Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: Gun owners aiming to shoot at government

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    , Colorado, USA
    Posts
    65

    Post imported post

    “The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to allow the citizens to protect themselves from tyranny, which will certainly be enforced with government ‘assault weapons,’” one writer patiently explained to me. “Logically, that is the type of weapon that we the people should have access to if we ever need to resist.”

    The whole point to constitutional protection of gun ownership, another said, was “for the purpose of arming people so they could revolt in case of government gone wrong.”

    http://gazettextra.com/news/2008/dec...ot-government/

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Posts
    800

    Post imported post

    Wow, this guy seriously needs a history lesson.

    Protection from govt tyranny is EXACTLY what the 2nd A is all about. Understanding this basic constitutional truth doesn't mean I WANT to violently overthrow the government, but that option must always be there.

  3. #3
    Regular Member rodbender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Navasota, Texas, USA
    Posts
    2,524

    Post imported post

    www.jpfo.org

    'nuff sed
    The thing about common sense is....it ain't too common.
    Will Rogers

  4. #4
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849

    Post imported post

    ScottyT wrote:
    Wow, this guy seriously needs a history lesson.

    Protection from govt tyranny is EXACTLY what the 2nd A is all about. Understanding this basic constitutional truth doesn't mean I WANT to violently overthrow the government, but that option must always be there.
    You are exactly right.

    Frequently we here mentioned that the Second Amendment protects the right of the people to defend themselves, their homes, and their loved ones, and to hunt game. Nothing could be further from the truth. These things were as basic and fundamental to the Founders and their fellow citizens as breathing. No one in their right mind would have questioned the right of someone to defend themselves or to harvest game for food. It was just something that was not done. The real reason for the Second Amendment was to stand as a warning to government that it had better not betray or usurp the rights and the power of the people. It was the ultimate arbiter, the final check against a government gone bad, the physical embodiment of the famous flag, "Don't Tread On Me".

    As for the article, clearly the writer has either never read/studied history (as in the writing of the Founders), or he has forgotten everything he might have learned. The worse case is he believes what he learned to be anarchy.


    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!

  5. #5
    Regular Member Decoligny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Rosamond, California, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    SouthernBoy wrote:
    ScottyT wrote:
    Wow, this guy seriously needs a history lesson.

    Protection from govt tyranny is EXACTLY what the 2nd A is all about. Understanding this basic constitutional truth doesn't mean I WANT to violently overthrow the government, but that option must always be there.
    You are exactly right.

    Frequently we here mentioned that the Second Amendment protects the right of the people to defend themselves, their homes, and their loved ones, and to hunt game. Nothing could be further from the truth. These things were as basic and fundamental to the Founders and their fellow citizens as breathing. No one in their right mind would have questioned the right of someone to defend themselves or to harvest game for food. It was just something that was not done. The real reason for the Second Amendment was to stand as a warning to government that it had better not betray or usurp the rights and the power of the people. It was the ultimate arbiter, the final check against a government gone bad, the physical embodiment of the famous flag, "Don't Tread On Me".

    As for the article, clearly the writer has either never read/studied history (as in the writing of the Founders), or he has forgotten everything he might have learned. The worse case is he believes what he learned to be anarchy.

    I usually don't play grammer police, but in this case, the well written post above could easily be misread.

    "Frequently we here mentioned that the Second Amendment protects the right of the people to defend themselves, their homes, and their loved ones, and to hunt game."

    The bold section should read "Frequently we hear mentioned" as in "Other people have said".

    What it implies as originally written is "Frequently weat OpenCarry.org mentioned"

    Just didn't want some anti grabbing the quote and using it to say "OpenCarry.org believes 2A is for home protection and hunting."

  6. #6
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849

    Post imported post

    Decoligny wrote:
    SouthernBoy wrote:
    ScottyT wrote:
    Wow, this guy seriously needs a history lesson.

    Protection from govt tyranny is EXACTLY what the 2nd A is all about. Understanding this basic constitutional truth doesn't mean I WANT to violently overthrow the government, but that option must always be there.
    You are exactly right.

    Frequently we here mentioned that the Second Amendment protects the right of the people to defend themselves, their homes, and their loved ones, and to hunt game. Nothing could be further from the truth. These things were as basic and fundamental to the Founders and their fellow citizens as breathing. No one in their right mind would have questioned the right of someone to defend themselves or to harvest game for food. It was just something that was not done. The real reason for the Second Amendment was to stand as a warning to government that it had better not betray or usurp the rights and the power of the people. It was the ultimate arbiter, the final check against a government gone bad, the physical embodiment of the famous flag, "Don't Tread On Me".

    As for the article, clearly the writer has either never read/studied history (as in the writing of the Founders), or he has forgotten everything he might have learned. The worse case is he believes what he learned to be anarchy.

    I usually don't play grammer police, but in this case, the well written post above could easily be misread.

    "Frequently we here mentioned that the Second Amendment protects the right of the people to defend themselves, their homes, and their loved ones, and to hunt game."

    The bold section should read "Frequently we hear mentioned" as in "Other people have said".

    What it implies as originally written is "Frequently weat OpenCarry.org mentioned"

    Just didn't want some anti grabbing the quote and using it to say "OpenCarry.org believes 2A is for home protection and hunting."
    Thank you, sir. I don't mind one bit when someone points out a typo I have made. I am also somewhat of a stickler when it comes to grammar. Good catch.

    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!

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    SouthernBoy wrote:
    Frequently we here mentioned that the Second Amendment protects the right of the people to defend themselves, their homes, and their loved ones, and to hunt game. Nothing could be further from the truth.
    Oh, I'm sure I could think of a few things that are farther from the truth.

    (since the grammar police are here, I think it's "farther", not "further")

    While the 2A was written with tyranny in mind, it's important to understand that resisting tyranny is still a matter of self-defense. The criminals are just better organized.

    The language used by the founders in instructive. We today like to say that you "can't trade liberty for security". But read this line from the Declaration of Independence:
    But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
    The concepts of liberty and security were not mutually exclusive. A government which provided you with security meant that it was securing your rights, not your physical security. The notion of a government employee coming to protect you from a fire hazard or a dog attack or even a mugger was not even considered. If you have problems with your neighbors, use the court system. The government's job is to leave you alone and protect the borders.

  8. #8
    Regular Member rodbender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Navasota, Texas, USA
    Posts
    2,524

    Post imported post

    Agreed, Tomahawk.
    The thing about common sense is....it ain't too common.
    Will Rogers

  9. #9
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849

    Post imported post

    Tomahawk wrote:
    SouthernBoy wrote:
    Frequently we here mentioned that the Second Amendment protects the right of the people to defend themselves, their homes, and their loved ones, and to hunt game. Nothing could be further from the truth.
    Oh, I'm sure I could think of a few things that are farther from the truth.

    (since the grammar police are here, I think it's "farther", not "further")

    While the 2A was written with tyranny in mind, it's important to understand that resisting tyranny is still a matter of self-defense. The criminals are just better organized.

    The language used by the founders in instructive. We today like to say that you "can't trade liberty for security". But read this line from the Declaration of Independence:
    But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
    The concepts of liberty and security were not mutually exclusive. A government which provided you with security meant that it was securing your rights, not your physical security. The notion of a government employee coming to protect you from a fire hazard or a dog attack or even a mugger was not even considered. If you have problems with your neighbors, use the court system. The government's job is to leave you alone and protect the borders.
    Your comments about security are correct in the context of your Declaration of Independence quote. Many people certainly do seem to forget, or worse, pervert that little word, do they not?

    Another phrase that has received contemporary perversion is from the Preamble to the Constitution. "promote the general Welfare". Madison did a little backstep on that and explained that he never intended its meaning to be for welfare protections we see today.

    As Chubby Checker sang in 1961, "Let's Twist Again".


    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!

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran Nelson_Muntz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Manassas, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    697

    Post imported post

    Well, y'know what they say...if a government needs shooting....

  11. #11
    Regular Member KansasMustang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Herington, Kansas, USA
    Posts
    1,005

    Post imported post

    "Get 'er done"
    Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. Thomas Jefferson

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    Tomahawk wrote:
    Oh, I'm sure I could think of a few things that are farther from the truth.

    (since the grammar police are here, I think it's "farther", not "further")

    While the 2A was written with tyranny in mind, it's important to understand that resisting tyranny is still a matter of self-defense. The criminals are just better organized.
    The usages of these two words are converging. On-line (post-modern) dictionaries make them nearly synonymous.

    The Harbrace College Handbook, 11th Edition, 1990 has the entry (Ch. 19i, 'Good Usage and Glossary, p219) "farther, further Some writers prefer farther in references to geographic distance: six miles farther. Further is used as a synonym for additional in more abstract references: further delay, further proof."

    In writing the above, I realized that it is the failure of abstraction in d'masses that is allowing this convergence and gutting our language.



  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,508

    Post imported post

    Decoligny wrote:
    I usually don't play grammer police....
    If that was deliberate, well played, sir!

    If not...


  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    KBCraig wrote:
    Decoligny wrote:
    I usually don't play grammer police....
    If that was deliberate, well played, sir!

    If not...
    Well, in all fairness, he did write "grammer [sic] police" not "spelling police".
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    Tomahawk wrote:
    Oh, I'm sure I could think of a few things that are farther from the truth.

    (since the grammar police are here, I think it's "farther", not "further")

    While the 2A was written with tyranny in mind, it's important to understand that resisting tyranny is still a matter of self-defense. The criminals are just better organized.
    The usages of these two words are converging. On-line (post-modern) dictionaries make them nearly synonymous.

    The Harbrace College Handbook, 11th Edition, 1990 has the entry (Ch. 19i, 'Good Usage and Glossary, p219) "farther, further Some writers prefer farther in references to geographic distance: six miles farther. Further is used as a synonym for additional in more abstract references: further delay, further proof."

    In writing the above, I realized that it is the failure of abstraction in d'masses that is allowing this convergence and gutting our language.

    One of the things I like about OCDO is that this is one of the few places on the internet where we actually care about this stuff.

    The use of proper language, be it English or whatever they speak where you live, is so important to conveying ideas. Dumbing people down so that they are incapable of understanding the concepts of liberty and unalienable rights, or unable to read and comprehend Locke or Jefferson, is a great way to make them dependent and subservient.

    My favorite part of Orwell's 1984 is the appendix at the end of the book which describes the history and purpose of NewSpeak which is the official language of Airstrip 1. The idea is to force people to use a language so simple and dumb that they cannot even discuss complex ideas or think about ideas like freedom. If you browse the comments on youtube.com you can see stupidity in action, and the future looking bleak.

  16. #16
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849

    Post imported post

    Tomahawk wrote:
    Doug Huffman wrote:
    Tomahawk wrote:
    Oh, I'm sure I could think of a few things that are farther from the truth.

    (since the grammar police are here, I think it's "farther", not "further")

    While the 2A was written with tyranny in mind, it's important to understand that resisting tyranny is still a matter of self-defense. The criminals are just better organized.
    The usages of these two words are converging. On-line (post-modern) dictionaries make them nearly synonymous.

    The Harbrace College Handbook, 11th Edition, 1990 has the entry (Ch. 19i, 'Good Usage and Glossary, p219) "farther, further Some writers prefer farther in references to geographic distance: six miles farther. Further is used as a synonym for additional in more abstract references: further delay, further proof."

    In writing the above, I realized that it is the failure of abstraction in d'masses that is allowing this convergence and gutting our language.

    One of the things I like about OCDO is that this is one of the few places on the internet where we actually care about this stuff.

    The use of proper language, be it English or whatever they speak where you live, is so important to conveying ideas. Dumbing people down so that they are incapable of understanding the concepts of liberty and unalienable rights, or unable to read and comprehend Locke or Jefferson, is a great way to make them dependent and subservient.

    My favorite part of Orwell's 1984 is the appendix at the end of the book which describes the history and purpose of NewSpeak which is the official language of Airstrip 1. The idea is to force people to use a language so simple and dumb that they cannot even discuss complex ideas or think about ideas like freedom. If you browse the comments on youtube.com you can see stupidity in action, and the future looking bleak.
    Double to you, sir. Man, I could not agree more that your post.


    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!

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    Well said, Tomahawk.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , Nevada, USA
    Posts
    716

    Post imported post

    Right on Tomakawk, If we be talkin like dis when we be in skool dey woulda flunked us out.

    Sorry, I couldn't resist. I have to admit to not being the most eloquent speaker or writer, but I try to communicate clearly. I am afraid that this is not emphasized strongly enough in today's society.

  19. #19
    Regular Member KansasMustang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Herington, Kansas, USA
    Posts
    1,005

    Post imported post

    Well the spelling police arrived and it's GrAmmAr but thass okay cuz I spell it like I say it anyhow, it's all good folks But the founding Fathers would be doin' Cheetah flips in their graves if they knew what we're fixin' to come up against now. Tis okay tho', if not their blood in all our veins it's at least the same fire in our souls. Give me Liberty or give me Death.
    Keep your powder dry!
    Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. Thomas Jefferson

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Well, in the 1700s spelling wasn't as rigidly enforced as it is today, but grammar was very important. Even more so was eloquence, the ability to convey an idea not only as a piece of simple data, but to give it a style, turn it into a pretty picture. The English language of the day was inspired by such wordsmiths as Shakespeare, who conveyed ideas in poetic terms.

    The language of the Declaration of Independence very much reflects this. To read it is to feel the passion of the author. Even if you nitpick the grammar and spelling, you can't deny that it's impossible to read it and not totally grock it, to use a Heinleinian term. It's just a beautiful piece of literature any way you look at it.

  21. #21
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    I'm endlessly impressed by Obama's supporters ability to deny his repeated promisses to eviscerate the 2nd Ammendment, and tell us all to go stick out heads in the sand becaue we're getting upset over nothing: exactly what will let him and his cohorts in congress commit their long planned treason.

    I guess you have to deliberately blind yourself to like the guy....

    Out of the frying pan and into the fire was not the change we needed. Denying that it is so is the pinnacle of self-delusion. I refuse to be a fool along with you!
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "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

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  22. #22
    Regular Member KansasMustang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Herington, Kansas, USA
    Posts
    1,005

    Post imported post

    Now that we're done with grammar and spelling lessons.
    When in the course of Human events it becomes necessary....
    Keep your powder dry!
    Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. Thomas Jefferson

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Norfolk, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,000

    Post imported post

    ixtow wrote:
    I'm endlessly impressed by Obama's supporters ability to deny his repeated promisses to eviscerate the 2nd Ammendment, and tell us all to go stick out heads in the sand becaue we're getting upset over nothing: exactly what will let him and his cohorts in congress commit their long planned treason.

    I guess you have to deliberately blind yourself to like the guy....

    Out of the frying pan and into the fire was not the change we needed. Denying that it is so is the pinnacle of self-delusion. I refuse to be a fool along with you!
    Either that or they are willfully trying to support his agenda of gun grabbing by convincing us to bury our heads in the sand so it's easier to grab everyone's guns.

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran Nelson_Muntz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Manassas, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    697

    Post imported post

    He's in serious need of a blanket party.

  25. #25
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    I haven't heard that one in a while.

    I would agree, but only if 'blanket party' is actually some secret code for 'concrete shoes.'

    ;-)
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "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

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

Posting Permissions

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