, when we started discussing the possibility of an upcoming war (or wars) when people were talking about that they would kill them if needed they took it to mean death threats instead of the true meaning of "I would only kill you if provoked and you were a threat to me."


So that's where I get lost as if they don't know that then what do they think the second amendment means? I know that they can't stand it, but it also seems like they don't have a clue what it's actually talking about.

Homicidal maniacs (aka MAGA voters) don’t need the 2nd Amendment to go on rampage killings. It’s a dumbass amendment written before there was streetlights or zippers.

 

[IM2]

The First Amendment is more important to liberals.

 

[Donald H]

It used to mean that the guns would ensure that the US Constitution would be protected against all threats, foreign or domestic, of a democratic election being stolen.

But the guns just laid there on the table, refusing to take notice!

Which served to prove the point once again that guns don't kill people!

 

[rightwinger]

So that's where I get lost as if they don't know that then what do they think the second amendment means

I think a well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free state

 

[rightwinger]

The First Amendment is more important to liberals.

We have never needed a second amendment to protect us
The first amendment does that

 

[Auld Phart]

I think a well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free state

I think a well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free state

shame the Amendment didn't stop there. Libs would be a lot happier

 

[The Duke]

I'm asking this question because in another one of my threads, when we started discussing the possibility of an upcoming war (or wars) when people were talking about that they would kill them if needed they took it to mean death threats instead of the true meaning of "I would only kill you if provoked and you were a threat to me."


So that's where I get lost as if they don't know that then what do they think the second amendment means? I know that they can't stand it, but it also seems like they don't have a clue what it's actually talking about.

Liberals wrote the 2nd Amendment.

 

[IM2]

It used to mean that the guns would ensure that the US Constitution would be protected against all threats, foreign or domestic, of a democratic election being stolen.

But the guns just laid there on the table, refusing to take notice!

Which served to prove the point once again that guns don't kill people!

It meant that guns were for a military that was necessary to protect the citizens.

 

[rightwinger]

It meant that guns were for a military that was necessary to protect the citizens.

The Constitution did not provide for a standing Army to protect the nation.
That is why they wanted well regulated militias made up of armed civilians

 

[Auld Phart]

It meant that guns were for a military that was necessary to protect the citizens.

then why did they give the right to the people instead of just the militia?

 

[rightwinger]

then why did they give the right to the people instead of just the militia?

Because they were cheap and did not want to pay to arm members of the militia

 

[Auld Phart]

Because they were cheap and did not want to pay to arm members of the militia

 

[Road Runner]

Liberals wrote the 2nd Amendment.

So, is it just simply a case of not being able to read their own writing?

 

[IM2]

The Constitution did not provide for a standing Army to protect the nation.
That is why they wanted well regulated militias made up of armed civilians

That's true. But now we have a well regulated militia called the US military and citzens don't need guns.

 

[rightwinger]

A well regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state

 

[Auld Phart]

A well regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state

the right of the people to keep and bear arms,,

 

[AZrailwhale]

Because they were cheap and did not want to pay to arm members of the militia

No it’s because the founders feared the government they were establishing and did everything in their power to keep it weak, poor and powerless.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I'm asking this question because in another one of my threads, when we started discussing the possibility of an upcoming war (or wars) when people were talking about that they would kill them if needed they took it to mean death threats instead of the true meaning of "I would only kill you if provoked and you were a threat to me."


So that's where I get lost as if they don't know that then what do they think the second amendment means? I know that they can't stand it, but it also seems like they don't have a clue what it's actually talking about.

The Second Amendment prevents the US federal govt (and now state govts) from stopping people from having guns, and from being in the militia.

 

[Stryder50]

There's a reason firearms are called great equalizers.
A pistol is a very reliable way a 100 pound women can "discourage" a 200 pound male rapist.

Ladies of Lead — Firearms Training for Women Ages 14 & Up​

Ladies Of Lead Group Therapy, LLC ​

Ladies of Lead Group Therapy Women Training Women in the NRA Firearms courses of Pistol, Rifle and Shotgun.. Bend, Oregon. Concealed Handgun License Handgun Lessons/Training for Ladies.

www.ladiesoflead.com