Why We Feel The Need To Defend the 2nd Amendent

[Chadeaux]

"It isn't the guns, it is the HUMAN WHO PULLS THE TRIGGER that is dangerous."

So you don't think there is any items that are more inherently dangerous than any other. Using that logic we should have no problem if folks had anthrax, nukes, sarin gas. Do you think that is a valid argument because of course none of them kill people, is the person who uses them that kill people. Would you feel safe in that kind of world, yes?

I guess you have proved that Forest Gump was right. Thanks.

Anyhow, neither the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights mention anthrax or sarin gas. I wasn't aware they were "arms" . . . if they are considered arms, then yes they should have them. Now, I have answered your completely stoopid question with a completely stoopid response.

As you wish to be absurd, I might as well join in.

Nukes, on the other hand, fall under the scope of governments as I don't know anyone who might have one other than political organizations. So, again, your argument is moot.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Treasure_Hunter]

Since you went there and TH seems to allow this, how do you feel about the 4500 lives lost due to lies leading up to the invasion of Iraq? Think the other guy and his vice should not be prosecuted for war crimes?

What I said before about twenty dead first graders still applies. In order for you to have the "right" to possess rapid fire large capacity weapons killings like that will be filed away under the "it was the human not the gun" heading and charged off to the cost of the "right".

Personally, I don't think anyone should take your guns, and I believe the founding fathers were right in placing the 2nd in the BOR. They also placed the words "well regulated militia" into the same amendment, when was the last time you mustered for drill? You can't eat a reeses peanut butter cup without swallowing both the chocolate and the peanut butter. (psst, that's an analogy)

This post has nothing to do with war crimes. Thread is on 2nd amendment and we allow 2nd amendment threads and related posts to 2nd amendment because the admins said to allow.

 

[Chadeaux]

AND! "The other guy"; was a WHITE REPUBLICAN Prez. AND! A WHITE REPUBLICAN Vice-Prez...

And you, sir, are behaving like a bigoted political antagonist. Why? No neighbors to annoy today?

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

AND! "The other guy"; was a WHITE REPUBLICAN Prez. AND! A WHITE REPUBLICAN Vice-Prez...

Rebel keep race out of this debate, your commment can easily be considered racist in itself......

 

[Peyton Manning]

Well, just the fact that you are on the property after being warned that death was a possibility would show a violation of the law. That it warns of deadly force does not always mean that it will be used. It depends on the individual and how they react when confronted. I've seen video that showed people entering area 51 as well. Some were caught, but none were killed. Why? Not because they were recording but because they were non hostile trespassers. Hostility would have been met with the same or greater force. Because they were warned, knew they were breaking the law and could not have been where they were without breaking the law, their actions are what kept them from being killed. Military bases must be protected by all means necessary.

Due process is what happens when you are charged, prosecuted in court and then either declared innocent or guilty. I can't answer how it works for the folks that guy in DC has killed with drones, but on the other hand, dead men tell no tales.

Your rights are being eaten away. If you are in the process of committing a crime, and the officer or citizen you are violating feels threatened they have a right to protect themselves. Then THEY face a jury of their peers to determine if they had reason to deprive that person (in the heat of the moment) of life.

With that guy, we are talking about premeditated murder. Much like Joe Blow deciding to take out his ex . . . except that guy in DC is doing it without fear of reprisal because he's attempting to write the rules as he goes along. Doesn't that sound fair? Wouldn't you like to do that when you gamble --- make up new rules as you go along so that you always win?

seems to me if 'that guy in DC' was so evil, rush limbaugh would have been droned long ago. you need to take the aluminum foil hat off more often

 

[Peyton Manning]

and what does this have to do with treasure hunting?

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Not only are we standing up for our rights, we are standing up for over 300 million other American's rights, it makes no difference if they own a weapon or not, if they will ever own a weapon or not does not matter, it is still a right guaranteed by the Constitution and we are also standing up for the rights every unborn American citizen that comes after us...

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

and what does this have to do with treasure hunting?

Jeff the owners of this website said to allow 2nd amendment threads, since they are Americans and this is a private business they have the right to decide what is posted and what is not posted, just like anyone else who owns a business has the right to say how their business operates...... No one is required to read if they do not want to read...

 

[releventchair]

and what does this have to do with treasure hunting?

There have been hunts i was armed.
Believe it or not others have done the same.
What is being recovered and where are factors.
On some excursions its insurance.



.

 

[Rebel - KGC]

And you, sir, are behaving like a bigoted political antagonist. Why? No neighbors to annoy today?

LOL! Just pointing out what the "other guy" was in a PREVIOUS "post"... NOT a "bigoted political antagonist". I am HERE, NOW.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

LOL! Just pointing out what the "other guy" was in a PREVIOUS "post"... NOT a "bigoted political antagonist". I am HERE, NOW.

Keep race out of it please it has nothing to do with it..........

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Rebel keep race out of this debate, your commment can easily be considered racist in itself......

TY, so does all the Obama-bashing...

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

TY, so does all the Obama-bashing...

Rebel, I asked nicely.............Keep race out of it.... The obama bashing has nothing to do with his race, it is his politics and his adminstration's attempt to gut the 2nd amendment.....

 

[jeff of pa]

TY, so does all the Obama-bashing...

Rebel don't go there !. Obama is a name & a person, not a race !

 

[0121stockpicker]

I guess you have proved that Forest Gump was right. Thanks.

Anyhow, neither the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights mention anthrax or sarin gas. I wasn't aware they were "arms" . . . if they are considered arms, then yes they should have them. Now, I have answered your completely stoopid question with a completely stoopid response.

As you wish to be absurd, I might as well join in.

Nukes, on the other hand, fall under the scope of governments as I don't know anyone who might have one other than political organizations. So, again, your argument is moot.

Thank you you've proven the stupidity of all the arguments that say guns should be legal because hammers, bats and knives have been known to kill people. And for the record I agree its a completely stupid statement. Your logic is sound and it works all ways. Excellent.

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Rebel don't go there !. Obama is a name & a person, not a race !

WILL do... is it the "party"...?

 

[0121stockpicker]

Refresher on the constitution.


The United States Constitution can be changed through the amendment process. Constitutional amendments are added to it, altering its effect. The first ten amendments, ratified by three-fourths of the states in 1791, are known as the Bill of Rights. The Constitution has been amended seventeen additional times (for a total of twenty-seven amendments). Principles of the Constitution, as amended, are applied in courts of law by judicial review.

The Constitution guides American law and political culture. Its writers composed the first constitution of its kind incorporating recent developments in constitutional theory with multiple traditions, and their work influenced later writers of national constitutions. It has been amended over time and it is supplemented and interpreted by a large body of United States constitutional law.

 

[jeff of pa]

WILL do... is it the "party"...?

Party ? only Parties I'm aware of, I haven't been to in years.

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Party ? only Parties I'm aware of, I haven't been to in years.

LOL! Need to get out more, then...

 

[releventchair]

So the struggle when considering amendment and the importance of who is involved.
Much more important than a union contract or a groups by laws(both important,no offence all) where an added or deleted clause can make major changes to the whole contract/mission.