The Right's Second Amendment Lies

Dec 22, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Common Dreams

Right-wing resistance to meaningful gun control is driven, in part, by a false notion that America's Founders adopted the Second Amendment because they wanted an armed population that could battle the U.S. government.

Comments
1 - 13 of 13 Comments Last updated Dec 24, 2012
jimbob

Phenix City, AL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Dec 22, 2012
 

Judged:

4

4

3

An unarmed population will be known as slaves. If the goverment has no oppisition from its people, it will rule them....
Not Now

Montgomery, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Dec 22, 2012
 

Judged:

4

4

3

”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….The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants”
~Thomas Jefferson

Since: Jan 09

Glen Cove, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Dec 22, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

I didn't even bother to read the article. The title showed ignorance of the writings of the founding fathers, as noted by @Not Now.
ohhhhh

Clifton Heights, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Dec 23, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Oh we need them there that is for sure. If there were a disaster you would need to protect yourself from the gang thug punks running all through the city. Oh we don't even need a disaster to have the need to protect ourselves from the black trash that aligns itself in gangs and prisons. The govt does not want us to be able to defend ourselves at all. That is why they made bullet proof vests illegal. A man got robbed by two black thugs the other day for a thousand on payday and shot him in the stomach anyway and killed him. If he had a vest on he would be breathing today. Don't fall for the liberal's lies.
Researcher

Killeen, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Dec 23, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Zzznorch wrote:
I didn't even bother to read the article..
Which should tell anybody all they need to know about YOU. Clinging to your ignorance hardly makes anybody want to agree with you.

"The reality was that the Framers wrote the Constitution and added the Second Amendment with the goal of creating a strong central government with a citizens-based military force capable of putting down insurrections, not to enable or encourage uprisings."
Researcher

Killeen, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Dec 23, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

"...it would be counterintuitive – as well as anti-historical – to believe that Madison and Washington wanted to arm the population so the discontented could resist the constitutionally elected government..."
Knower

Clifton Heights, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Dec 23, 2012
 
The black women don't know how to raise their kids at all. It's a real shame. Black women mothers are to blame for all the black males and black females in prisons. Each black person in a gang and in prison is the product of his mother. 73% of black children are fatherless in the home. Why can't a black woman keep a man. Societ ought to be talking more about the black mother and holding her responsible for the black prison nation and the gangs etc. This is why all other people in america needs to have a gun.
Tray

Tupelo, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Dec 23, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Researcher wrote:
"...it would be counterintuitive – as well as anti-historical – to believe that Madison and Washington wanted to arm the population so the discontented could resist the constitutionally elected government..."
But isn't that exactly what they did? The armed citizens overthrew an oppressive government and formed a new government and wrote a set of rules for that new government to follow including amendments telling that government what rights the PEOPLE had that the government had NO POWER over. If they did not want the people to have that right then why go through the trouble of writing it in with the rest of our rights and specifically calling it "The right of the PEOPLE"?
Tray

Tupelo, MS

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Dec 23, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Researcher wrote:
<quoted text>
Which should tell anybody all they need to know about YOU. Clinging to your ignorance hardly makes anybody want to agree with you.
"The reality was that the Framers wrote the Constitution and added the Second Amendment with the goal of creating a strong central government with a citizens-based military force capable of putting down insurrections, not to enable or encourage uprisings."
Hmm that's odd. If it was citizens being the army then why specify citizens didn't have to house soldiers in their homes in peace time? Odd that they would specify that when it's the citizen that's the army? If the army was citizen based and not government based then the army we know of today is unconstitutional and should be abolished now.
downhill246

Sandy, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Dec 23, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Researcher wrote:
<quoted text>
Which should tell anybody all they need to know about YOU. Clinging to your ignorance hardly makes anybody want to agree with you.
"The reality was that the Framers wrote the Constitution and added the Second Amendment with the goal of creating a strong central government with a citizens-based military force capable of putting down insurrections, not to enable or encourage uprisings."


Incorrect .The 2nd amendment was written to allay fears that the new government could usurp powers and rights that belonged to the states and ultimately to the people. James Madison said the Bill of Rights was first and foremost a matter of private rights.

Since: Jan 09

Glen Cove, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Dec 23, 2012
 
Researcher wrote:
<quoted text>
Which should tell anybody all they need to know about YOU. Clinging to your ignorance hardly makes anybody want to agree with you.
"The reality was that the Framers wrote the Constitution and added the Second Amendment with the goal of creating a strong central government with a citizens-based military force capable of putting down insurrections, not to enable or encourage uprisings."
I didn't need to read it. I have read the complete text of both the 2008 "District of Columbia v. Heller" and 2010 "McDonald v. Chicago" SCOTUS rulings. Since they are the law of the land, their content and citations are more important than wasting my time on an op ed piece that carries no weight in law. When/if the author Robert Parry is in a position to rule from the Supreme Court or have his work cited in a court opinion, I will read what he has to say.
Get Out

Jacksonville, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Dec 23, 2012
 
Researcher wrote:
<quoted text>
Which should tell anybody all they need to know about YOU. Clinging to your ignorance hardly makes anybody want to agree with you.
"The reality was that the Framers wrote the Constitution and added the Second Amendment with the goal of creating a strong central government with a citizens-based military force capable of putting down insurrections, not to enable or encourage uprisings."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Constitutio...
Potential military coercion
The Second Amendment guarantees the right of citizens to keep their own weapons apart from state-run arsenals.[l] Once the new Constitution began government, states petitioned Congress to propose amendments including militia protections. New Hampshire’s proposal for amendment was, "Congress shall never disarm any citizen unless such as are or have been in actual rebellion." New York proposed, "... a well regulated militia, including the body of the people capable of bearing arms, is the proper, natural and safe defense of a free State."[m] Over time, this amendment has been confirmed by the courts to protect individual rights and used to overturn state legislation regulating hand guns.
Applying the Second Amendment only to the federal government, and not to the states, persisted for much of the nation's early history. It was sustained in United States v. Cruikshank (1876) to support disarming African-Americans holding arms in self-defense from Klansmen in Louisiana. The Supreme Court held, citizens must "look for their protection against any violation by their fellow-citizens from the state, rather than the national, government." Federal protection of an individual interfering with the state’s right to disarm any of its citizens came in Presser v. Illinois (1886). The Supreme Court ruled the citizens were members of the federal militia, as were "all citizens capable of bearing arms." A state cannot "disable the people from performing their duty to the General Government". The Court was harking back to the language establishing a federal militia in 1792.[n]
In 1939, the Supreme Court returned to a consideration of militia. In U.S. v. Miller, the Court addressed the enforceability of the National Firearms Act of 1934 prohibiting a short-barreled shotgun. Held in the days of Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow, this ruling referenced units of well equipped, drilled militia, the Founders "trainbands", the modern military Reserves.[o] It did not address the tradition of an unorganized militia. Twentieth century instances have been rare but Professor Stanford Levinson has observed consistency requires giving the Second Amendment the same dignity of the First, Fourth, Ninth and Tenth.[p]
Once again viewing federal relationships, the Supreme Court in McDonald v. Chicago (2010) determined that the right of an individual to "keep and bear arms" is protected by the Second Amendment. It is incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, so it applies to the states.
canecorso69

Reading, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Dec 24, 2012
 
Lmao....tell me how the black thug murdered 20 children in Conn.? Please tell me.....oh wait what shade of grey was he. Dumb arses.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

22 Users are viewing the Philadelphia Forum right now

Search the Philadelphia Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
PA Who do you support for Governor in Pennsylvania... (Oct '10) 56 min Obamas Border Sedition 51,188
PA Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Pennsylva... (Oct '10) 1 hr Plagiarists Are Liars Too 3,814
Michelle Grossman - About NBC 10 News Story - W... (Mar '08) 2 hr Fat virgin loser 398
One dead in shooting at hospital near Philadelphia 7 hr lock up all nutters 1
anyone try super beta prostate (Dec '12) Thu Really 7
Phila. man accused of Nazi crimes is hospitalized Wed Mustang Mike 1
Jen Freeman Wed bubbles0o0o 3
•••
•••

Philadelphia News Video

•••
•••

Philadelphia Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Philadelphia People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Philadelphia News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Philadelphia
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••