Are guns all that matter?
- Thread starter Heist
- Start date
Uhhh, 'cause this is a gun board . . ? 
The only other topics likely to get folks as fired up as attacks on the 2nd Amendment are, for all intents and purposes, off limits here.
It ain't at all a matter of "not caring," whatever your "other issues" happen to be. It's a matter of behaving ourselves as guests in someone else's living room.
The only other topics likely to get folks as fired up as attacks on the 2nd Amendment are, for all intents and purposes, off limits here.
It ain't at all a matter of "not caring," whatever your "other issues" happen to be. It's a matter of behaving ourselves as guests in someone else's living room.
GlocksRfun
New member
umm, yes, the 2nd ammendment is all I care about. I really don't care what people do untill it effects me. I guess I'm ignorant.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Flame suit on!
That is because a good slice of the posters who draw lines in the sand, ask when we should fight, etc. are social conservatives.
They see that most politicians that support the RKBA tend to be social conservatives. Thus, they can trumpet the one issue voting stance as the odds are high that they will also get the politics they like with the RKBA candidate.
They are not faced with libertarian or liberal candidates that would not be of their ilk. If so, they would probably have a system overload.
A proabortion, strong separation of church and state, legalize drugs and gay marriage libertarian or social welfare loving liberal with strong gun credentials vs. a GWB or Bob Dole ( both fans of the AWB) would be a problem. However, that isn't common so they can ride on the illusion of being one issue voters.
That the 2nd protects all the rest is funny as they tend to be very controlling and authoritarian on the social conservative dimension and have a hard time defining what they would fight for except keeping their guns.
We've been down this road before and here comes the lock.
If we adopted a either progun or antigun view and dropped all the liberals stink rhetoric, we would be better off as the RKBA needs more than social conservatives. However, the most common and loudest folks on the one issue side don't see that - due to the delusion I mentioned above.
Still got my flame suit on.
That is because a good slice of the posters who draw lines in the sand, ask when we should fight, etc. are social conservatives.
They see that most politicians that support the RKBA tend to be social conservatives. Thus, they can trumpet the one issue voting stance as the odds are high that they will also get the politics they like with the RKBA candidate.
They are not faced with libertarian or liberal candidates that would not be of their ilk. If so, they would probably have a system overload.
A proabortion, strong separation of church and state, legalize drugs and gay marriage libertarian or social welfare loving liberal with strong gun credentials vs. a GWB or Bob Dole ( both fans of the AWB) would be a problem. However, that isn't common so they can ride on the illusion of being one issue voters.
That the 2nd protects all the rest is funny as they tend to be very controlling and authoritarian on the social conservative dimension and have a hard time defining what they would fight for except keeping their guns.
We've been down this road before and here comes the lock.
If we adopted a either progun or antigun view and dropped all the liberals stink rhetoric, we would be better off as the RKBA needs more than social conservatives. However, the most common and loudest folks on the one issue side don't see that - due to the delusion I mentioned above.
Still got my flame suit on.
Oh, pish
I'd rather not go running down a rabbit hole over which side of which issues the enlightened and noble few stand, versus that great feckless unwashed [not to mention deluded] mass of mouth-breathers. Suffice it to say, some have likened the 2nd to the canary in the mine - when you see the bird's health start to fail, you know yours isn't too far behind. So, you do all you can to protect the bird's health. 'Tis true enough, many pols who are most adamant about 2nd Amendment issues (the true torch-bearers) come down "right" (as in "correct") on other issues.
As for those other issues, I guess each must decide which, if any, he is willing to fight for.
You are right about one thing, if the RKBA is to survive, it will take more than so-called "social conservatives." I think boards such as this give us a fair approximation of just such a coalition, peopled as it is with its smattering of "conservatives," as well as liberals, libertines, libertarians, contrarians, etc., etc.
Pax vobiscum . . .
I'd rather not go running down a rabbit hole over which side of which issues the enlightened and noble few stand, versus that great feckless unwashed [not to mention deluded] mass of mouth-breathers. Suffice it to say, some have likened the 2nd to the canary in the mine - when you see the bird's health start to fail, you know yours isn't too far behind. So, you do all you can to protect the bird's health. 'Tis true enough, many pols who are most adamant about 2nd Amendment issues (the true torch-bearers) come down "right" (as in "correct") on other issues.
As for those other issues, I guess each must decide which, if any, he is willing to fight for.
You are right about one thing, if the RKBA is to survive, it will take more than so-called "social conservatives." I think boards such as this give us a fair approximation of just such a coalition, peopled as it is with its smattering of "conservatives," as well as liberals, libertines, libertarians, contrarians, etc., etc.
Pax vobiscum . . .
silicon wolverine
New member
Soviet citiczens were also prohibited from owning military rifles.
SW
SW
Edward429451
Moderator
Good question. I think maybe it's the social state changing how people think, and the resulting loss of compassion within themselves. I say this in a very broad way, all across the board and not just specific to 2nd Am. issues. People don't hardly even smile at each other anymore! Then pour over the details (without setting aside their egos for the sake of discussion) and when someone says something they don't agree with, their lack of compassion coupled with their ego turns it into a pissing match. Which compounds the problem(s). We need to look within ourselves for the answers, and better ourselves (speech & behavior patterns) to set the example that would be contagious.
Sometimes our core beliefs can be wrong but our egos disallow us to (even academically) even try to see it from another perspective. We have seen the enemy and he is us. Don't sweat the small stuff.
(I see your point Glenn.)
Sometimes our core beliefs can be wrong but our egos disallow us to (even academically) even try to see it from another perspective. We have seen the enemy and he is us. Don't sweat the small stuff.
(I see your point Glenn.)
leadcounsel
Moderator
Under I believe Stalin the Soviets were forced to turn in their guns.
Stalin then turned the Russian citizens into effectively slave labor and murdered those who opposed.
I believe that's were the following phrase was coined:
"Those who beat their guns into plows will be plowing for those who didn't" or something to that effect.
Stalin then turned the Russian citizens into effectively slave labor and murdered those who opposed.
I believe that's were the following phrase was coined:
"Those who beat their guns into plows will be plowing for those who didn't" or something to that effect.
Rich Lucibella
Staff
I think Heist asks a very topical question. For me, I believe the Second is not that "canary in the coal mine" these past few years; the 4th and the 10th are. Direct attacks against the 2nd have lightened from the Left, while direct attacks against the 4th and the 10th have been constant from the Right. Probably most of our Members do care about each of the BoR.
Too many get all crazy about the "UN trying to take our guns" but cannot understand the threat to the 2nd of rulings like Raich, for instance. Since 9-11, many of us would argue that Search & Seizure and States Rights are liabilities to our "security" and so they support illegal wiretaps and Papers Please stops. Other's, I believe, really don't understand the context in which the Bill of Rights came about; it's almost like it's too confusing to have to read any Amendment with more than the 2nd's 27 words.
Still others....well, I think Glenn's analysis covers them.
Rich
Too many get all crazy about the "UN trying to take our guns" but cannot understand the threat to the 2nd of rulings like Raich, for instance. Since 9-11, many of us would argue that Search & Seizure and States Rights are liabilities to our "security" and so they support illegal wiretaps and Papers Please stops. Other's, I believe, really don't understand the context in which the Bill of Rights came about; it's almost like it's too confusing to have to read any Amendment with more than the 2nd's 27 words.
Still others....well, I think Glenn's analysis covers them.
Rich
Mannlicher
New member
well Heist, its a gun forum. Of course its important here. You will find just as much passion here, as you will on a forum dedicated to 'save the trees'.
PinnedAndRecessed
Moderator
I had a hard time understanding what you're talking about. No periods. Run-on sentences. Convoluted syntax.
But let me see.
The antecedent would be "people?" Right? But you're not asking about the other "people." You're asking about the other amendments. Right?
Fact is that we all care about all the amendments. But seeing as how this is a gun board, the one that's going to get discussed is the 2nd.
I care about them all. If one falls, they all fall.
I think all 10 of the First 10 Amendmends to the BoR are important. They are like the foundation of the house that our ancestors built. Without a good foundation the house will never be solid. The folks at that time had experienced many abuses at the hands of the British that the 10 amendments covered.
Any attempt to weaken one of those amendments weakens the foundation that our liberty is built on. Those of the right and left are like termites knawing at that foundation. If the termites knaw long enough we know what will eventually happen to the house.
When those left and right politicians knaw long enough around the second amendment till it is all that is left, then guess whats next on the menu.
Any attempt to weaken one of those amendments weakens the foundation that our liberty is built on. Those of the right and left are like termites knawing at that foundation. If the termites knaw long enough we know what will eventually happen to the house.
When those left and right politicians knaw long enough around the second amendment till it is all that is left, then guess whats next on the menu.
Harley Quinn
Moderator
I have been reading about the 500 nations
An Illustraded History of the North American Indians.
Pretty scary when you think about it. I must be getting soft in my old age.
I also just finished a good book about the Okinawans, that one is totally shameful.
They both are. Hungry growing nations, and people having their rights and ability to fight back taken from them, then treated very badly. Scary
I am concerned about the Bill of Rights. Especially when you realize it was just an add on. Lucky for us. Thanks Thomas Jefferson, and all you did for us.
Thomas Paine was helping also. They covered him up for along time, guess they were to concerned with wiping out other's and putting them on reservations. Main reason was they were godless heathens.
Pretty convoluted and an ugly chapter in our history. Look what Europe did to the Jewish. Like I say scary!
History is interesting. The various gangs are testing it right now. The Bill of Rights is a two edged sword, cuts both ways.
We really need the 2nd, it is very important to the people who are law abiding.
HQ
An Illustraded History of the North American Indians.
Pretty scary when you think about it. I must be getting soft in my old age.
I also just finished a good book about the Okinawans, that one is totally shameful.
They both are. Hungry growing nations, and people having their rights and ability to fight back taken from them, then treated very badly. Scary
I am concerned about the Bill of Rights. Especially when you realize it was just an add on. Lucky for us. Thanks Thomas Jefferson, and all you did for us.
Thomas Paine was helping also. They covered him up for along time, guess they were to concerned with wiping out other's and putting them on reservations. Main reason was they were godless heathens.
Pretty convoluted and an ugly chapter in our history. Look what Europe did to the Jewish. Like I say scary!
History is interesting. The various gangs are testing it right now. The Bill of Rights is a two edged sword, cuts both ways.
We really need the 2nd, it is very important to the people who are law abiding.
HQ
Wildcard, a serious question: What good will your guns be when you no longer have the freedom to speak? Who ya gonna call? Hmmm?
How about privacy? When you lose that completely. what good will your guns do you?
How about your right to a public and speedy trial? The right to confront your accusers? The right to subpoena witnesses? (Jose Padilla, anyone? Bueller?) What good will your guns do ya then?
What have you done with your guns, Wildcard, to preserve these other important rights?
The second amendment was meant (among other things) to back up those other, more important rights.
I disagree with Rich, in that the 1st, the 4th and the 5th are the tell-tale rights. The 10th is almost non-existant. The 4th and 5th are on their last gasp. Last, but not least, the 1st is feeling the pricks from the poisoned darts...
OK, it's not all that bad. But it's getting to darn close for comfort!
Harley, the BoR are not just an add on. 5 of the 13 States refused to ratify the Constitution without the addition of a BoR. There are plenty of Legal scholars who will argue that the ratifying documents objections/demands are meaningless, once the Constitution was in fact ratified. That may be true today, but it wasn't true at the time the debate was going on. Since it required at least 9 state to ratify, the threat from those 5, was very real.
Suffice it to say, the Bill of Rights is not "just a footnote" to the Constitution.
How about privacy? When you lose that completely. what good will your guns do you?
How about your right to a public and speedy trial? The right to confront your accusers? The right to subpoena witnesses? (Jose Padilla, anyone? Bueller?) What good will your guns do ya then?
What have you done with your guns, Wildcard, to preserve these other important rights?
The second amendment was meant (among other things) to back up those other, more important rights.
I disagree with Rich, in that the 1st, the 4th and the 5th are the tell-tale rights. The 10th is almost non-existant. The 4th and 5th are on their last gasp. Last, but not least, the 1st is feeling the pricks from the poisoned darts...
OK, it's not all that bad. But it's getting to darn close for comfort!
Harley, the BoR are not just an add on. 5 of the 13 States refused to ratify the Constitution without the addition of a BoR. There are plenty of Legal scholars who will argue that the ratifying documents objections/demands are meaningless, once the Constitution was in fact ratified. That may be true today, but it wasn't true at the time the debate was going on. Since it required at least 9 state to ratify, the threat from those 5, was very real.
Suffice it to say, the Bill of Rights is not "just a footnote" to the Constitution.
Life and liberty, as I spoke of before, to me, contain free speech. I would hope people, if it came to restrictions on speech, or anything, would exercise the constitutional option the founders gave us under the 2A to keep our rights. Long before the WHO YA GONNA CALL came to pass.
Like I said, I protect my family, try encourage folks that are not gun savy to get involved, engage them in conversations about the meaning and importance of the 2A. Take them to the range, get their hands on a firearm, teach them to use and use it properly.
If you are asking me if I would vote from the rooftops if the situation with freedom of speech (or any other right) came to a head, yes, I would. As I would hope that I would not be the only one to do so, IF that extreme situation occurs.