Why are advocates for OC disliked so much?

[Big Gay Al]

"Those who give up liberty for safety deserve neither and lose both."

If you want to break up 2a like that, look it this way.

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to a free state,"

What does that mean? The military? I believe most would agree. What else would you consider a well regulated militia? Some believe it to be the citizen iarmy. Other would say the armed forces. Who knows. BUT!!!!!! One of the things you are missing is this: ,

"....necessary to a free state(COMMA), the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

A comma is used to connect two independent clauses. It generally means "and" "or" "but". So using either one of those, I will show 2a again.

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to a free state, AND the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed"

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to a free state, OR the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

By basic definition of its contents, 2a tells the .gov that our rights are not to be regulated. And the last words tell it all. "Shall not be infringed." I believe it to mean that 2a supports a regulated army, and supports the peoples right to bear arms.

Nothing in 2a allows state regulation. Period.

Yeah!! What he said!!!

 

[davidmcbeth]

But gun control works .. ask Hitler and the jews ... Stalin and the 20 mil he killed ... Marcos and the Philippines .. it works well

 

[sudden valley gunner]

can't help but play devils advocate and point out that the 2A does mention a well regulated militia. I've never been a fan of the wording of the 2A, its vague, could be seen as contradictory, and feels like it's two independent thoughts joined together for some reason. But it leaves quite a bit of room for interpretation, and the way it's interpreted at this point is to allow for some state regulation.

The quote you're looking for is Ben Franklin.

But gun control works .. ask Hitler and the jews ... Stalin and the 20 mil he killed ... Marcos and the Philippines .. it works well

The Brits used it well too when they conquered or wanted to control a population, the founders were British subjects at one time.

 

[WalkingWolf]

I'm just puzzled why they don't make guns illegal in Afghanistan, seems like a easy cure to all of the problems. Hell somebody should of told the generals in Iraq all they had to do was outlaw IEDs.

 

[Big Gay Al]

I'm just puzzled why they don't make guns illegal in Afghanistan, seems like a easy cure to all of the problems. Hell somebody should of told the generals in Iraq all they had to do was outlaw IEDs.

LOL, I think they are illegal, that's why there's so many of them.

 

[jimpen]

While anecdotes are not data, two I heard about recently:

http://forum.pafoa.org/open-carry-144/147404-oc-may-have-prevented-crime-leo-encounter.html
http://www.examiner.com/article/open-carry-deters-armed-robbery-kennesaw

:monkey

 

[KYGlockster]

Cant read all of these there are too many. But I will say this, you OC people are crazy.

Who in their right mind would carry a weapon and show it to all who would see it? Imagine the horror to many who see the gun, the sleepless nights, the nightmares of gun toting bible thumping mid-westerners? By what right do you openly carry a firearm?

Oh wait a minute, I am on the wrong internet site, I thought this was MSNBC.

Sorry.

You OC people are cool.

Hey man! Don't leave the lunatics on the east side of the country out! You know, the guys and gals that choose to exercise their rights and are labeled "lunatics" because of it! HAHA..

 

[KYGlockster]

can't help but play devils advocate and point out that the 2A does mention a well regulated militia. I've never been a fan of the wording of the 2A, its vague, could be seen as contradictory, and feels like it's two independent thoughts joined together for some reason. But it leaves quite a bit of room for interpretation, and the way it's interpreted at this point is to allow for some state regulation.

The quote you're looking for is Ben Franklin.

The pre-log is simply a statement made to reflect the importance of this right. A well-regulated militia, necessary to keep a free state free was the most important reason to keep and bear arms when the Constitution was ratified. This is still the most important reason to bear arms today, and the founders knew that in order to maintain the republic they founded they would need to protect this right in the Constitution from federal government intrusion. This was a right already recognized and protected by the majority of state constitutions, and it was neccessary to protect it from the newly formed federal government as well. How better to show the importance of this right than with the pre-log that was placed before the actual amendment? We must remember that a person's state was considered his country in those days, and the state was of key importance; if you lost your state, you lost everything.

 

[MAC702]

... its ******* hot in LV and I don't always like wearing the coat. When cops ask me why I'm oc'ing that's what I've been saying....

I don't answer. But I've been known to reply: "Why are you?"