Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 49

Thread: Are we REALLY for protection of the Second Amendment, or just a little piece of it?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Springfield, MO
    Posts
    203

    Are we REALLY for protection of the Second Amendment, or just a little piece of it?

    It is bothersome to me that we all advocate for only ONE type of open carry of arms (specifically, firearms) Doesn't the second amendment protect the right to bear ARMS, not just FIREARMS? Why should a person not under disability be prevented from open carrying a sword, club, knife, etc?

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by BriKuz View Post
    It is bothersome to me that we all advocate for only ONE type of open carry of arms (specifically, firearms) Doesn't the second amendment protect the right to bear ARMS, not just FIREARMS? Why should a person not under disability be prevented from open carrying a sword, club, knife, etc?
    Why would a disability be a factor?

  3. #3
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961
    Quote Originally Posted by BriKuz View Post
    It is bothersome to me that we all advocate for only ONE type of open carry of arms (specifically, firearms)
    Actually OCDO only advocates for the open carry of properly holstered handguns.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Nokesville, VA
    Posts
    99
    I certainly believe that people should be able to use any arms that they can carry themselves. Knives, guns, throwing-stars, bricks, sticks, nun-chuks.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    Only if they are allowed by your militia.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    Only if they are allowed by your militia.
    Its the right of the people .... not the right of the people able to join a militia ....

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Nampa, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    1,096
    As the forum is dedicated to the lawful, responsible open carry of handguns, that is what is advocated here.

    As individuals I believe that we advocate for the second amendment and how it applies to lawful citizens.

  8. #8
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,271
    OCDO is a privately owned and run site, there are no rights on a non government website, only the privileges the site administrators and moderators allow. Open carry of properly holstered handguns is the site focus, there are other sites that do focus on other arms.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    OCDO is a privately owned and run site, there are no rights on a non government website, only the privileges the site administrators and moderators allow. Open carry of properly holstered handguns is the site focus, there are other sites that do focus on other arms.
    Rights? I got rights... lol


    I got a left too.

  10. #10
    Regular Member 09jisaac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Louisa, Kentucky
    Posts
    1,694
    Quote Originally Posted by Defrock View Post
    I certainly believe that people should be able to use any arms that they can carry themselves. Knives, guns, throwing-stars, bricks, sticks, nun-chuks.
    Grenades, RPGs, machineguns, SBR/SBS, mortars?
    No man alive can beat me in a fair fight: It's not fair to chase a man down and beat him.

  11. #11
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    Only if they are allowed by your militia.
    Hahaha still trying this disproved faulty tactic?

    The people with an uninfringed right are the militia. Organized or not...........
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    Could my old 1973 Cadillac Fleetwood, thats built like a Tank be considered a deadly weapon? Or being the driver of said tank make me a deadly weapon? LOL

    CCJ

  13. #13
    Activist Member golddigger14s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Lacey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,990
    Not sure the 2A protects all weapons. For example in WA butterfly knives are illegal, and numerous cities have various convoluted laws concerning blade length etc. Yet we have pretty decent, and uniform laws through out the state for firearms.
    "The beauty of the Second Amenment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." Thomas Jefferson
    "Evil often triumphs, but never conquers." Joseph Roux
    http://nwfood.shelfreliance.com

  14. #14
    Regular Member Gil223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Weber County Utah
    Posts
    1,428

    The same reason cats and hamsters aren't entered in dog shows...

    Quote Originally Posted by BriKuz View Post
    It is bothersome to me that we all advocate for only ONE type of open carry of arms (specifically, firearms) Doesn't the second amendment protect the right to bear ARMS, not just FIREARMS? Why should a person not under disability be prevented from open carrying a sword, club, knife, etc?
    Ummmmm... perhaps it's because this is a firearms forum? Swords, clubs, knives, telescoping batons, baseball bats, hatpins, kubatons, shuriken, steel pipe, and petrified possum feces all have their own forums. None of these items are under constant assault by the left. We try to keep the emphasis where it's supposed to be, which is not even firearms in general, but specifically holstered handguns in plain sight. Pax...
    MOLON LABE
    COUNTRY FIRST
    Glocks ROCK!

  15. #15
    Regular Member sharkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    1,066
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Why would a disability be a factor?
    LOL

    I don't know if you were joking or being serious. If you were being serious google "relief from disability".


    ETA: Then again maybe you were being serious but for a different reason. I do believe it's unconstitutional to deny a felon their rights after their sentence is served.
    Last edited by sharkey; 05-16-2013 at 03:21 AM. Reason: hands can't keep up with my mind
    "Public opinion and votes have nothing to do with this. The challenge of the Court is not what they're going to do with votes. The challenge-- of the Court is are they going to protect people's rights." - Al Sharpton


  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by BriKuz View Post
    It is bothersome to me that we all advocate for only ONE type of open carry of arms (specifically, firearms) Doesn't the second amendment protect the right to bear ARMS, not just FIREARMS? Why should a person not under disability be prevented from open carrying a sword, club, knife, etc?
    I am sure that the overwhelming majority of folks here believe that the 2A is about firearms and other arms. This just ain't the place to discuss the other arms as it purpose, as stated by the owners is to discuss the open carry of properly holstered handguns. Feel free to start your own forum to discuss whatever you wish to discuss.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by golddigger14s View Post
    Not sure the 2A protects all weapons. For example in WA butterfly knives are illegal, and numerous cities have various convoluted laws concerning blade length etc. Yet we have pretty decent, and uniform laws through out the state for firearms.
    Like the state of WAshington is known for following the constitution?

    Bad argument.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Springfield, MO
    Posts
    203
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    I am sure that the overwhelming majority of folks here believe that the 2A is about firearms and other arms. This just ain't the place to discuss the other arms as it purpose, as stated by the owners is to discuss the open carry of properly holstered handguns. Feel free to start your own forum to discuss whatever you wish to discuss.
    (and in reply to WalkingWolf)

    I am fully aware of the owners' rights to guide the discussion in whatever way they see fit... I respect and support that right fully (each person is the ONLY person who has any RIGHTS to said individual's person and/or efforts and result of those efforts) I was merely interested in others' viewpoint on this particular subject... perhaps it should be moved to "Social Lounge" or another appropriate sub-forum?

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by golddigger14s View Post
    Not sure the 2A protects all weapons. For example in WA butterfly knives are illegal, and numerous cities have various convoluted laws concerning blade length etc. Yet we have pretty decent, and uniform laws through out the state for firearms.
    The 2A protects nothing - the people's resistance to disarmament does the protecting. The Constitution (amendments included) merely delineates the powers of government. The actual protection is left as an exercise to the reader.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    The 2A restricts the behavior of government. In that sense, it protects the enumerated Right.

    What are the arms mentioned in the 2A? It does not specifically say, so we must look to the historical context for the answer. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is not new to the US. It existed in England prior to colonization. The idea came here with English colonists. The origin of the English RKBA were laws that created a Duty to Keep and Bear Arms. Those arms were originally swords, later bows and arrows, later yet crossbows, and finally firearms. Clearly the arms covered by the duty and later by the Right were the arms that typically have personal civilian uses but, in a pinch, could be used as one's personal military weapon.

    At the time of the Framing, that would have included knives, long guns, hand guns, and ammunition. We can look to the militia laws of the time for a list of arms that militia members were required to own. Today's analogs are knives, pistols, revolvers, shotguns, rifles, and the like. Oh, and the ammo to feed them.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Gil223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Weber County Utah
    Posts
    1,428
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    The 2A restricts the behavior of government. In that sense, it protects the enumerated Right.

    Clearly the arms covered by the duty and later by the Right were the arms that typically have personal civilian uses but, in a pinch, could be used as one's personal military weapon.

    At the time of the Framing, that would have included knives, long guns, hand guns, and ammunition. We can look to the militia laws of the time for a list of arms that militia members were required to own. Today's analogs are knives, pistols, revolvers, shotguns, rifles, and the like. Oh, and the ammo to feed them.
    What you're saying is essentially that, "arms" were virtually any tool that was designed, made or adapted for personal defense. The only weapon from the mid-1800s that isn't in common use today by our military is the officer/NCO saber/sabre (aka "sword"), the practical function of which has been replaced by the bayonet. That doesn't relegate the sword to the scrapheap, and in an up-close-and-personal confrontation it may still have a place. Like the gambler said, "Ya gotta play the hand ya got."

    There are a few edged weapons that I have an affinity towards in case of HTHC - my Cold Steel machete, SOG tomahawk, Ka-Bar BK-2 and my Boker Magnum (completely discounting my really long blades, and a 7' long Assegai. Yes, I am ready for the "Zombie Apocalypse"). But, should my guns/ammo become inaccessible to me for some reason (i.e. - confiscated), and I haven't been killed during the process of their being made inaccessible, I will still have some defensive tools available (assuming we still have the Constitution as written). Pax...
    MOLON LABE
    COUNTRY FIRST
    Glocks ROCK!

  22. #22
    Regular Member HP995's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    MO, USA
    Posts
    289
    The 2A protects nothing - the people's resistance to disarmament does the protecting. The Constitution (amendments included) merely delineates the powers of government. The actual protection is left as an exercise to the reader.
    True!

  23. #23
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    Only if they are allowed by your militia.
    Where does this come into the picture? The Second Amendment has no such restriction.
    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  24. #24
    Regular Member Jay Jacobs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Canton, GA
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by 09jisaac View Post
    Grenades, RPGs, machineguns,... mortars?
    Why not?

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernBoy View Post
    Where does this come into the picture? The Second Amendment has no such restriction.
    It used to be the very 1st line in the 2nd amendment until District of Columbia vs. Heller decided that the authors didn't really mean for the amendment to have anything to do with militias.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •