would you vote to repeal the 2nd ammendment

[GreatNews2night]

I dont think you understand the US code. You should look up 'militias'. There are 2 militias...the orgganized and unorganized militias. The State militia is the organized militia. The citizens are the unorganized militia.

And Id like to believe that the country wont devolve to the point of needing he unorganized militia...but I cant say with full confidence it wont happen or that there arent people actively trying to bring it about. Civil unrest is as much a threat to national security as a foreign invader.

In the meantime, the framers had the foresight to ensure that citizens have the means and intended for those citizens to assume the responsibility to be armed, well trained, and their weapons and munitions be well regulated...kept in good working order. Because while I dont think anything bad is going to happen in my lifetime, I wouldnt have believed idiot leftists in the US on college campuses and even within the democrat party would ever openly advocate for communism. So...who knows.

No, I understand. It's just that I'm talking about the unorganized, non-State militias (like the National Guard can be called a State-sponsored one; that's not what I'm talking about). I don't think we need the unorganized kind (the kind you can find in remote areas, made of paranoid hillbillies and gun-crazy rednecks). I think when the Framers established this phrasing, it was appropriate and proportional. But things have changed over the centuries, and these days, the armed forces are so powerful that unorganized militias are quite powerless by comparison... and frankly useless, and not needed. That's my point. A hypothetical need for citizen-driven, unorganized militias, should not be a justification for the second amendment. It's no longer applicable.

Look, while I don't like Sanders and Warren and AOC and all the far-left extremists like I said, I am a bit surprised that you are so upset that they openly advocate for something. What you are saying goes against the First Amendment. The good thing about this country is that even if I disagree with what they say, I'll fight for their right to say it.

So, they advocate for something and put themselves up for the people's consideration, through vote. If what they are proposing doesn't agree with the spirit of the people of this country, then what will happen is that people will defeat them in the elections.

Neither Sanders, nor Warren, nor AOC are inciting people to take up arms, overturn the government, and implement a communist dictatorship. They are merely exercising their freedom of speech and expressing their ideas. It's up to the people to pass judgment, and endorse their ideas by electing them to office, or reject them by not voting for them (I personally hope for the latter).

When militias start trying to force others to not say certain things... that's when we'll be in real trouble. I hope it never gets to that. So, for me, I'll say, "speak up, Senator Sanders; do express your ideas; but I won't vote for you; I think you are a moron with far-fetched vacuous populist ideas. This said, which is my opinion and I'm as free as you are to express it, I won't pick up arms to try to shut you up."

When Trump talks about incarcerating his political opponents, that's what is dangerous for our democratic republic. I think it's more dangerous than what some far-left lunatics say.

 

[Court Jester]

If somehow my "vote" would matter on this issue, it would be to expand the right to bear arms so that every qualified citizen (meaning not criminals and not crazy) could constitutionally carry a concealed weapon in as many places as your average law enforcement officer is currently allowed to.

More good guys with guns means less bad guys committing crimes. Less bad guys and less need for these expensive police unions, prison guards, judges, and probation folks with their fat tax payer supported pensions.

 

[VanceMack]

We've not had a divisive white nationalist as prez before. One who basically attacks 65% of Americans on a daily basis.

It's not the leftists you blame, its tRUMPers white nationalism. It's tRUMP who keeps talking about a civil war. You seem to be blinded from reality.

Horse****. All you can see is TTTTTRRRRRRRRRRUUUUUUUUUUMMMMMMPPPPPP!!!!!. You literally believe the worlds social ills begin and end with the guy sitting behind the desk for the last 3 years. Your lack of a grasp of history or depth is ****ing stunning.

 

[VanceMack]

No, I understand. It's just that I'm talking about the unorganized, non-State militias (like the National Guard can be called a State-sponsored one; that's not what I'm talking about). I don't think we need the unorganized kind (the kind you can find in remote areas, made of paranoid hillbillies and gun-crazy rednecks). I think when the Framers established this phrasing, it was appropriate and proportional. But things have changed over the centuries, and these days, the armed forces are so powerful that unorganized militias are quite powerless by comparison... and frankly useless, and not needed. That's my point. A hypothetical need for citizen-driven, unorganized militias, should not be a justification for the second amendment. It's no longer applicable.

Look, while I don't like Sanders and Warren and AOC and all the far-left extremists like I said, I am a bit surprised that you are so upset that they openly advocate for something. What you are saying goes against the First Amendment. The good thing about this country is that even if I disagree with what they say, I'll fight for their right to say it.

So, they advocate for something and put themselves up for the people's consideration, through vote. If what they are proposing doesn't agree with the spirit of the people of this country, then what will happen is that people will defeat them in the elections.

Neither Sanders, nor Warren, nor AOC are inciting people to take up arms, overturn the government, and implement a communist dictatorship. They are merely exercising their freedom of speech and expressing their ideas. It's up to the people to pass judgment, and endorse their ideas by electing them to office, or reject them by not voting for them (I personally hope for the latter).

When militias start trying to force others to not say certain things... that's when we'll be in real trouble. I hope it never gets to that. So, for me, I'll say, "speak up, Senator Sanders; do express your ideas; but I won't vote for you; I think you are a moron with far-fetched vacuous populist ideas. This said, which is my opinion and I'm as free as you are to express it, I won't pick up arms to try to shut you up."

When Trump talks about incarcerating his political opponents, that's what is dangerous for our democratic republic. I think it's more dangerous than what some far-left lunatics say.

Actually, the type you described ARE organized...and on most states actually recognized as a legit militia. In fact some states have both a citizen militia AD the state National Guard. 21 states including California have recognized "State Defense Forces".

When you say "useless and not necessary" what you really mean is "I personally cant see right now the need for such forces". But the Constitution wasnt written for the best of times, it was written for the worst of times. Thats why we dont throw away our rights with the expectation that everyone is going to be good guys.

 

[VanceMack]

Actually, the type you described ARE organized...and on most states actually recognized as a legit militia. In fact some states have both a citizen militia AD the state National Guard. 21 states including California have recognized "State Defense Forces".

When you say "useless and not necessary" what you really mean is "I personally cant see right now the need for such forces". But the Constitution wasnt written for the best of times, it was written for the worst of times. Thats why we dont throw away our rights with the expectation that everyone is going to be good guys.

Just a last comment on the type of militias you describe...look...those Militias have been in existence for decades. They arent a threat to start anything. You create a tempest in a teapot similar to the furor created over 'white supremacists'. Those kinds of clowns have existed for centuries. There are a handful of them and they are a fringe concern...at best. They arent any different than Farrakhan's Nation of Islam or the Black Panthers or La Raza. Freak out over them if you like...but I would bet that you will never see them surface unless/until everything else has literally gone to ****. And if that ever happens...hell...you might find yourself grateful for them.

 

[GreatNews2night]

Actually, the type you described ARE organized...and on most states actually recognized as a legit militia. In fact some states have both a citizen militia AD the state National Guard. 21 states including California have recognized "State Defense Forces".

When you say "useless and not necessary" what you really mean is "I personally cant see right now the need for such forces". But the Constitution wasnt written for the best of times, it was written for the worst of times. Thats why we dont throw away our rights with the expectation that everyone is going to be good guys.

Fair enough. Still, I think that the era that had an organized citizenry as a force powerful enough to face a full-blown military, is far gone.

 

[GreatNews2night]

Just a last comment on the type of militias you describe...look...those Militias have been in existence for decades. They arent a threat to start anything. You create a tempest in a teapot similar to the furor created over 'white supremacists'. Those kinds of clowns have existed for centuries. There are a handful of them and they are a fringe concern...at best. They arent any different than Farrakhan's Nation of Islam or the Black Panthers or La Raza. Freak out over them if you like...but I would bet that you will never see them surface unless/until everything else has literally gone to ****. And if that ever happens...hell...you might find yourself grateful for them.

Well, we need to look at History to learn its lessons... I bet that in Pre-Nazi Germany people didn't take the threat seriously, either... until it was too late.

 

[VanceMack]

Well, we need to look at History to learn its lessons... I bet that in Pre-Nazi Germany people didn't take the threat seriously, either... until it was too late.

Best not be turning in your guns then....right?

 

[VanceMack]

Fair enough. Still, I think that the era that had an organized citizenry as a force powerful enough to face a full-blown military, is far gone.

Decades of insurgency would say otherwise.

 

[bomberfox]

Best not be turning in your guns then....right?

The “aryans” didnt turn in their guns. They got free reign, even citizens. All you ever know is NRA propaganda so im not surprised.

 

[dairyair]

Horse****. All you can see is TTTTTRRRRRRRRRRUUUUUUUUUUMMMMMMPPPPPP!!!!!. You literally believe the worlds social ills begin and end with the guy sitting behind the desk for the last 3 years. Your lack of a grasp of history or depth is ****ing stunning.

Just throwing your utter BS that all the ills of the world is due to leftists.
Grasp history.

You remind me of tRUMP, whine whine whine and cut down cut down and cut down.
Then whine when someone throws it back in your face.

In reality, the elites of our political world do much of the ills of the country. Because they are bought and paid for by large campaign donors. Both sides.
tRUMP funded his own way to the prez, so he's just corrupt because of his own doing.

 

[GreatNews2night]

Best not be turning in your guns then....right?

If a fringe of Neo-Nazis started growing and growing and becoming not a fringe any longer, I'd rather that they didn't have any guns.

This said, you seem to be misunderstanding my position. I said, I respect the right of law-abiding citizens to have handguns and shotguns and hunting rifles to defend themselves, their family, and their properties from the bad guys (as in, criminals such as burglars and rapists), and/or for sport like hunting or target practice. So, I'm not asking for guns to be turned in.

What I find unnecessary (because it is, after all, futile) is for regular citizens to own military-grade assault weapons under the justification that it is for the purpose of fighting off an abusive government and that government's armed forces, because if this very unlikely possibility ever materialized, even citizens who possessed those assault weapons would be unable to stop a full-blown attack by a modern military.

Because if the justification is to be fully able to stop such an attack (exercised with the full force of the military), then the citizens would have to have combat helicopters, fighter jets, tanks, missiles, small nuclear tactical devices (or even bigger ones), submarines, aircraft carriers, etc. Do you actually think that this is viable??? As you know, just to operate these weapons, you need years of specialized training. And each of these weapons cost a lot. A fighter jet costs between 90 and 120 million dollars. One. Our armed forces have more than 5,300 such jets. A B2 bomber costs more than 2 billion dollars. We have 20. How many would the citizenry be able to afford? LOL

The B61-12 atomic bombs cost roughly 9.5 billion dollars each. We have 400 to 500 of those. 6,300 of all kinds.

And so on and so forth.

So, would we need to redo a full equivalent of the American military among the citizens? Just to show you how absurd this is, can you imagine? We'd have ICBMs aimed at other countries such as Russia and China... and our own citizens would also own ICBMs aimed at Washington DC, to defend ourselves against the possibility that the federal government might go nuts and turn against us... LOL.

Hey, one ICBM costs 85 billion dollars. Somehow, I think that my neighborhood homeowners association, if we were to organize ourselves like a militia, wouldn't be able to afford one. That I know, they are not for sale at the local gun shop, either.

Get it? This ship has sailed. When the Framers came up with the 2nd Amendment phrasing, all that the military had were horses and muskets... so the citizen militias actually WOULD be able to fight them off, if needed. But now, the military has all the ultra-sophisticated instruments of wide-spread destruction listed above at a prohibitive cost, so the asymmetry grew to such a degree, that these militias lost all possibility of matching the national armed forces.

So, being the above impossible, and consequently the only justification being vacuous, allowing the citizens to own military-grade weaponry serves no purpose other than enabling some nuts to commit mass-murder of innocent Americans.

Get it?

 

[VanceMack]

Just throwing your utter BS that all the ills of the world is due to leftists.
Grasp history.

You remind me of tRUMP, whine whine whine and cut down cut down and cut down.
Then whine when someone throws it back in your face.

In reality, the elites of our political world do much of the ills of the country. Because they are bought and paid for by large campaign donors. Both sides.
tRUMP funded his own way to the prez, so he's just corrupt because of his own doing.

:lamo

You ignore an entire world of history focusing on your irrational hatred of the last 3 years...yes...I can understand why your perceptions are so messed up.

 

[VanceMack]

If a fringe of Neo-Nazis started growing and growing and becoming not a fringe any longer, I'd rather that they didn't have any guns.

This said, you seem to be misunderstanding my position. I said, I respect the right of law-abiding citizens to have handguns and shotguns and hunting rifles to defend themselves, their family, and their properties from the bad guys (as in, criminals such as burglars and rapists), and/or for sport like hunting or target practice. So, I'm not asking for guns to be turned in.

What I find unnecessary (because it is, after all, futile) is for regular citizens to own military-grade assault weapons under the justification that it is for the purpose of fighting off an abusive government and that government's armed forces, because if this very unlikely possibility ever materialized, even citizens who possessed those assault weapons would be unable to stop a full-blown attack by a modern military.

Because if the justification is to be fully able to stop such an attack (exercised with the full force of the military), then the citizens would have to have combat helicopters, fighter jets, tanks, missiles, small nuclear tactical devices (or even bigger ones), submarines, aircraft carriers, etc. Do you actually think that this is viable??? As you know, just to operate these weapons, you need years of specialized training. And each of these weapons cost a lot. A fighter jet costs between 90 and 120 million dollars. One. Our armed forces have more than 5,300 such jets. A B2 bomber costs more than 2 billion dollars. We have 20. How many would the citizenry be able to afford? LOL

The B61-12 atomic bombs cost roughly 9.5 billion dollars each. We have 400 to 500 of those. 6,300 of all kinds.

And so on and so forth.

So, would we need to redo a full equivalent of the American military among the citizens? Just to show you how absurd this is, can you imagine? We'd have ICBMs aimed at other countries such as Russia and China... and our own citizens would also own ICBMs aimed at Washington DC, to defend ourselves against the possibility that the federal government might go nuts and turn against us... LOL.

Hey, one ICBM costs 85 billion dollars. Somehow, I think that my neighborhood homeowners association, if we were to organize ourselves like a militia, wouldn't be able to afford one. That I know, they are not for sale at the local gun shop, either.

Get it? This ship has sailed. When the Framers came up with the 2nd Amendment phrasing, all that the military had were horses and muskets... so the citizen militias actually WOULD be able to fight them off, if needed. But now, the military has all the ultra-sophisticated instruments of wide-spread destruction listed above at a prohibitive cost, so the asymmetry grew to such a degree, that these militias lost all possibility of matching the national armed forces.

So, being the above impossible, and consequently the only justification being vacuous, allowing the citizens to own military-grade weaponry serves no purpose other than enabling some nuts to commit mass-murder of innocent Americans.

Get it?

What I dont get is why people like you always devolve arguments regarding the 2nd Amendment and firearms into NOOKCLEAR WEEPONZ.

its just...dumb. Anything you might have ever said that wasnt dumb was just made dumb.

 

[dairyair]

You ignore an entire world of history focusing on your irrational hatred of the last 3 years...yes...I can understand why your perceptions are so messed up.

So you didn't even bother to read the post you responded to. :lamo

 

[bomberfox]

So you didn't even bother to read the post you responded to.

Then again the only thing Vance knows regarding this topic is NRA propaganda as evidenced by his overlooking of the fact that only jews were disarmed in nazi germany. “pureblood” Germans enjoyed expanded gun ownership

 

[VanceMack]

So you didn't even bother to read the post you responded to. :lamo

Correct. I did not respond to your mindless trump hatred.

 

[VanceMack]

Then again the only thing Vance knows regarding this topic is NRA propaganda as evidenced by his overlooking of the fact that only jews were disarmed in nazi germany. “pureblood” Germans enjoyed expanded gun ownership

Shall we test knowledge on this subject head to head? Remember now...we are talking the 2nd Amendment, not furry childrens comic characters.

 

[Integrityrespec]

I've been engaging with a poster that believes the 2a should be repealed. So, what say you? Would you vote to repeal the 2nd amendment? yes or no

This is just another socialist idea of the left. Take my guns so you can take my free speech and force me to settle for what the government thinks I should have.

 

[bomberfox]

Shall we test knowledge on this subject head to head? Remember now...we are talking the 2nd Amendment, not furry childrens comic characters.

:lamo

You really are showing you have no idea what you are talking about. Dismissed

 

[bomberfox]

This is just another socialist idea of the left. Take my guns so you can take my free speech and force me to settle for what the government thinks I should have.

Woooooooo those scary european countries are sooo ghastlyyyy

 

[dairyair]

Correct. I did not respond to your mindless trump hatred.

The only hatred portrayed is from you.

 

[VanceMack]

:lamo

You really are showing you have no idea what you are talking about. Dismissed

You got me when it comes to childrens furry comic characters. I cede that expertise to you and I reckon the other 6-7 year old age demographic they target. Now...about the 2nd Amendment..

 

[VanceMack]

The only hatred portrayed is from you.

:lamo

You could literally see the spit flying from you when you were typing.

 

[bomberfox]

Ill just consider this a win since Vance thinks trolling is a replacement for arguments.