View Single Post
Old 03-21-2013, 07:33 PM   #254
broncobum6162
Manning Up!
 
broncobum6162's Avatar
 
Baaammmmmmmm!!

Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Beautiful Baugher Lake....
Posts: 1,409

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Von Miller
Default

An interesting read from http://thebattleforyourmind.blogspot.com/. The last paragraph explains it perfect.

The Second Amendment: Do you fear your government?

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

Our fore fathers were no dummies. They truly knew what they were doing when they created the most important document in the history of man, the Constitution of the United States. This document set up the great republic we once were. We may never see men like that again. It was through much fighting and deliberation that they ratified the constitution, but this was not enough for them.
The men of this country during its birth had studied other governments though history in great detail with many hours in a library of their own. They were self taught, and learned from failures such as the Articles of Confederation. They study books from people like John Locke, and Thomas Hobbes. They argued over the concepts of corruption by man or society through philosophy and religion or “Laws of Nature”.

They didn’t just jump into this great experiment with blind eyes and hopeful will. The drive came from the failings of their previous oppressor.
When the constitution was ratified, the states would not sign it. They were separate governments refusing to enter a union or contract without certain protection: the Bill of Rights.

This set of 10 amendments was made to protect the states and people from the centralized government evolving into a monarchy or dictatorship as every single government in the history of man has done.
The first amendment gave us something different from any other government: the right to speak your mind without punishment, and the right to pursue religion without persecution. In government throughout history, this was a problem. The Persians persecuted the Israelites, the Romans killed the Christians and Britain went after both Catholics and Protestants. Also, if you said anything bad about your king, you could and would face a judge.

This is why the Protestants went after the king of England when he tried to disarm them. That’s right, the idea of gun rights came from Europe; it’s not just a cowboy mentality of Americans. Second Amendment. The king even tried to take the colonial weapons in order to establish dominance.
The point to all of this though, is that owning a gun is not for hunting, sport, or home protection. That was never the intent.

It had one end purpose: to ensure the protection of liberty from the government, and to provide protection for the states, being that a standing army at the time was taboo. A standing army was always a point of contention since this was the first step in every government that led to the end. Rome is a great example. Caesar used his army to overthrow the Senate. This is why our senate has control over the army and not the president. The thought behind a standing army was said best on this site. Libertyfund.org
It talks about the Idea of a standing army leading to the unmanly shifting of responsibility from the head of the house defending his family, to the responsibility of the government.

In short, it is not only a right to bear arms but a duty; duty to one’s family, country, and future. It is the man’s job to protect his family. It is the man’s job to check his government and protect his land from it or defend against foreign invaders, and it is his job to protect the future of our government.

To do this, he needs to be armed, and not just armed, but equally armed as his government. When you hear someone use the line: you don’t need an assault weapon to kill a deer or ten rounds to hunt, they are using a straw man argument.

Today I looked up what a “straw man argument” was from Wikipedia just to better understand it. In short, it is a tactic used to divert. It is when you use a fake argument similar to the original but perverse it or present the argument with misrepresentation, and then attack it in order to show its absurdity.

Again, the intent was not to hunt or have a hobby, but to protect one’s self from the government. Also, and most importantly, we should be equally as armed as our military. When you hear someone say, “That amendment was made when we used muskets and was never intended for weapons that could kill at such a rate”, feel free to slap the ignorance out of them. At the time, the musket was the most up-to-date weapon and was considered remarkable for killing at such ranges without physical contact. If this argument were true, the founders would have said “the right to own a knife or bow”, but they didn’t.

Our founders wanted to be able to fight back the government with equal terms, not just defend from death during a home break-in. Fight against government, as they did their own governing forces, the King.

As always, I defer to great wisdom, Thomas Jefferson. He said, “When the government fears the people, there is liberty, but when the people fear the government, there is tyranny.” Do you think the government fears you with a revolver or Glock loaded with 6 rounds against their 30-round AR-15s? Better yet, ask yourself, do you fear the government?
broncobum6162 is offline   Reply With Quote