Thoughts on 1st and 2nd Amendments...

S

savage1r

New member
What if we turned the wording around?

VIDEO

For a long time, gun control advocates have done their best to keep us safe by writing laws and making speeches that would seek to limit or abolish the second amendment. Many of those same people do not understand the implications of their actions, yet if the roles were reversed and politicians were calling for an end to free speech, what would people think of that?
This short video is my illustration of this concept, please give it a look over and leave a comment either in this thread or on my YouTube page.


Reopened - GEM
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, problem with copyrighted songs is that you only get 30 seconds and I was working on a time crunch :p. will allow for more time on the next one.
 
Oddly enough, people often forget just how powerful speech itself is. It can drive people to revolution, to genocide, and to commit acts benevolent and heinous. All by invoking feelings in those that hear it.

IMHO, one skilled orator or writer can benefit or damage society far more than any gun ever could.
 
savage1r said:
Many of those same people do not understand the implications of their actions, yet if the roles were reversed and politicians were calling for an end to free speech, what would people think of that?
Click to expand...

Have you heard about the Chik-fil-A controversy? Quite a lot of people, including politicians, would happily limit speech they do not like. The beauty of the First and Second Amendments is that they protect rights for everyone, pro or con, and whether or not an individual wants to exercise those rights or not.
 
Speaking of Chik-fil-a, what really gets me about that situation, is that chik-fil-a is a privately held company, who's business practices have always been guided by the owners religious beliefs. Then people are surprised the leadership speaks their mind on a social topic with beliefs that are inline with their personal beliefs?

As gc70 points out those rights go both ways, yet people are quick to scold or want to remove those rights when they disagree with what's being said or done.
 
As gc70 points out those rights go both ways, yet people are quick to scold or want to remove those rights when they disagree with what's being said or done.
Click to expand...

Popular or "pc" speech doesn't need to be protected, and what was popular yesterday is "hate speech" today.
 
You have to protect hate speech if you want the right to have any speech. Definitions change, minds change, but you can't force it on people.
 
The problem is that the 1st has been assaulted and many of our rights under it have been curtailed. It;s not a matter of twisting quotes it's a matter of fact.

Who ever heard of a "free speech zone 20 years ago? Who would have thought that government could listen in to client/lawyer conversations without a warrant? Whoever thought that government would be able to access what books we check out from the library? Whoever thought that our ability to speak was restricted by the size of our wallet?

On the other hand the 2nd has now been separated from the militia clause and at least one justice is open to having "any" military small arm available to citizens. That's a huge increase in the power of the 2nd.

Compared to the 1st the 2nd amendment is robust and untarnished. The only bill safer than the 2nd is the 3rd amendment.
 
Quite a lot of people, including politicians, would happily limit speech they do not like.
Click to expand...
Two things:

  1. What stance Chik-Fil-A might take on an issue unrelated to guns isn't really relevant to this forum.
  2. I've seen no evidence that the government has quashed anybody's rights in that situation. The Bill of Rights is about our relationship to the government, not to each other.

I'm reminded of an old Frank Lloyd Wright quote: "I'm all for taking weapons out of the hands of dangerous people. Let's start with typewriters."
 
lol at the typewriter quote.

I think the Second Amendment is alive and well. Seven minutes... some $$$ and I was out the door a couple of weeks ago with my CZ 452.
 
It is said that, given the right questions, people would not be in favor of any of the bill of rights and generally speaking, I'd say that's the way most people act.
 
Tom Servo, several politicians (Chicago, Boston, NYC, DC) have made noises about blocking Chick-Fil-A from opening franchises in their districts due to the Cathy family's statements about their beliefs.

So in this case, the example is on point for the thread.
 
Tom Servo, several politicians (Chicago, Boston, NYC, DC) have made noises about blocking Chick-Fil-A from opening franchises in their districts due to the Cathy family's statements about their beliefs.
Click to expand...
Yeah, gc70 mentioned that to me. At the time, I was unaware of it.

Let them try it. It'll be grounds for an interesting 1A lawsuit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top