» News

Specific Answers and the 2nd Amendment

Home - by - December 27, 2012 - 19:30 America/New_York - 20 Comments

HT/ Bayouwulf -

GaryNorth

I want to go over in considerable detail the fundamental issues of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution: the right to keep and bear arms.

There is a great deal of emotional commitment in the United States to one of two extreme positions: (1) the right of every non-felon adult citizen of the United States to own any weapon he chooses, and (2) the right of the government of the United States to outlaw the ownership of firearms.

I am hard core. I would extend this right to convicted felons who have served their time or have made restitution to their victims. I would not let the federal government revoke this fundamental right of citizenship.

To understand the Second Amendment, we need to go back to something like the beginning.

FEUDALISM AND POLITICAL SOVEREIGNTY

Read more

» 20 Comments

  1. Menderman

    December 27th, 2012

    If I remember right, the British demanded that the colonists surrender their weapons, and the battle of Lexington and Concord was about that. I remember this from grade school history class some 40+ years ago….am I right?

    Are you reading this illustr8r?

    Thumb up +5

     
  2. jclady

    December 27th, 2012

    “Firearms are marks of political sovereignty. They should be defended on this basis, not on the basis of some hypothetical revolution, which is not going to take place. I am saying that such a revolution is not necessary, precisely because the people do possess the right to keep and bear arms. They need not take up arms against the government, precisely because they already possess the arms.”

    Amen.

    Thumb up +7

     
  3. old_oaks

    December 27th, 2012

    What exactly is the rate of reshitivism in the US?

    Where it to be low, I might advocate. But since the prisons basically house the mentally ill, I wouldn’t even consider giving ANY felon today a gun/permit/tax stamp or EBT.

    Thumb up +7

     
  4. Billy Fuster

    December 27th, 2012

    Reading that article was like going to school.

    Thumb up +2

     
  5. J Galt

    December 27th, 2012

    This article ended with a line of pure gibberish: Citizens will need not take up arms because they already possess arms.

    Thumb up 0

     
  6. Ten-Ten

    December 27th, 2012

    The author lost me when he claimed firearms ownership more symbolic than practical. I’d expect that steaming pile o.f. horseshit from a progressive stooge.

    Thumb up +1

     
  7. Pearl Clutcher

    December 27th, 2012

    I respect the author of the article posted, however his blanketed statement “I am hard core. I would extend this right to convicted felons who have served their time or have made restitution to their victims. I would not let the federal government revoke this fundamental right of citizenship.”
    I am of the opinion that the federal government did not revoke this fundamental right per se’ the effing criminal did.

    Thumb up +6

     
  8. jclady

    December 27th, 2012

    @J Galt — That was the statement that made most sense to me. If you already possess the arms, you don’t need to rally to take up arms.

    Thumb up +2

     
  9. MNP

    December 27th, 2012

    Don’t need to take up arms, unless they try to take them away.

    The beauty of the second amendment is that it is’nt needed until they take it away.

    Thumb up +3

     
  10. Xavier

    December 27th, 2012

    Well ol’ Gary is quite a prognosticator, isn’t he?
    Bit long winded, too.

    Deleted my long comment. Let me just say this: regarding that last paragraph, either Gary’s a fool or he thinks his readers are. Logic’s not his strong point either.

    Thumb up +1

     
  11. Blink

    December 27th, 2012

    I never bothered owning firearms until they started saying I shouldn’t be allow to.

    This essay was posted 37 years ago – Militia, Standing Armies and the Second Amendment.

    http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1495

    .. The second way to cope with the peril to liberty of a standing army is to counter its existence with an armed citizen’s militia which stands outside of the control of the government.

    … Thus we see that the experiences of the Revolutionary War confirmed in the minds of the Founders the teachings of the Whigs: An armed citizenry was both a check on domestic tyranny and the most desirable form of national defense. It was for the security of a free state from these perils that the Founders sought the protection of a well-regulated militia.

    Or – Perhaps this Gary North essay posted Dec 21st is more pleasing or not – Why the Gun Control Movement is Doomed. By 3-D printers?

    http://www.garynorth.com/public/10461.cfm

    Well, I do agree with the summary paragraph –
    I think it is a good idea for people to purchase those items that they want to own, and which are legal for them to own. ….. Otherwise, procrastination wins out again.

    Thumb up +1

     
  12. Bad Brad

    December 27th, 2012

    Blink, 3D printer thing is BULLSHIT. First of all I read that article and 3 d printers don’t print moving assemblies (moving parts). They would need to print component parts and the you assemble them. 3D PRINTER PRINT POROUS WEAK MATERIAL. Shit cracks. 3d printers are only good for plus or minus .005 tolerance. A lot of gun parts are much closer tolerances then that, slides, barrels, barrel bushings, and a bunch more. Some moron read about 3d printers and discovered his navel at the same time. White noise.

    Thumb up +5

     
  13. Xavier

    December 27th, 2012

    Brad’s right. Somebody hyping 3D printing of guns is probably trying to raise venture capital. Making firearms via printer is load of crap under the current technology.

    It won’t print barrels either. Hard to fire a bullet straight without one of those.

    Thumb up +4

     
  14. andrea Shea King

    December 27th, 2012

    But what about the gangs? This makes sense to me.

    “I do not think that many advocates of the Second Amendment believe that there is going to be a time when American citizens get their guns, leave their homes, and somehow adopt urban guerrilla warfare tactics. But they do understand that the gangs may do this.

    They do not believe the local authorities will always be in a position to defend them against criminal violence. They understand that the decentralization of weapons ownership is basic to the preservation of peace in society, because guerrilla groups, which the gangs are, are mobile, well-armed, well-organized, and ruthless.

    I am arguing that the citizen who owns defensive weapons, and was trained in their use, constitutes the great barrier against centralized power from above and decentralized criminal violence from below. It is the man in the middle, the armed voter, who is the backbone of Western liberty.”

    Thumb up +4

     
  15. Blink

    December 27th, 2012

    Oh, I quit agree that 3-D printers are not a threat. Yet the video shows some lame politician and CNN getting all worked up about them. I merely wanted to illustrate that they are consistent in continuing to be wrong about where to place the blame for the real source of criminal gun violence.

    Guns themselves are not dangerous, they’re inanimate objects. Law-abiding citizens are not a threat either. Yet both are targeted to be controlled by big-government. Yet they continue to not blame the real source of threats; the criminals and mentally unbalanced.

    Gary North was correct in his final comment. Don’t procrastinate. Buy ‘em now while you still can.

    ( why is that the lefties continually rant about; big-oil, big-tobacco, big-pharmaceuticals, big-magazines, etc. But never a peep about big-government being a bad thing)

    And what the heck is this big-government, Obama-Holder plan all about? Fast and Furious Plan-2? A new plan to get guns across the border or into the hands of illegal immigrants from their legal immigrant friends. Then complain about how additional gun regulation is needed.

    Gun ownership by new immigrants to be eased. While pushing for gun ownership by native citizens to be made more difficult.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/24/Merry-Christmas-immigrants-Obama-Holder-push-to-loosen-alien-gun-sales-restrictions

    Thumb up +1

     
  16. BigFurHat

    December 27th, 2012

    x,
    You made a comment at Gary North and he deleted it?

    Thumb up +1

     
  17. Bad Brad

    December 27th, 2012

    Blink: It’s no longer called 3d printing it called Additive Machining.
    Buy weapons now, absolutely. I live in Cali. with a couple older Sig high capacity magazines semi autos, they grandfathered those in too, so mine are legal. Buy now, buy fast. Seems to be a lapse in their thought process here,

    Thumb up +1

     
  18. WhiteFalcon1

    December 28th, 2012

    @Old Oaks: What of those who offended, did their time, paid their debt to society IN FULL and haven’t had so much as a traffic ticket in over 30 years? Are you saying that since the system, in my case, worked and worked very well, I too shouldn’t be permitted to protect my family against those for whom the system is a revolving door? From over 30 years ago?
    Brother, I disagree, but, of course, I would, but what was the sense in incarcerating me (punitive/ rehabilative) if at some point in the future, I couldn’t have my rights restored for having committed that one act?
    I guess I should just be happy Ohio laws aren’t as strict, after the tail end of ones sentence has expired, in my case, 4 to 25 years, of which I did almost 3 years in one of the nastiest prisons in this country, the old Mansfield Reformatory @ Mansfield, Ohio, and the person has not re-offended, his rights to votes are automatically restored, his rights to own firearms can be restored by hearing, but a carry/ conceal permit is always going to be off the table!
    I guess my question is, should I be punished for the rest of my life, and my children be included in that punishment, since being left defenseless against the criminals is exactly where we’d be, for something I did 30 years ago? Sorry brother, but I have to disagree….my debt is paid!

    Thumb up +1

     
  19. old_oaks

    December 28th, 2012

    WhiteFalcon1, there are always exceptions to the norm, which appears to be your case. Even though you are not part of the problem, a majority of felons go on to lead a life of repeat felonies. You unfortunately are wrapped up with them by having a single felony. Believe me, I’ve had some trouble too, not felony level but an embarrassment in my later life all the same. There’s far more non-offenders than offenders, so it is theoretically possible to live life without ever being a felon. I do have compassion for debts paid but being a felon once removes folks from a lot more than just gun ownership and voting. Security clearance? CEO/BOD for certain organizations? Investing other people’s money? etc. there are many things other than guns felons or ex-felons are barred from.

    Thumb up +1

     
  20. Unruly Refugee

    December 28th, 2012

    Read this yesterday. Great stuff!

    Thumb up 0