• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

History and Purpose of the Second Amendment[W:192,794]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

Rucker61 said:
So if the government says that an individual doesn't have a right, that right doesn't exist?
Click to expand...

Yes that is correct
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

vegas giants said:
Yes that is correct
Click to expand...

this is hilarious. state governments told gays and women seeking abortions they didn't have certain rights. Hmmm
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

TurtleDude said:
this is hilarious. state governments told gays and women seeking abortions they didn't have certain rights. Hmmm
Click to expand...

Yes. And we changed that.
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

jimithyashford said:
Also, you seem to be standing by the notion that this thing the constitutions mention over and over again, the use of a militia to avoid standing armies, was not the man concern and an inherant right to be armed agianst your government was the main concern, even though the former is mentioned explicitly over and over, and the later is not mentioned explicitly at all, at best is alluded to.
Click to expand...

This is the intent of the 2A. I dont believe in the extension, which I consider wishful thinking, that this means a right to self-defense.

It's to enable the populace to protect themselves from govt tyranny and I think the FFs made themselves pretty clear on that. It was at the forefront of their minds at the time. It's about the right to liberty, freedom (and I've also been told that this is just an extension of a right to self-defense too :roll:)

I do believe strongly in a right to self-defense, I'm just not willing to invent reasons to apply it where not warranted. The 2A stands on it's own as a protection of our freedom from govt tyranny.

I also dont hold this view based on any beliefs in natural or God-given rights.
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

jimithyashford said:
So I made a video and blog post about this which I will link here:https://pointofcontention.wordpress.com/2017/11/13/the-history-and-context-of-the-second-amendment/

That link goes into greater detail, quotes sources, reads from historic texts of the time, etc, but I will also recap the general case here:

While the Second Amendment was written by revolutionaries in the revolutionary era, and while the general sentiment of empowering people against tyrants was quite strong at the time, that is not why the Second Amendment exists or why it is in the US constitution.

We have to ask the question why was gun control and the mustering of militias not left up to individual states? Why put that in the federal Constitution, why put that under federal protection, why take the gun control power off the table for individual states? Further more why did fiercely revolutionary and pro-gun people like Patrick Henry (who is often quoted by Gun advocates) oppose the second amendment if it was really about arming people against tyrannical government, something Patrick Henry was all about?

The answer is that the Second Amendment was not about that at all. The Second amendment was about forming a militia to avoid the creation of a military caste, and about preserving State control of Slave Militias.

The aversion to standing armies is well documented at the time, I quote many sources. The usage of slave patrols was extremely common, I quote many sources, and the fear that the Federal government would use their control over the militia to undermine the slave trade is also well attested, I quote patrick henry himself at length.

It seems to be far beyond any reasonable doubt that while revolutionary sentiment was popular at the time, that state would have been content to leave the arming of their people against potential tyrants as a state matter if not for the issues of slave patrols and a federal militia, and that those are the reasons why the second amendment of the US constitution exists, rather than leaving the matter at the state level.

I would sincerly like to know if anyone, after hearing from the rather authoritative sources I cite in my research, can reasonably deny this to be the case?
Click to expand...

So I've been watching he thread for a some time now and it went exactly as expected. None of these pro gun people are ever going to admit that they're wrong[/i] and don't have a grasp on American history or the militia system and what it was and what it was for.

These people will never admit that "natural rights" is just a concept that is outside of our social contract by some, but not real enough as hard fact to be included IN our social contract. "Natural rights" have no place in the real world, like constitutional rights and they only exist if there is another person to observe as such. The pro gun crowd on this board can never prove anything they claim on the subject.

It was a good exercise though and I congratulate you for giving it a go.
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

vegas giants said:
Yes. And we changed that.
Click to expand...

So then we had the right to enslave a race of people because they did not have the right to be free until we decided otherwise. Indians did not have the right to their land because we did not "give" them that right. So Trail of Tears was just okey dokey pokey in your view because the majority said so. Awesome if you happen to be part of the majority....sucks to be you otherwise. Wow...sign me up for your utopian government.
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

jet57 said:
So I've been watching he thread for a some time now and it went exactly as expected. None of these pro gun people are ever going to admit that they're wrong[/i] and don't have a grasp on American history or the militia system and what it was and what it was for.

These people will never admit that "natural rights" is just a concept that is outside of our social contract by some, but not real enough as hard fact to be included IN our social contract. "Natural rights" have no place in the real world, like constitutional rights and they only exist if there is another person to observe as such. The pro gun crowd on this board can never prove anything they claim on the subject.

It was a good exercise though and I congratulate you for giving it a go.
Click to expand...


Obviously you feel that African American rights were not infringed upon because they had not been granted the right to be free until the majority allowed it.
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

TurtleDude said:
major fail. read CRUIKSHANK and the writings of St George Tucker

the second amendment was intended to guarantee a natural right the founders believed preceded and pre-existed government. one of the purposes of that was to allow people to form militias but the main purpose was to guarantee the natural right of self defense with arms.
Click to expand...

All you need for self-defense in most situations is pepper spray. If you are in an exceptionally dangerous situation, like dealing with several bad guys in a blind dark alley in a bad part of town after dark, a small caliber pistol is more than enough.

No one needs a semiautomatic rifle with bump stocks for self-defense. The only thing that's good for is taking out over 600 people in the space of a few minutes. That's not self defense anymore. That's just ridiculous. You might as well say it's natural to have a battery of missile launchers in your backyard for self defense.
 
Last edited:
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

TurtleDude said:
this is hilarious. state governments told gays and women seeking abortions they didn't have certain rights. Hmmm
Click to expand...

Yes. And now we are deciding differently.

Without a government enforced system of law and order, nature doesn't even give you the right to breathe if there is someone stronger than you around.
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

BretJ said:
Obviously you feel that African American rights were not infringed upon because they had not been granted the right to be free until the majority allowed it.
Click to expand...

They were NOT free until the government said they were; and even then, it took until the end of the war for that to happen.

And before the war black people had no rights - because the government said they didn't.

Are you beginning to catch on now?
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

jet57 said:
They were NOT free until the government said they were; and even then, it took until the end of the war for that to happen.

And before the war black people had no rights - because the government said they didn't.

Are you beginning to catch on now?
Click to expand...

Oh yea, i get it. You are saying what the government allowed was morally ok with you. Ones "rights" depends only on the benevolence of the government and the majority. Wow.
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

BretJ said:
Oh yea, i get it. You are saying what the government allowed was morally ok with you. Ones "rights" depends only on the benevolence of the government and the majority. Wow.
Click to expand...

Yeah...

(cough)

You're trying to insult me personally and I ain't bitin'.

Let's see - natural rights existed at the time of the second amendment - for gun owners, but - not for "African Americans", who just wanted to be free people...

hmmmm what's wrong with that picture?
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

jet57 said:
Yeah...

(cough)

You're trying to insult me personally and I ain't bitin'.

Let's see - natural rights existed at the time of the second amendment - for gun owners, but - not for "African Americans", who just wanted to be free people...

hmmmm what's wrong with that picture?
Click to expand...

Not trying to insult you. If you believe that society had the right through their government to hold a race of people in bondage, you are claiming it was morally acceptable at that time. After all, how can you deprive someone of freedom if they don't have the right to be free? Btw, what amendments did they have the rights to as slaves?
 
Last edited:
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

ataraxia said:
All you need for self-defense in most situations is pepper spray. If you are in an exceptionally dangerous situation, like dealing with several bad guys in a blind dark alley in a bad part of town after dark, a small caliber pistol is more than enough.
Click to expand...

You should talk to the police of which I was one. Tell them that hogwash.

ataraxia said:
No one needs a semiautomatic rifle with bump stocks for self-defense. The only thing that's good for is taking out over 600 people in the space of a few minutes. That's not self defense anymore. That's just ridiculous. You might as well say it's natural to have a battery of missile launchers in your backyard for self defense.
Click to expand...

Your argument became invalid the moment you you used "missiles" as a comparison to a semiauto rifle.

Your arguments are indeed lacking.
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

ataraxia said:
Yes. And now we are deciding differently.

Without a government enforced system of law and order, nature doesn't even give you the right to breathe if there is someone stronger than you around.
Click to expand...

Hence why self defence IS a natural right. If someone is stronger, so what? This does not somehow magically make you give up your right to defend yourself.
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

ataraxia said:
All you need for self-defense in most situations is pepper spray. If you are in an exceptionally dangerous situation, like dealing with several bad guys in a blind dark alley in a bad part of town after dark, a small caliber pistol is more than enough.

No one needs a semiautomatic rifle with bump stocks for self-defense. The only thing that's good for is taking out over 600 people in the space of a few minutes. That's not self defense anymore. That's just ridiculous. You might as well say it's natural to have a battery of missile launchers in your backyard for self defense.
Click to expand...

So, in your world, criminals don't carry weapons? In your world do assailants just walk away after you hand them your wallet?

You seem to be more than a little naive.
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

Your argument became invalid the moment you you used "missiles" as a comparison to a semiauto rifle.

Your arguments are indeed lacking.
Click to expand...

Not sure why. The only reason I can think of is that maybe because you think the 2nd amendment should only applies to weapons you currently like. If you don't like missiles, then why should semiauto rifles be OK, but full autos which were banned by Reagan? If you think full auto should be OK, then why not auto cannons? And if you think auto cannons are OK, then why not grenade and missile launchers?

These are all on a spectrum. Most people think that it's OK to draw the line SOMEWHERE. We may disagree with exactly WHERE that line should be. But there are really very few people who think that "The right to arms shall not be infringed" should be interpreted to mean any arms whatsoever. Not even Justice Scalia:


“Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited …It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose...

Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”
-Antonin Scalia, ruling in District of Columbia vs. Heller
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

Lutherf said:
So, in your world, criminals don't carry weapons? In your world do assailants just walk away after you hand them your wallet?

You seem to be more than a little naive.
Click to expand...

There is no end to how big a gun you should carry if you want to stay ahead of the criminals. That's not how things work anymore in modern societies.

You will never get ahead of this guy:

madmax.jpg
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

BretJ said:
Not trying to insult you. If you believe that society had the right through their government to hold a race of people in bondage, you are claiming it was morally acceptable at that time. After all, how can you deprive someone of freedom if they don't have the right to be free? Btw, what amendments did they have the rights to as slaves?
Click to expand...

oh sure you are

And - I'm not claiming it - THEY CLAIMED IT!! And it worked for 89 years!!

And ya'know? I've read through bill of rights AND the amendments, and nowhere do I see it written that an American has the "natural right" to self defense with any kind of gun he wants... straaaange...

Perhaps you can show me where it says that, because I just can't find it.
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

Black Dog said:
Hence why self defence IS a natural right. If someone is stronger, so what? This does not somehow magically make you give up your right to defend yourself.
Click to expand...

I think you are getting a little confused on the topic here. I was responding to someone who said that some rights pre-exist government. Government is not there to protect them, he says. The Bill of Rights was written only to make sure that government does NOT interfere.

I was just pointing out that in nature, no rights pre-exist governmental protection. Not even the right to breathe. In nature, your right to arms only exists as long as there is no one with a bigger gun to take it away from you. Ditto for your right to breathe.
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

ataraxia said:
Not sure why. The only reason I can think of is that maybe because you think the 2nd amendment should only applies to weapons you currently like. If you don't like missiles, then why should semiauto rifles be OK, but full autos which were banned by Reagan? If you think full auto should be OK, then why not auto cannons? And if you think auto cannons are OK, then why not grenade and missile launchers?

These are all on a spectrum. Most people think that it's OK to draw the line SOMEWHERE. We may disagree with exactly WHERE that line should be. But there are really very few people who think that "The right to arms shall not be infringed" should be interpreted to mean any arms whatsoever. Not even Justice Scalia:
Click to expand...

Oh, now you've done it; you've used the supreme court against the gun guys.
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

ataraxia said:
I think you are getting a little confused on the topic here. I was responding to someone who said that some rights pre-exist government. Government is not there to protect them, he says. The Bill of Rights was written only to make sure that government does NOT interfere.

I was just pointing out that in nature, no rights pre-exist governmental protection. Not even the right to breathe. In nature, your right to arms only exists as long as there is no one with a bigger gun to take it away from you. Ditto for your right to breathe.
Click to expand...

They're never going to believe you. The real world is not a part of their agenda.
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

jet57 said:
Oh, now you've done it; you've used the supreme court against the gun guys.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know, right? ;)

And not just any old Supreme Court, but the opinion of the great Antonin Scalia himself!
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

ataraxia said:
Yeah, I know, right? ;)

And not just any old Supreme Court, but the opinion of the great Antonin Scalia himself!
Click to expand...

Yeeee -ep. They fall into their own illogical quick sand every - single - time.

They've been schooled on the militia system, natural rights AND the constitution and they still don't get it.
 
Re: History and Purpose of the Second Amendment

jet57 said:
Yeah...

(cough)

You're trying to insult me personally and I ain't bitin'.

Let's see - natural rights existed at the time of the second amendment - for gun owners, but - not for "African Americans", who just wanted to be free people...

hmmmm what's wrong with that picture?
Click to expand...

ah the idiotic insinuation that gun rights were anti black.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom