Author Topic: If the "Founding Fathers" had known what was going to happen...NO AMENDMENT 2  (Read 462 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dutch508

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12522
  • Reputation: +1647/-1068
  • Remember
Quote
Star Member Stuart G (32,482 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/113513227

If the "Founding Fathers" had known what was going to happen.......NO AMENDMENT 2...

Amendment 2....

"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."

Remember no police force then.. No assembly lines to manufacture guns..(or anything else)..Who had guns?
...adult males. No wide spread availability of guns....

Most important. The writers of the "Bill of Rights" could not for see that the 13 states, would become 50 states, and guns would be the problem they are today. The founding fathers could not for see that guns
would be available everywhere, cheap, easy to get, anyone can shoot and kill. It was a different time & place in the 1790s.

I believe if founding fathers knew what was going to happen: THEY WOULD HAVE restricted gun availability only to adults with training and knowledge of them...

It was 13 states, minor power in the world. Britain & France were the major powers in the world at that time. It was impossible to see that this new country would become the 3rd most populous country in the world, with more guns per person, on average, than anywhere else. Who could afford a gun? OR A RIFLE? WERE THERE HAND GUNS THEN?.
AND NO POLICE FORCES EXISTED IN MAJOR CITIES...did they?. Rifles were very expensive and limited. (hand made)

Think about the times in the 1790s as compared to today...Also: Media portrayal of guns, killing etc.has something to do with it. Think about the so called media then. It was newspapers only, & word of mouth...

NO TV, MOVIES, RADIO, VIDEO GAMES, ETC, ETC, ETC.

 :mental: :mental: :mental: :mental: :mental: :mental: :mental: :mental: :mental: :mental:

Quote
Star Member Irish_Dem (19,380 posts)

1. Founding fathers assumed leaders with courage, character and wisdom

would make needed changes as time went by.

Some of our founding fathers were very very intelligent and knew they could not cover every possible eventuality their country would face in future times.

Quote
Star Member alwaysinasnit (4,124 posts)

2. For me, this amendment refers to prohibitions on infringements as they relate to

"A well regulated Militia." That descriptor phrase has been totally ignored. Given that many of the founders didn't want a standing army, they preferred a Militia that could be called up in times of trouble, and disbanded fairly easily afterwards. These founders also did not want the cost of supplying arms and munitions to the Militia members.

Quote
Star Member Dale in Laurel MD (523 posts)

4. They were also leery of a standing army,

especially in light of how much unilateral power they had to allow the president (who had been almost a nonentity under the Articles of Confederation). They wanted to make sure that the state-controlled militias couldn't be disarmed or co-opted by the central government.

And of course, in the South, the militia doubled as a slave patrol to prevent unrest.

Quote
Star Member bucolic_frolic (28,667 posts)

3. The right to self-defense was a known issue during the Enlightenment as far back as Hobbes

Surely there were criminals in the cities in the 1700s, and self-defense was necessary in rural areas against hostile natives and wildlife.

That amendment has been parsed and parsed.

"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."

The militia part we understand. Firearms kept at home and subject to call-up to defend the country. Arms is a broad term, and capitalized. Wonder what THAT meant. In the broadest sense arms could mean anything, from steak knives to mace to battle-axe to shoulder fired rocket launchers to tanks.

So we're left with "keep and bear". Keep. Own. Bear. A show of force against criminality. The Enlightenment mind took a very positive view of human nature. Arms would be used for good things, to keep peace, to apprehend criminals. Note they didn't say "use". So it was meant as deterrent rather than unregulated license. There's the problem. We're past deterrent. We're into anarchy and malice.
Hope some judge draws that distinction sometime.

 :thatsright:

Quote
unblock (49,670 posts)

8. The constitution is a balancing act. It's not an absolute as some gun nuts would insist

Just look at the first amendment. No law abridging freedom of speech, etc.

And yet, you can't defame, you can't threaten, you can't incite panic or riot, you can't defraud, you can't commit treason, you can't lie in certain official situations, etc.

Tons of restrictions on freedom of speech because the constitution has other objectives that must be balanced against freedom of speech.


Same goes for the second amendment. The constitution is also about enduring domestic tranquility and promoting the general welfare. There has to be some balance for that against an unfettered right to arm oneself to the teeth.

If it's too dangerous to simple beboutvin public because some gun nut might go around shooting people for no good reason, then the government has a responsibility to address that.

The second amendment must be respected, but that doesn't mean we can't have reasonable restrictions, same as we have reasonable restrictions on free speech.

Quote
Star Member SCantiGOP (12,073 posts)

9. A gun in the 1770s was like a car today

Most people could only afford one. When a (male) child came of age the family might get another gun so he could hunt or stand guard against hostile forces.

 :whatever:
The torch of moral clarity since 12/18/07

2016 DOTY: 06 Omaha Steve - Is dying for ****'s face! How could you not vote for him, you heartless bastards!?!

Offline DLR Pyro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9234
  • Reputation: +1418/-29
Quote
Star Member Stuart G (32,482 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/113513227

If the "Founding Fathers" had known what was going to happen.......NO AMENDMENT 2...

and if the queen had balls she would be king

If you don't like the 2nd Amendment, petition your elected representatives to change it.
Biden is an illegitimate President.  Change my mind.

Police lives matter.

Basking in the glow of my white privilege

ProudDad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Wed Mar-09-11 08:50 PM
64.I'd almost be willing to get a job in order to participate in
A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE
  https://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4763020

Offline SVPete

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25923
  • Reputation: +2236/-242
DU is abounding in :stoner: -sucking profundity of late. Did a bunch of DU-Denizens get electric gift packs from their local dispensary?
« Last Edit: January 04, 2022, 09:23:39 AM by SVPete »
If, as anti-Covid-vaxxers claim, https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2021/robert-f-kennedy-jr-said-the-covid-19-vaccine-is-the-deadliest-vaccine-ever-made-thats-not-true/ , https://gospelnewsnetwork.org/2021/11/23/covid-shots-are-the-deadliest-vaccines-in-medical-history/ , The Vaccine is deadly, where in the US have Pfizer and Moderna hidden the millions of bodies of those who died of "vaccine injury"? Is reality a Big Pharma Shill?

Millions now living should have died. Anti-Covid-Vaxxer ghouls hardest hit.

Offline 67 Rover

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5763
  • Reputation: +1222/-41
Quote
"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."

pretty sure that the founding fathers never anticipated having to make it any clearer that this to future idiots. :banghead:
NRA Benefactor member
G.O.A. Life member
G.O.A.L. Life member
Certified Law Enforcement Sig Armorer

Offline SVPete

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25923
  • Reputation: +2236/-242
and if the queen had balls she would be king

If you don't like the 2nd Amendment, petition your elected representatives to change it.

Since it was undesirable for a "well regulated Militia" to have to show members what a gun was and how to use and maintain it, the writers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights wanted fire arms to be plentiful and the owners skillful in fire arms use.
If, as anti-Covid-vaxxers claim, https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2021/robert-f-kennedy-jr-said-the-covid-19-vaccine-is-the-deadliest-vaccine-ever-made-thats-not-true/ , https://gospelnewsnetwork.org/2021/11/23/covid-shots-are-the-deadliest-vaccines-in-medical-history/ , The Vaccine is deadly, where in the US have Pfizer and Moderna hidden the millions of bodies of those who died of "vaccine injury"? Is reality a Big Pharma Shill?

Millions now living should have died. Anti-Covid-Vaxxer ghouls hardest hit.

Offline CollectivismMustDie

  • American
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3473
  • Reputation: +1099/-42
  • (D)Ummie nightmare.
If the founding fathers had known what was going to happen...


No democrats.

Or does some lefty think that the gay/trans agenda, open borders, election month, spying on a sitting President, and the bloated fedgov we have now were what the framers were shooting for?

"Be not intimidated... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your liberties by any pretense of politeness, delicacy, or decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for hypocrisy, chicanery and cowardice." - John Adams

Hillary Clinton will never be the President of the United States.

Online DefiantSix

  • Set Condition One throughout the ship
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17460
  • Reputation: +1722/-189
  • Captain, IKV Defiant
If the Founding Fathers had known what a tyranical, all encompassing, bureaucratic cluster**** the government they were setting up would (D)e-volve into, the Second Amendment wouldn't have been an Amendment in the first place.

It would have been, Article I, Section 1.

 :fuelfire:
« Last Edit: January 04, 2022, 04:50:24 PM by DefiantSix »
"Stand your ground. Don't fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here."
-- Capt. John Parker

"I'm not looking for forgiveness, and I'm way past asking permission"
-- Capt. Steve Rogers

"In this present crisis, government in not the solution to our problem, government IS the problem."
-- Ronaldus Magnus

Offline I_B_Perky

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7530
  • Reputation: +718/-329
Quote
Star Member Stuart G (32,482 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/113513227

If the "Founding Fathers" had known what was going to happen.......NO AMENDMENT 2...

Amendment 2....

"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."

Remember no police force then.. No assembly lines to manufacture guns..(or anything else)..Who had guns?
...adult males. No wide spread availability of guns....

Most important. The writers of the "Bill of Rights" could not for see that the 13 states, would become 50 states, and guns would be the problem they are today. The founding fathers could not for see that guns
would be available everywhere, cheap, easy to get, anyone can shoot and kill. It was a different time & place in the 1790s.

I believe if founding fathers knew what was going to happen: THEY WOULD HAVE restricted gun availability only to adults with training and knowledge of them...

It was 13 states, minor power in the world. Britain & France were the major powers in the world at that time. It was impossible to see that this new country would become the 3rd most populous country in the world, with more guns per person, on average, than anywhere else. Who could afford a gun? OR A RIFLE? WERE THERE HAND GUNS THEN?.
AND NO POLICE FORCES EXISTED IN MAJOR CITIES...did they?. Rifles were very expensive and limited. (hand made)

Think about the times in the 1790s as compared to today...Also: Media portrayal of guns, killing etc.has something to do with it. Think about the so called media then. It was newspapers only, & word of mouth...

NO TV, MOVIES, RADIO, VIDEO GAMES, ETC, ETC, ETC.

The same founding fathers that thought one should own land to be able to vote? Those guys? Seems to me like they understood exactly what they were doing... it was only after the original constitution and bill of rights got amended that we started having problems.
Living in the Dummies minds rent free since 2009!

Montani Semper Liberi

Offline ADsOutburst

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4575
  • Reputation: +1214/-12
Quote
And yet, you can't defame, you can't threaten, you can't incite panic or riot, you can't defraud, you can't commit treason, you can't lie in certain official situations, etc.

Can you see what these situations have in common?

They involve violations of someone else's rights, whereas gun ownership is not in and of itself a violation of anyone's rights.

And you might be surprised what one can get away with in terms of defamation.

Offline Movie buff- The Sequel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1522
  • Reputation: +182/-11
Stuart G actually hit upon a good point (And one the Left often conveniently ignores when discussing this issue) in the last couple sentences of his op: A MAJOR part of the reason for our society's current problems with gun violence is from our culture glorifying gun violence.
Between much of pop culture portraying gun violence as cool,  such as the innumerable gangsta (c)rap music videos showing gangbangers blowing each other away while looking like heroes and role models in the process, and the widespread media who leap at any opportunity to exploit tragedies for ratings ensuring almost- instant global fame to mass shooters, it's a culture that quickly corrupts people.
THAT'S what I'd imagine the Founding Fathers would take issue with. They knew their new nation needed a strong moral compass in order to survive, and would thus be enraged at how much our current culture makes rampant violence, lawlessness, and general evil look cool.

Offline Mr Mannn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14885
  • Reputation: +2646/-276
The Democrat...tyrant agenda cannot succeed with an armed populace. Armed men can say, "NO!" Unarmed men have no choice in the matter.

Offline Aristotelian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1589
  • Reputation: +167/-10
Stuart G actually hit upon a good point (And one the Left often conveniently ignores when discussing this issue) in the last couple sentences of his op: A MAJOR part of the reason for our society's current problems with gun violence is from our culture glorifying gun violence.
Between much of pop culture portraying gun violence as cool,  such as the innumerable gangsta (c)rap music videos showing gangbangers blowing each other away while looking like heroes and role models in the process, and the widespread media who leap at any opportunity to exploit tragedies for ratings ensuring almost- instant global fame to mass shooters, it's a culture that quickly corrupts people.
THAT'S what I'd imagine the Founding Fathers would take issue with. They knew their new nation needed a strong moral compass in order to survive, and would thus be enraged at how much our current culture makes rampant violence, lawlessness, and general evil look cool.

There is no constitution in the world which can prevent a vicious population engaging in vice. There is no law in the world which can prevent a vicious population engaging in vice. The Founding Fathers knew that well.

Compare with the knife crime statistics in London - guns are ludicrously over-regulated here (including no hand-guns in private hands), and so the violent gangs just go to the next available tool.

Compare then those parts of the U.S. which have high gun ownership and higher standards of virtue and look at the levels of gun deaths which emerge. I know full well that I'd feel far far safer walking through a civilised part of the U.S. where lots of folk owned (and a fair few carried) guns, than I would in large parts of my own capital city where guns are de facto banned.

But that would be to let the facts get in the way of a good story...