Social Question

plethora's avatar

How do the following statements affect your thoughts on the 2nd Amendment?

Asked by plethora (9560 points ) March 7th, 2010

I received these by email today from an old friend. This guy happens to be big into hunting and I don’t hunt at all and never have. I don’t even own a gun, but have encountered quite few women who have a gun on their person on in their car at all times. I am not posting this to be “convinced” to do anything. And I’m not lobbying for anything. I would simply be interested in comments pro or con in light of these comments.

1. “Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not.”~Thomas Jefferson
2. “Those who trade liberty for security have neither.” ~John Adams
3. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.
4. An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.
5. Only a government that is afraid of its citizens tries to control them.
6. Gun control is not about guns; it’s about control.
7. You only have the rights you are willing to fight for.
8. Know guns, know peace, know safety.
No guns, no peace, no safety.
9. You don’t shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive.
10. Assault is a behavior, not a device.
11. 64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday.
12. The United States Constitution© 1791. All Rights Reserved.
13. The Second Amendment is in place in case the politicians ignore the others.
14. What part of ‘shall not be infringed’ do you NOT understand?
15. Guns have only two enemies; rust and politicians.
16. When you remove the people’s right to bear arms, you create slaves.
17. The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

30 Answers

malevolentbutticklish's avatar

No change. I have always been a strong supporter of our second amendment.

dpworkin's avatar

The first thing despots do is disarm their victims.

LuckyGuy's avatar

They are called “equalizers’ for a reason.

laureth's avatar

re: 12 – I believe that document is in the public domain nowadays ;)

Re: 14 – I always wonder what part of “well-regulated militia” these people do not understand.

That said, I don’t believe the 2nd amendment really has anything to do with the way the right to bear arms exists in the U.S. today. If the gun owners were all bearing them as part of a well regulated militia, they’d all be out practicing manoeuvers together on Sundays or something. So the point is moot.

This is not to say I’m against gun ownership. I am very much for it, and agree with what the two above-quoted Founders said, too. (The rest of the slogans sound like soundbites that try to package a complex issue into a mantra that you can repeat without much thought, as needed.) It just has superficial relevance to the Second Amendment.

TexasDude's avatar

No change. I’ve interpreted the 2nd Amendment for as long as I can remember to mean a protection of individual gun rights.

syz's avatar

As I’ve mentioned before, I support the right to own guns.

I also support the requirement that in order to have one, you take a course (just like Driver’s Ed), you must pass a test (just like a driver’s test), and you apply for and carry a license (just as you do to drive a car).

Captain_Fantasy's avatar

Gun owners who are responsible I have no problem with.
There’s no need to play the wounded NRA guy here.
We’re not buying the victim mentality.

filmfann's avatar

The second amendment is very misunderstood, and doesn’t actually support individual gun rights, per se.
The point of that amendment was to insure that the US does not create a standing army.
Since we have one, anyway, you could say the amendment is moot, but I support gun ownership, although I would like tougher controls on some of the scum that misuse that right.

malevolentbutticklish's avatar

@filmfann: Criminals don’t follow the gun controls now. Gun controls are only for law-abiding citizens.

Arisztid's avatar

I am a firm believer in the right to bear arms and the necessity of learning gun safety.

I agree with @Fiddle_Playing_Creole_Bastard in believing that the 2nd amendment is about the protection of individual gun rights.

plethora's avatar

@Captain_Fantasy Not to worry. I think I was pretty clear on not pushing any position. I’m not lobbying for anything. I would simply be interested in comments

pikipupiba's avatar

I’ll shoot ya in the NUUUUUUTTTTTTSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!

ratboy's avatar

The contention that private ownership of guns will prevent our government from devolving into tyranny is absurd on its face. The armaments available to the government make guns that citizens can own look like toys. How long is your local militia going to last against a single fighter jet fully armed with missiles and laser guided bombs?

TexasDude's avatar

@ratboy, tell that to the Mujaheddin who very effectively fought off the extremely superior Soviet forces. They had some help, of course, but the amount is negligible in comparison to an American civilian militia force, should the need arise.

plethora's avatar

@jaytkay mmmmm…..well he should have..:)

mammal's avatar

The American gun craze, is truly awful, but so ingrained into the very soul of the American psyche, that America cannot conceive of a gun-less society, no Western European country has this problem. British cops are mainly unarmed, the citizens are unarmed, that way people don’t get shot, it’s civilised.

The gun precipitated property rights to European settlers, at the detriment of the Native Indian. The gun is the guardian principle of private ownership, when people try to justify gun ownership, this is what they mean politically. So what we are saying is that the right to bear arms is an integral part of the Capitalist ethic, it symbolises individual interests over social ones.

This is why America is such a fouled up, divisive nation of edgy individuals and not a cohesive state.

laureth's avatar

@mammal – Violent people are violent. If they can’t get guns, they will use the next thing – hence the talk in Britain about banning kitchen knives. Getting rid of everything that could potentially be used to hurt someone else is never going to work because people are ingenious and will figure some other way to hurt people (or defend themselves) if that’s their goal. Even in the UK, banning guns is a losing proposition. Lifting a ban will not necessarily put guns in the hands of bad people, but it would help good people be able to defend against bad people who already have guns.

It’s true that the gun was used against native Americans, and I’m sure that if the Romans had had guns, they would have used them against the native people of Europe as well. Instead they used the gladius. Colonialism and conquest don’t need guns, they just need people bent on colonialism and conquest.

jaytkay's avatar

The idea that every gun death would be a knifing or beating instead, if a firearm wasn’t available, is ridiculous.

laureth's avatar

The idea that banning weapons makes people in general much safer or creates a nonviolent utopia is similarly ridiculous.

malevolentbutticklish's avatar

@mammal @jaytkay: Many gun deaths are good. Europe is missing out on all the criminal-on-criminal death America enjoys. If someone breaks into my house and they are running away down the street I want to shoot them in the back. This is a positive gun death with positive benefits for society. What about the loses to Europe because these people are not eliminated from your population? How many dollars in social programs would have to be spent to realize the benefits of a single gangster popping a cap in another gangster’s ass?

jaytkay's avatar

Just so everybody knows, after enough tags for flamebait, trolls go away.

malevolentbutticklish's avatar

@jaytkay: You clearly want to suppress opposing viewpoints using the flagging system. This is an abuse of fluther.com. I am sorry if you tenderly weep for every gangster at night. If so, I think you are part of society’s problem. I stand by my statement that the only good gangster is a dead one and gun-deaths are our friend in this battle.

mammal's avatar

The Pentagon incident was the only incident i can recall where an American gun owning Citizen has utilised the right to bear arms in the spirit of the 2nd Amendment.

TexasDude's avatar

All civility in this discussion has ceased. Goodbye.

malevolentbutticklish's avatar

@mammal: “the only incident” <== ha! How about each day that Americans enjoy a higher baseline of freedoms than elsewhere in the world? No one is trying to take away our kitchen knives (UK) or tell us our men should pee sitting down (Germany).

“reek of fear.” <—you are mistaken but I cannot yet tell you why because I don’t even know why you said it.

plethora's avatar

@laureth Incredibly good answers….:)

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther