Why there is a need for the Second Amendment

There are 245 comments on the Tampa Bay Online story from Jan 3, 2013, titled Why there is a need for the Second Amendment. In it, Tampa Bay Online reports that:

Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., in the wake of the Newtown, Conn., shootings, said: "The British are not coming.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Tampa Bay Online.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#108 Jan 6, 2013
Tray wrote:
<quoted text> A right to defend against oppression is never needed till the oppressed can't defend from it.
But, as i pointed pout, it was needed. and history will show you it was needed often but it never worked.

all the guns you say you need to defend agaisnt tyranny have only been used to kill fellow citizens.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#109 Jan 6, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Sound s like you don't have a point...
My point is you were avoiding his point.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#110 Jan 6, 2013
Dr-Sniper wrote:
<quoted text>
My point is you were avoiding his point.
there was no point to avoid. Certainly not one relative to this duscussion.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#111 Jan 6, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>And that has what to do with now or Prep's question?

you really need to focus...
The meaning behind the second amendment hasn't changed! I know you would like it to. You leave out the part about the government being armed with muskets too at the time. Now the government is better armed, so are citizens. The second amendment still means that citizens SHALL be armed in case they must form Militias and rise against tyranny.
Any more questions?

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#112 Jan 6, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>Yes. It is the most importnant of them as it protects all the rest of them...
You are mistaken. It is the second that protects the rest of them. You lose the second, and I assure you, you will not have a first. You will not have any freedoms at that point.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#113 Jan 6, 2013
Dr-Sniper wrote:
<quoted text>
The meaning behind the second amendment hasn't changed! I know you would like it to. You leave out the part about the government being armed with muskets too at the time. Now the government is better armed, so are citizens. The second amendment still means that citizens SHALL be armed in case they must form Militias and rise against tyranny.
Any more questions?
yes, again when has this worked in the US? i have gin=ven many exampl;es of when it should have, but did not. Why can you not address the facts in this case?

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#115 Jan 6, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>there was no point to avoid. Certainly not one relative to this duscussion.
It has become obvious you just want to avoid facts and relevant points simply by stating they do not exist. I'm not going to waste my time debating or attempting to educate someone that doesn't want to see the truth. If you want to spew your false propaganda and deflect from reality, have fun with that. You aren't fooling anyone.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#116 Jan 6, 2013
Dr-Sniper wrote:
<quoted text>
It has become obvious you just want to avoid facts and relevant points simply by stating they do not exist. I'm not going to waste my time debating or attempting to educate someone that doesn't want to see the truth. If you want to spew your false propaganda and deflect from reality, have fun with that. You aren't fooling anyone.
yeah, i'd crawl away with my tail between my legs also... it was getting embarrassing for you..

I gave you clear, historical, reproduceable facts, and you couldn't touch them. and it is YOU talking about not dealing with facts? that is funny...

try again any time... buh bye...
Dee Hood

Fort Myers, FL

#117 Jan 6, 2013
Besara wrote:
<quoted text>
So it's never going to happen?
<quoted text>
20,000 Firearms laws yet you prattle on about "wide availability". Everything you mentioned involves criminals. Nothing to do with law abiding gun owners.
<quoted text>
No, not close.
<quoted text>
Only a subject or despot would question the the justification of rights. Rights don't need to be justified.
<quoted text>
Liar. You ignore the reality that guns in the hands of the citizenry protect them and stop crimes.
<quoted text>
You can't argue that the acts of the statistically minute minority should dictate the rights and liberties of the majority who choose to live withing the boundaries of the law. So arguing against guns doesn't really apply.
<quoted text>But you are okay if that criminal has already killed 3 or 4 victims in that situation because you wanted them to remain unarmed. How noble.
http://www.ijreview.com/2012/12/27238-just-a-...

“Antisocialistic”

Since: May 12

Lake Charles, LA

#118 Jan 6, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>but it didn't answer your question about now, did it?

Whaa waa waaaaaaaa.......
So this is the post you choose to respond to? That is weak and pathetic. His post did actually answer my question about now. You're just too closed minded to see it.
Since you ignored my post to you, here it is again:
Lmao! You give one INCORRECT answer in reply to three different questions. Yet you claim it is me that is off tonight in my comprehension.

You are wrong. Please explain your thought process.
It's not rocket science. If US Citizens must stand up to our government, in the case of tyranny, you think that government is going to provide them with weapons? Come on! Ignorance by choice must be your motivation. You really can't be that stupid.

“Antisocialistic”

Since: May 12

Lake Charles, LA

#119 Jan 6, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>yeah, i'd crawl away with my tail between my legs also... it was getting embarrassing for you..

I gave you clear, historical, reproduceable facts, and you couldn't touch them. and it is YOU talking about not dealing with facts? that is funny...

try again any time... buh bye...
You sure do like patting yourself on the back for nothing.
He figured you out pretty quickly. Now all you can do is try to bait him back into acknowledging you. Lmao. I hope he leaves you hanging! Lol!

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#120 Jan 6, 2013
Prep-for-Dep wrote:
<quoted text>
So this is the post you choose to respond to? That is weak and pathetic. His post did actually answer my question about now. You're just too closed minded to see it.
Since you ignored my post to you, here it is again:
Lmao! You give one INCORRECT answer in reply to three different questions. Yet you claim it is me that is off tonight in my comprehension.
You are wrong. Please explain your thought process.
It's not rocket science. If US Citizens must stand up to our government, in the case of tyranny, you think that government is going to provide them with weapons? Come on! Ignorance by choice must be your motivation. You really can't be that stupid.
..No, it really didn't, did it? The civilians joining our military do not bring their priovate weapons to fight with, do they.

Why can't you just admit you were wrong? Are you again going to fail miserably in trying to show when the armed US citizenry has stopped tyranny from the US gov't? that last time was so embaraassing for you I didn't think you
d be stupid enought to try again, bvut if all you have i s gun powder for brains, go ahead, this should be funny the second time around...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#121 Jan 6, 2013
Prep-for-Dep wrote:
<quoted text>
You sure do like patting yourself on the back for nothing.
He figured you out pretty quickly. Now all you can do is try to bait him back into acknowledging you. Lmao. I hope he leaves you hanging! Lol!
you could just answer the facts I have posted, or fail miserably trying ./...again...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#122 Jan 6, 2013
Prep-for-Dep wrote:
<quoted text>
So this is the post you choose to respond to? That is weak and pathetic. His post did actually answer my question about now. You're just too closed minded to see it.
Since you ignored my post to you, here it is again:
Lmao! You give one INCORRECT answer in reply to three different questions. Yet you claim it is me that is off tonight in my comprehension.
You are wrong. Please explain your thought process.
It's not rocket science. If US Citizens must stand up to our government, in the case of tyranny, you think that government is going to provide them with weapons? Come on! Ignorance by choice must be your motivation. You really can't be that stupid.
what post of yours didn't I resopnd to? I showed them to all be nonsense...
the rest of us

Saint Paul, MN

#123 Jan 6, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>yeah, i'd crawl away with my tail between my legs also... it was getting embarrassing for you..
I gave you clear, historical, reproduceable facts, and you couldn't.....BLAH,BLAH,FART,BL AH......
No wooddick, your MN deluded liberal arrogance is flaring up again. Stick with the gay threads where you at least have a chance at somebody agreeing with you.

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#124 Jan 6, 2013
WICKY wrote:
<quoted text>You Republican Fruits.
Fortunately most sensible Americans no longer feel 20 dead 1st graders are a fair exchange for your pathetic, fetid,little stroke fantasy of shooting at Federal Government agents with your home arsonal,Fantasizing about living out the 'Turner Diaries'....
Have you Glenn Beck Groupies ever consider tying a Bath Towel around your neck and pretending to be Superman?
I used to think it was fun...when I was NINE.....
Are you in North Korea or Iran ?

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#125 Jan 6, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>But, as i pointed pout, it was needed. and history will show you it was needed often but it never worked.
all the guns you say you need to defend agaisnt tyranny have only been used to kill fellow citizens.
LOL ! If not for guns, murder would not exist.

Who knew, men need guns to kill small kids.

You're so stupid...

“Constitutionist/ SAF”

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#126 Jan 6, 2013
Amerika is full of antigun communists...

We are armed so we can KILL cops and soldiers when the govt goes rogue.
woodtick57 wrote:
...
Why can't you just admit you were wrong? Are you again going to fail miserably in trying to show when the armed US citizenry has stopped tyranny from the US gov't? that last time was so embaraassing for you I didn't think you
d be stupid enought to try again, bvut if all you have i s gun powder for brains, go ahead, this should be funny the second time around...
So you're a PIG and your're helping the PIGS learn who will admit (now) they will resist the next Warsaw Ghetto gun confiscation by PIGS ? You want us to incriminate ourselves before the fact ?

If you think we are harmless cowards, why don't you post (here) your name and address ahead of time.
CrimeaRiver - IMP

South Ockendon, UK

#127 Jan 7, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>First of all the United States of America IS NOT a democracy. It's a democratic republic. The founding fathers designed it that way so the INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS wouldn't be at the mercy of majority (mob) rule. That's why we have a Constitution setting down INALIENABLE rights. The second amendment is one of those rights because the founding fathers had a very healthy distrust of governments......even the one they were creating. People who do not distrust government (all governments) are idiots, fool, and government officials. There is ONLY one reason that a government would want to disarm it's honest law abiding citizens........so they can be easily controlled and subjugated. In America the PEOPLE are supposed to control the government, not the other way around and the second amendment insures our ability to do just that by force if necessary. A wise man once said "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely". If you don't believe that........just look at Washington DC.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
"The difference between a free man and a slave is the possession of arms" Tomas Jefferson
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin
Could the founding fathers have made it any clearer?????
Even though you're refuting my claims, I like this post. In fact, I love the history of the constitution. I recently caught a Series on the life of John Adams and i found it fascinating.

But we live in different times. I don't think all of the inalienable rights you speak are possible anymore. And i don't understand how the people can topple a govt in the US. How would you even go about it?
CrimeaRiver - IMP

South Ockendon, UK

#128 Jan 7, 2013
mingo wrote:
Lets see your from the UK, correct? There the violent crime rate has jumped >200% sense your gun ban laws went into effect,, Australia,, the same thing,but at a higher rate. Here,, the most gun regulated states have the highest crime rates over those that have less regulations. It's a fact and not conjecture, backed up with statistics.
As an X law enforcement officer I can tell you first hand the criminals are NOT going to abide by the laws,and new laws will not make one bit of difference but to raise the crime rate and punish the honest law abiding citizen. That's a proven fact, with the statistics to prove it so. Even as in your own country and many of ,our,, overly restrictive states.
Over 500 officers a year are killed in auto accidents related to there job,, no police cruisers anymore then?? More people are killed in the US with baseball bats a year than with guns,, no bats??? Catch my drift? Enforce the laws, and stop writing more laws that just don't work on criminals? That's why there criminals, don't make the honest people defenseless against them.
What you may read in the EU is just not the whole story, US reporters are only after the sensationalism rather than the real story,you've been misinformed, or mislead sir by the omission of key facts.
I'm sorry but your not a realist,sir, your just a sheep being lead around to do your masters bidding. Why do you think WE left for the "Colonies",,the English aristocracy running rough shod over us,,,that just doesn't fly with a truly free people.
<quoted text>
I appreciate it when people debate without adding dumbass, idiot, moron etc etc. I'm much more likely to read the rest of their post.

I'm getting a better idea of why Aemricans are so defensive of their 2nd Ammedment Rights. I'm not sure it works in practise but it is a part of your cultural heritage as well as your everyday life so I understand it a bit more than I did a few weeks ago.

Just to clear something up though. We have very few guns on the streets in the UK. And our gun laws have never allowed a civillians to carry firearms in public.

Rises in crime rates have nothing to do with guns here because we've never been allowed to use a gun to protect ourselves.

But our police don't carry guns either (apart from big events and airports). It goes to show that crime can be dealt with without the use of guns by civilians or police.

We've lived with a monarchy for over a 1000 years. And as you can see, it is possible for the people to make a change without taking up arms. Our monarchy no longer dictates our lives - this was done though political protest and not through bloodshed.

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.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News COD Offers Classes Promoting Firearm Safety thi... 5 hr Dr David 1
News No wedding for Bristol Palin Sun Tazo 9
Stop white on white crime May 20 Truth and Facts 30
News Concealed Carry Reduced Crime But NOT on Chicag... May 18 Truth and Facts 3
News Local Jews upset by Holocaust references in cam... (Jun '12) May 17 Robbie Siegmyer 115
News The Free Beacon Thinks Purchasing Ammunition Sh... May 17 JEFF1234 1
Democrats: Get A $2,000 Tax Credit For Turning ... May 10 Prep-for-Dep 22
More from around the web