The right to rebel

The right to rebel

There are 9 comments on the Vallejo Times-Herald story from Jan 18, 2013, titled The right to rebel. In it, Vallejo Times-Herald reports that:

There is nothing in the Second Amendment about arming the citizenry to keep our government in check.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Vallejo Times-Herald.


Columbia, SC

#1 Jan 18, 2013
You have your opinion about the Second Amendment, Mr. McCombs. Now put some teeth in it.

Troy, MI

#2 Jan 18, 2013
You're quite ignert. "Well regulated" in the context of the day does not mean what you believe it means. It meant "well drilled" and "well equipped". To the officer class of the American Revolution the well equipped part meant the most due to the fact that recruits would often show up with no rifle, no powder, no shot, and sometimes no shoes. That's the reason why the original militia act defined militia as all able males between certain ages, and required them to have a firelock rifle, and sufficent powder and shot. No this was not the Militia Act of 1903 that created the National Guard - which is not a militia in any sense since the federal government pays and equips them, and can claim their lives to service at any time. The firelock rifle was the assualt weapon of the day too. If they had AK-47's I guarantee they would have required those. The purpose of the 2A was not to guarantee militia members the right to have weapons, nor is it for hunters or self defense people. It merely states that a natural right that is yours simply from being born, cannot be infringed by the federal gov't of the U.S.- by inference, any act to infringe the right gives the owner of the right, the right to fight back. He/she may lose, but cumulatively I believe they will give a tyrant gov't pause before it really tries to own the citizenry. We're almost at the point where we find out. I can hardly wait - can you?
Tsgt B

Lewisville, TX

#3 Jan 18, 2013
I would strongly suggest that someone read the Bill of Rights, Federalist Papers, and the Declaration of Independence to you, as you obviously cannot read or comprehend paslin English.
Tsgt B

Lewisville, TX

#4 Jan 18, 2013
Pardon my typo; I meant to say "plain English"

TSgt B

Denver, CO

#5 Jan 18, 2013
Try looking in the Declaration of Independence:

...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness....

It clearly states the purpose of Government, and it's responsibility to the people.
When the Government stops functioning in it's role to protect the natural rights of the people, the people have a right to abolish it and replace it with one that does.
Questions -- Try a book.

Vallejo, CA

#6 Jan 18, 2013
All your letters are the same, foolish and without facts. Do you just like seeing your name in the paper?

Bottom line, nobody cares what you think!
Uncle Frank

Woodbridge, VA

#7 Jan 18, 2013
Maybe that is why they created a Constitutional Republic instead of a Democracy. It is you who are wrong and can't stop sputtering long enough to see the truth. In many documents they hashed over the right of the people to change the government by any means necessary if it became repugnant. They stated in no uncertain terms a Democracy was one of those conditions.
Juan Lago

Alameda, CA

#8 Jan 18, 2013
"As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms." (Tench Coxe in `Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution' under the Pseudonym `A Pennsylvanian' in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 at 2 col. 1)

Barnesville, MN

#9 Jan 19, 2013
Its not a democracy you misinformed dolt. Its a republic. Look it up.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Vallejo Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Kidnapped Vallejo woman talks of ordeal, accusa... 6 min manifort 1
Diaz not running for Vallejo City Council, supp... 9 min BIG Pounder 8
Mare Island Cemetery 16 min fedup2 7
Vallejo City Council gets look at survey results 46 min the digger 17
Trump speaks Russian 1 hr trailer trash times 1
ICYMI: Vallejo school board trustee suing forme... 12 hr riddlemethisfatman 22
Sanctuary laws + Jeff Sessions + roads + housing 22 hr Anonymous 22

Vallejo Jobs

Personal Finance

Vallejo Mortgages