2nd amendment definition of "arms"

[teratos]

Indeed.

When I think of the word democracy in the context that most Americans believe it to be, the first thing that comes to mind is...

Yep. My kids get pissed at school when they keep saying we are a democracy. No. Thank God we aren’t a democracy. People are stupid and a democracy is horrible when we have as many stupid people as we do.

 

[protegeV]

Yep. My kids get pissed at school when they keep saying we are a democracy. No. Thank God we aren’t a democracy. People are stupid and a democracy is horrible when we have as many stupid people as we do.

I've heard the term Democratic Republic before as well. In the end it's all semantics. We know how this B runs.

 

[ToolAA]

This thread started off looking like a real trolling expedition. If the original posters intent was to make fools of our community members or those of us who believe in the second amendment, he has surely failed.

This thread has become a very meaningful discussion. Cowboy321 I appreciate your questions and honest opinions expressed in a civil manor. Kcbrown your responses are truly insightful and I’m thankful that you have taken the time to share them here.

I’ve subscribed to this thread to remind me how parties should be able to discuss differences in opinion and/or their interpretation of our history.

Thanks.

 

[Czechnologist]

Personally, I think our level-headedness and non-violent approach gives the libs a false sense of security. I don’t think we will see a lot of warning except in retrospect. There will be a single event, or just a couple of events that will tip the scales and the response from citizens (including LEO and military) will be swift and violence. I hope I don’t underestimate the cajones attached to my fellow patriots.

Yeah, well, if that day ever comes (and I hope it never does) I think I'll be more concerned about self preservation than the cajones on my fellow patriots. Sorry. Again, I'm prepared to defend myself from all comers, be it a POS crackhead kicking-in my front door in the middle of the night or anyone else intending to do me harm. I can tell you with some assurance that most of us who have served in combat arms MOS's, particularly grunts, neither sit around wringing their hands in fear of a dystopian future that resembles a scene from The Hunger Games, nor do we totally dismiss the possibility it could happen.

 

[Rab1515]

Personally, I think our level-headedness and non-violent approach gives the libs a false sense of security. I don’t think we will see a lot of warning except in retrospect. There will be a single event, or just a couple of events that will tip the scales and the response from citizens (including LEO and military) will be swift and violence. I hope I don’t underestimate the cajones attached to my fellow patriots.

I was somewhat worried when the Marshall island gov signed the confiscation order. I believe if there had been an attempted enforcement of something similar in a different state, that would be the first shot.

 

[teratos]

Yeah, well, if that day ever comes (and I hope it never does) I think I'll be more concerned about self preservation than the cajones on my fellow patriots. Sorry. Again, I'm prepared to defend myself from all comers, be it a POS crackhead kicking-in my front door in the middle of the night or anyone else intending to do me harm. I can tell you with some assurance that most of us who have served in combat arms MOS's, particularly grunts, neither sit around wringing their hands in fear of a dystopian future that resembles a scene from The Hunger Games, nor do we totally dismiss the possibility it could happen.

Nobody is wringing their hands. Think “be prepared” like a Boy Scout.

 

[Czechnologist]

Nobody is wringing their hands. Think “be prepared” like a Boy Scout.

Always!

 

[Boom Boom]

Yep. My kids get pissed at school when they keep saying we are a democracy. No. Thank God we aren’t a democracy. People are stupid and a democracy is horrible when we have as many stupid people as we do.

Indeed. It's why so many states are turning into bung holes, thanks to "mob rule" elections where 80-90% or more of the geographic area is drowned out and ignored.

 

[cowboy321]

This thread started off looking like a real trolling expedition. If the original posters intent was to make fools of our community members or those of us who believe in the second amendment, he has surely failed.

This thread has become a very meaningful discussion. Cowboy321 I appreciate your questions and honest opinions expressed in a civil manor. Kcbrown your responses are truly insightful and I’m thankful that you have taken the time to share them here.

I’ve subscribed to this thread to remind me how parties should be able to discuss differences in opinion and/or their interpretation of our history.

Thanks.

I believe in the "market place of ideas". Public debate is healthy once we at least respect and try to understand other points of view. My career revolved around helping shape public opinion, build coalitions and attack issues with federal agencies and the Congress as well as a POTUS or 4.

My faith in America is significant as is my gun collection. The Left is not gun friendly, most want to ban AR15s and the Florida shooting is helping them build a powerful nationwide coalition of youngsters. I always take my lefty friends to the range. I have yet to meet any who want all or most guns banned. Placing this weapons debate in the public eye would be an enormous mistake. Timing is everything.

There could certainly be chaos and violence in the USA. I simply cannot endorse the use of deadly force against government entities. This would begin anarchy and horror. Also, never start a fight with a guy who has B52s ...!

 

[eruby]

Nobody is wringing their hands. Think “be prepared” like a Boy Scout.

I got kicked out of the Boy Scouts for eating a Brownie.

 

[Boondock Saint]

Had this discussion with my nephews over the weekend.

 

[teratos]

I got kicked out of the Boy Scouts for eating a Brownie.

Extra points for you, sir.

 

[Rack&Roll]

I got kicked out of the Boy Scouts for eating a Brownie.

Extra points for you, sir.

Did you later marry?

 

[noddaz]

To get back to the original question

American weapons
Brown Bess.
Charleville Musket.
American-made Muskets.
Long Rifles.
Bayonet.
Pattern 1776 Infantry Rifle.
Ferguson Rifle.
Brown Bess Musket.

 

[Jbbtwb]

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=5TwXOe81&id=E365A5EC6A9D47D685E9FDE19F9CADEC98A951BA&thid=OIP.5TwXOe81Q2maPsEH61mCBQHaMJ&mediaurl=http%3a%2f%2fimg09.deviantart.net%2fd04d%2fi%2f2009%2f159%2ff%2f3%2farmless_bear_mountain_by_jackhook.jpg&exph=1679&expw=1024&q=armless+bear&simid=608039419922288087&selectedIndex=0&ajaxhist=0[/IMG]

Ive got my bear atms

 

[Jbbtwb]

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=5TwXOe81&id=E365A5EC6A9D47D685E9FDE19F9CADEC98A951BA&thid=OIP.5TwXOe81Q2maPsEH61mCBQHaMJ&mediaurl=http%3a%2f%2fimg09.deviantart.net%2fd04d%2fi%2f2009%2f159%2ff%2f3%2farmless_bear_mountain_by_jackhook.jpg&exph=1679&expw=1024&q=armless+bear&simid=608039419922288087&selectedIndex=0&ajaxhist=0[/IMG]

Ive got my bear atms[/QUOTE]

 

[kcbrown]

I believe in the "market place of ideas". Public debate is healthy once we at least respect and try to understand other points of view. My career revolved around helping shape public opinion, build coalitions and attack issues with federal agencies and the Congress as well as a POTUS or 4.

Could not agree more!

My faith in America is significant as is my gun collection. The Left is not gun friendly, most want to ban AR15s and the Florida shooting is helping them build a powerful nationwide coalition of youngsters. I always take my lefty friends to the range. I have yet to meet any who want all or most guns banned. Placing this weapons debate in the public eye would be an enormous mistake. Timing is everything.

Completely agree with this as well. Timing is everything for this, and I am most certainly not proposing that we push this message now. That would be a mistake. The population is not well-positioned to understand the message.

But maybe we can at least lay the foundation. Talk about how the people have the right to be free. Get consensus on that. And perhaps go from there. Slowly, but surely.

And obviously we'd have to eventually build the institutions necessary to properly train the citizenry.

It's going to be a long process. First order of business is to get the citizenry trained up in the use of small arms, which first requires getting the citizenry to accept small arms. For that, you push the argument that people have the right to their own lives. You can probably push the message about the right to be free along with that, but I'd start with right-to-life first.

There could certainly be chaos and violence in the USA. I simply cannot endorse the use of deadly force against government entities. This would begin anarchy and horror.

Even when those same government entities are using deadly force against the citizenry?

Would you say the same thing to the people of North Korea? Or the tens of millions killed in the Soviet Union? Or the Jews in Nazi Germany?

Is that what you would have said to the founders? "Don't fight the British"?


You would let the government take your life, or the lives of your children, without so much as firing a shot against the government in protest?

Also, never start a fight with a guy who has B52s ...!

The B52s are why the citizenry needs SAMs ...

 

[cowboy321]

Could not agree more!




Completely agree with this as well. Timing is everything for this, and I am most certainly not proposing that we push this message now. That would be a mistake. The population is not well-positioned to understand the message.

But maybe we can at least lay the foundation. Talk about how the people have the right to be free. Get consensus on that. And perhaps go from there. Slowly, but surely.

And obviously we'd have to eventually build the institutions necessary to properly train the citizenry.

It's going to be a long process. First order of business is to get the citizenry trained up in the use of small arms, which first requires getting the citizenry to accept small arms. For that, you push the argument that people have the right to their own lives. You can probably push the message about the right to be free along with that, but I'd start with right-to-life first.




Even when those same government entities are using deadly force against the citizenry?

Would you say the same thing to the people of North Korea? Or the tens of millions killed in the Soviet Union? Or the Jews in Nazi Germany?

Is that what you would have said to the founders? "Don't fight the British"?


You would let the government take your life, or the lives of your children, without so much as firing a shot against the government in protest?

-------

We have too many talented lawyers to allow the federal government to begin slaughtering us with B52s. My ancestors fought the British in the Carolinas. The America I live in is not the one you envision, America will not descend into the violent Mad Max madness you and others predict.

That said, you are a good writer and articulate your position with fervor. But don't write an article calling for legalizing possession of RPGs,Stingers and Anti tank weapons. Bad timing..

 

[ToolAA]

KCbrown, I had posted this question half heartedly in another thread here, but I would be interested in your opinion.

What is to stop any specific state or even locality from building their own militia with fully automatic weapons, hand grenades, tanks and stinger missiles? If a community used their existing voting bodies to allocate tax revenue to fund such a militia under their existing state or local laws, would it be legal in the eyes of ATF and DOJ? Would it be a viable challenge to the current anti-2a movement? It seems that this avenue may be a more viable method for community of likeminded individuals to test the limits of current 2a interpretation.

To take this line of through further could Texas or Arizona create a heavily armed civilian force to stop illegal immigration along their borders? Or more forcefully deter drug smugglers? Suppose the state of California decides to get serious about defending itself against what they perceive as federal government tyranny against sanctuary cities? Could likeminded citizens organized by the state arm themselves in defense of their beliefs? While I don’t agree politically with the last example, it could be interpreted as the exact type of situation that the founding fathers envisioned.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[kcbrown]

We have too many talented lawyers to allow the federal government to begin slaughtering us with B52s.

"Deadly force" doesn't just come in the form of B52s.


One would hope the lawyers would be enough. But I should note that this is only an article of faith.

Lawyers didn't save the tens of millions of people who died in the Soviet Union, or China, or Nazi Germany.

And you didn't answer my question: would you let the government take your life, or the lives of your children, without so much as firing a shot against the government in protest?

My ancestors fought the British in the Carolinas.

Would you have told them that they were wrong to do so? They did bring lethal force against a government entity, which is precisely what you're arguing that people should never do under any circumstances, right?

The America I live in is not the one you envision, America will not descend into the violent Mad Max madness you and others predict.

I'm not predicting anything. That's perhaps part of the misunderstanding here. There's a difference between being prepared for the worst and believing the worst will happen. One cannot properly deal with the worst case scenario if one is unprepared for it, but being prepared for it will not make it happen on its own!

It's kinda like the U.S. military. Why does it have a nuclear arsenal? Is it because a nuclear war will happen? No. It's because, firstly, having that arsenal means that nobody dares to credibly threaten the U.S. with destruction, lest they be blown off the map (this is the equivalent of the citizenry being so well armed that the government dare not trample upon them); and secondly, the U.S. might actually need to use at least some of it to beat a particularly obstinate and strong enemy, which would otherwise destroy the U.S., into submission (this is the equivalent of the citizenry actually being faced with having to take their liberty back from a nasty, oppressive government). The U.S. military has a nuclear arsenal in order to be able to deal with the worst possible case, and dares not use it except when faced with that case.

That said, you are a good writer and articulate your position with fervor. But don't write an article calling for legalizing possession of RPGs,Stingers and Anti tank weapons. Bad timing..

Oh, believe me, I'm not writing such an article in the kind of environment we currently find ourselves in. I know it would be horrible timing. But we can have this discussion here, now, at least.