• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

The Real Purpose of the Second Amendment

smoking357

Banned
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
1,100
Location
Pierce is a Coward, ,
imported post

It's time someone besides Marchiafava understood that it's not about self defense or crime deterrence.

From Lewrockwell.com:

August 18, 2009 A Non-State Gun at Obama Event Posted by Butler Shaffer on August 18, 2009 07:57 AM Karen: Those who are getting their diapers in a knot over the appearance of a man with an assault rifle at an Obama event need a little perspective. To begin with, they might recall the day, back in the 1960s, when a contingent of Black Panthers walked into the California State Legislative chambers with rifles and shotguns – while the legislature was in session – to make a political statement. No shots were fired; no one was injured; but the incident was intended to remind government officials of the purpose of the Second Amendment. Ordinary people – not the state’s police and military – are to have the ultimate power in a free society. It is this reminder – not the gun – that most terrifies members of the media, academia, etc. I suspect there were numerous government agents at this event with weapons more powerful than what this one man carried: why was there no outrage over their armed presence? The political scientist who worried that the carrying of guns at such events “creates a chilling effect” on members of the public might ask, if he is sincere, whether armed functionaries of the state might produce the same effect.
The fear that the ultimate political authority may be decentralizing into the hands of private persons is more than the statist faithful can tolerate. To paraphrase the anti-war bumper-sticker from the 1960s: “what if they gave a democracy and EVERYBODY showed up?”
 

coolusername2007

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,660
Location
Temecula, California, USA
imported post

smoking357 wrote:
To begin with, they might recall the day, back in the 1960s, when a contingent of Black Panthers walked into the California State Legislative chambers with rifles and shotguns – while the legislature was in session – to make a political statement. No shots were fired; no one was injured; but the incident was intended to remind government officials of the purpose of the Second Amendment. Ordinary people – not the state’s police and military – are to have the ultimate power in a free society.
Yup, and what did we in CA get for it...unloaded open carry.
 

darthmord

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2008
Messages
998
Location
Norfolk, Virginia, USA
imported post

coolusername2007 wrote:
smoking357 wrote:
To begin with, they might recall the day, back in the 1960s, when a contingent of Black Panthers walked into the California State Legislative chambers with rifles and shotguns – while the legislature was in session – to make a political statement. No shots were fired; no one was injured; but the incident was intended to remind government officials of the purpose of the Second Amendment. Ordinary people – not the state’s police and military – are to have the ultimate power in a free society.
Yup, and what did we in CA get for it...unloaded open carry.
Only because The People in CA let their employees tell their bosses / employershow it was going to be.
 

Gator5713

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
591
Location
Aggieland, Texas, USA
imported post

smoking357 wrote:
It's time someone besides Marchiafava understood that it's not about self defense or crime deterrence.
I believe that everyone here is on the same page as far as the overall scope of the 2nd, however, this site is about the carrying of a defensive weapon (side arm) and more specifically OPEN carry of said arm, not about the overall purpose of the 2nd...

Therefore, for the purposes of THIS site, it IS about self defense and crime deterrence! It is all about context.
 

smoking357

Banned
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
1,100
Location
Pierce is a Coward, ,
imported post

Gator5713 wrote:
smoking357 wrote:
It's time someone besides Marchiafava understood that it's not about self defense or crime deterrence.
I believe that everyone here is on the same page as far as the overall scope of the 2nd, however, this site is about the carrying of a defensive weapon
Whoa, you just contradicted yourself. If everyone is on the same page regarding 2A, then everyone is trying to show power to the government.

Did you mean defense of yourself against the government? If so, you're correct.

Therefore, for the purposes of THIS site, it IS about self defense and crime deterrence! It is all about context.
Right, defense against governmental crime.
 

Gator5713

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
591
Location
Aggieland, Texas, USA
imported post

Not sure how you figure that I contradicted myself unless you completely read some extra words into my statement as I simply stated that this site is NOT so much about 2A as it applies to a tyrannical govt as it is about Self Defense! We have the RIGHT to "Life Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness", which is backed up by the RIGHT to bear arms.
The original writing of 2A was aimed NOT ONLY at the eventual reality of a tyrannical Govt, but also as an individual right to self preservation. This site focuses on the latter of those two.
Clear now?
 

Washintonian_For_Liberty

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2008
Messages
922
Location
Mercer Island, Washington, USA
imported post

Gator5713 wrote:
smoking357 wrote:
It's time someone besides Marchiafava understood that it's not about self defense or crime deterrence.
I believe that everyone here is on the same page as far as the overall scope of the 2nd, however, this site is about the carrying of a defensive weapon (side arm) and more specifically OPEN carry of said arm, not about the overall purpose of the 2nd...

Therefore, for the purposes of THIS site, it IS about self defense and crime deterrence! It is all about context.
You are wrong!

The motto of this site has nothing to do with crime... nor does it have anything to do with self defense.

You and everyone like you are the problem with gun owners. You have abdicated your duty to a government stooge.

We the people were supposed to be the ones in charge, but instead, we have a thugocracy that takes everything and anything it wants at the point of a gun, and most of us do nothing.

A right unexercised is a right lost! The second amendment was never about self defense. It was never about hunting. It was always about the responsibility to make sure government never became tyrannical. We can know this is true by the prolific writings of those who crafted the second amendment.

The second amendment our right as free people to exercise... and like that courageous man in Arizona did, we had better get out there in numbers before we lose our rights to abolish a tyrannical government once and for all. If we do just like him, and peacefully remind our government just who has the power... in the millions, then we may stem the tide of tyranny that is overwhelming our country.
 

smoking357

Banned
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
1,100
Location
Pierce is a Coward, ,
imported post

Gator5713 wrote:
The original writing of 2A was aimed NOT ONLY at the eventual reality of a tyrannical Govt, but also as an individual right to self preservation. This site focuses on the latter of those two.
Clear now?
You just can't seem to get it right.

One more time: OC is primarily about telling the government whose in charge.

Got it?
 

riverrat10k

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2008
Messages
1,472
Location
on a rock in the james river
imported post

smoking357 wrote:
Gator5713 wrote:
The original writing of 2A was aimed NOT ONLY at the eventual reality of a tyrannical Govt, but also as an individual right to self preservation. This site focuses on the latter of those two.
Clear now?
You just can't seem to get it right.

One more time: OC is primarily about telling the government whose in charge.

Got it?
+100000
 

coolusername2007

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,660
Location
Temecula, California, USA
imported post

smoking357 wrote:
Gator5713 wrote:
The original writing of 2A was aimed NOT ONLY at the eventual reality of a tyrannical Govt, but also as an individual right to self preservation. This site focuses on the latter of those two.
Clear now?
You just can't seem to get it right.

One more time: OC is primarily about telling the government whose in charge.

Got it?

Yup. Don't believe it? Then come on over to the People's Republik of Kalifornia where on that day the Black Panthers protested we virtually lost our rights to open carry. Yes, it's barely legal here (unloaded open carry only) but most are too afraid of either getting arrested and spending major defense $$$$$ or just causing even more strict anti-gun laws. Sorry to restate what the OP wrote, but here it is from the senate.ca.gov website...


1967 The legislature was in session, debating a gun control bill, when two dozen armed members of the Black Panthers marched into the Assembly chamber. Then Assembly Chief Sergeant-at-Arms ordered the protesters out while terrified legislators hid behind their desks. The protesters, whose guns where not loaded, complied by leaving the building. Although they were not breaking any laws at the time, the next day legislation was introduced to make it illegal to bring weapons or firearms into the State Capitol.
I'm too young to know for sure what the People's response was to this government action, but it seems to me the entire pro-gun population should have gone in the day after that.


And what country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. -Thomas Jefferson
 

Washintonian_For_Liberty

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2008
Messages
922
Location
Mercer Island, Washington, USA
imported post

coolusername2007 wrote:
smoking357 wrote:
Gator5713 wrote:
The original writing of 2A was aimed NOT ONLY at the eventual reality of a tyrannical Govt, but also as an individual right to self preservation. This site focuses on the latter of those two.
Clear now?
You just can't seem to get it right.

One more time: OC is primarily about telling the government whose in charge.

Got it?

Yup. Don't believe it? Then come on over to the People's Republik of Kalifornia where on that day the Black Panthers protested we virtually lost our rights to open carry. Yes, it's barely legal here (unloaded open carry only) but most are too afraid of either getting arrested and spending major defense $$$$$ or just causing even more strict anti-gun laws. Sorry to restate what the OP wrote, but here it is from the senate.ca.gov website...


1967 The legislature was in session, debating a gun control bill, when two dozen armed members of the Black Panthers marched into the Assembly chamber. Then Assembly Chief Sergeant-at-Arms ordered the protesters out while terrified legislators hid behind their desks. The protesters, whose guns where not loaded, complied by leaving the building. Although they were not breaking any laws at the time, the next day legislation was introduced to make it illegal to bring weapons or firearms into the State Capitol.
I'm too young to know for sure what the People's response was to this government action, but it seems to me the entire pro-gun population should have gone in the day after that.


And what country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. -Thomas Jefferson
Sounds like someone needs to organize a 100,000 armed man (of all colors) march on the Kapital in Sakrimento. No matter how many police they get, 100,000 armed men will not be arrested nor will they be stopped. Its time to let the despots we will no longer accept their unconstitutional laws taking away our Constitutionally protected rights.

While States have the legislative powers not delegated in the Constitution to the Federal Government, the bill of rights makes clear what is to be protected from all government bodies. State governments cannot legitimately write laws that take away our 1st, 2nd, 4th or 5th Amendment rights plus all the others even though they do on a regular basis.

The unconstitutional tyrants in government need to be reminded who they work for.
 

MSC 45ACP

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,840
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
imported post

Even better, we need 100,000 of us to OC andmarch in DC between the Washington Monument and the Capitol (The Mall, for those that haven't been to the Crime Capital of the Country).
 

Bustelo5%

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
474
Location
kent, Ohio, USA
imported post

Im down someone wanna pick me up in Ohio then we take a boat to Hawaii and libirate the peoples who live on the Hawaiian home steads and give them their land back.
 

coolusername2007

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,660
Location
Temecula, California, USA
imported post

Bustelo5% wrote:
Im down someone wanna pick me up in Ohio then we take a boat to Hawaii and libirate the peoples who live on the Hawaiian home steads and give them their land back.
No, let's liberate the PRK first, then we'll go offshore to the islands. Don't want the enemy sneaking up our backside do we?
 

Washintonian_For_Liberty

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2008
Messages
922
Location
Mercer Island, Washington, USA
imported post

People's Republic of Kalifornia?

Or

PRK = People's Republic of Korea?

The real acronym is DPRK... or theinaccuratelynamed Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

Ever notice how everything about liberals is a lie? They name their countries or policies exactly the opposite of what they are. Liberals are not liberal, the Employee Free Choice Act is anything but... When they originally called themselves progressives before world war 2, that name lost all credibility when Hitler followed of of their programs to their logical ends and people saw progressivism for what it was... now enough time has passed, and they've managed to damage the name "Liberal" enough that the term progressive is being introduced back into the mix. Also, they've had control of the school system long enough now that most Americans are sufficiently ignorant of what the progressives did before world war 2 and how they were great admirers of Hitler.

So when they say they support the Second Amendment... don't believe them. They Lie!

Maybe we should have named it the Democratic People's Republic of Kalifornia...:lol:
 

Bustelo5%

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
474
Location
kent, Ohio, USA
imported post

Well both places Puerto Rico and PRK lol.You are completely right.Actually the black panthers and any pro america org should get involved and just do a nationwide campaign of OC.
I cannot belive that in Cali you cannot OC while loaded that is complete bs and I dont understand why people are actually following this,there are enough people in Cali to take it over for good.
 

coolusername2007

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,660
Location
Temecula, California, USA
imported post

Bustelo5% wrote:
PRK? as in La Isla del encanto (Puerto Rico)
Sorry, forgot this wasn't in the CA forum. PRK = Peoples Republik of Kalifornia (or sometimes Kommiefornia). Yeah, we just love our state. I wonder if there was a popular opinion poll of people and their states, where would CA be? Most here simply acknowledge the real reason why we stay...the weather. Yeah, its that good.
 

coolusername2007

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,660
Location
Temecula, California, USA
imported post

Bustelo5% wrote:
Well both places Puerto Rico and PRK lol.You are completely right.Actually the black panthers and any pro america org should get involved and just do a nationwide campaign of OC.
I cannot belive that in Cali you cannot OC while loaded that is complete bs and I dont understand why people are actually following this,there are enough people in Cali to take it over for good.
It gets better,the governor that signed that little legislative gem was then Governor...what for it...Reagan! Believe it. Sad, huh? Here's a couple of links for the interested.


It was Governor Ronald Reagan of California who signed the Mulford Act in 1967, "prohibiting the carrying of firearms on one's person or in a vehicle, in any public place or on any public street." The law was aimed at stopping the Black Panthers, but affected all gun owners.(emphasis added)http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=22064
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/NewsArchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=SHOWTOP
 
Top