Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 13 of 18
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    California/Nevada
    Posts
    3,636

    The Second Amendment's right to self defense

    ...so having a look at this old dusty document, found crumbled up in the back of a storage room, called the "United States Constitution", we find some arguments.

    The Second Amendment is not just about guns, it outlines your right of self defense.
    of course the Second Amendment doesn't actually SAY "self defense", so that's an open door for the modern legal vultures to change everything to mean, 'what ever the rich say, that's what you have to do'
    the founders of the nation were hoping the country would never become to stupit.

    in the beginning of out nation, many founders of the country were planning never to have a "standing army", they were terrified of the (federal) government having power.
    now days we see why.
    the only person who had any power to detain someone was the local Sheriff, this person had to list the suspects trespass of law, and QUICKLY charge and try to convict the suspect who was presumed innocent.
    the only power of the government was to conduct a trial, only a jury of citizens could give the government power to jail or execute someone.


    the best way to think of American self defense is to imagine yourself with your home on the range.
    you are out in the middle of nowhere and a group of 5 men arrive and start stealing your cattle.
    that is their only crime depending on what THEY feel like.
    the Second Amendment is clear as to what your right is. you have the right, ...if you want, to confront these criminals, load your family up with rifles, and leave 5 dead theif-s in a pool of blood where they stood.

    there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Sheriff conducting an investigation to see if the facts add up on behalf of the government.
    however, the home owner being the only survivor of the incident, there is only one side to give testimony, and who is the Sheriff to dispute what the home owner says happened?

    American law was never meant to be perfect.
    in this case, the home owner becomes the suspect and he is presumed innocent until proved guilty.
    American law was written to leave this person alone unless the jury believes there is no doubt he committed a crime.
    with no witnesses, that would be near impossible to achieve.

    if the home owner has no right to kill these suspects, what is his rights?
    a modern legal disruptor says his right is "to call the police"
    so the right of the home owner would be to flee to the Sheriff's house, bang on the door, and tell him 5 men are stealing from his farm? ...then the Sheriff and the home owner would get their ass kicked by the 5 men.
    the idea is ridiculous.
    you say, 'well we don't have that anymore, we have police who are supposed to be there in 5 minutes'
    was there a major shift in the Constitution because a city decided to add a police force?
    when was the ratification of the Constitution to dissolve the Second Amendment and tell people they only have a right to call the police? that never happened.


    what is a police officer?
    a police officer is nothing more that a citizen who agrees to abide by certain rules, given by the public, to act as an impartial third party witness, for the goal of fighting crime.
    his word is no more valid than any other citizen.
    naturally a jury would rather believe an impartial police officer rather than a suspect, ...and there is nothing wrong with that, until is goes too far.

    now days we have police offers who are paid from extorted money from the public, police departments who only answer to government officials, and the government locks away people who police offers say lied to them.
    this is completely unconstitutional.

    what happens when police departments are ordered to ignore crimes?
    such is the case with illegal immigration and car burglary.
    what happens IF police departments are ordered to ignore home invasion robberies?

    do we decide cases because black people feel someone is guity?
    do we decide cases because some rights group says so?
    de we decide cases because someone has achieved the highest rank in government and he says so?

    HERE COMES A SHOCKING FACT FOR YOU.
    the right to self defense is protected by the Second Amendment,
    police departments are not!
    your right to own guns, protect yourself and your property, far out weigh the existence of any police department!!!






    for the last many years our government has placed , what they call vigilantism, as priority number one.
    what has our legal system accomplished by trying to prosecute people who defend themselves?
    our government has told the public that criminals are not to be touched.
    this is a very frightening concept considering our government picks and chooses which crimes they feel like enforcing.
    we have gangs and mafias who know how to exist under the radar, with no fear of the average citizen.
    this is not an improvement of society.
    if the government doesn't want citizens solving crimes for them, then the government needs to provide a system that works.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,268
    Quote Originally Posted by wolfstrike View Post
    ...so having a look at this old dusty document, found crumbled up in the back of a storage room, called the "United States Constitution", we find some arguments.

    The Second Amendment is not just about guns, it outlines your right of self defense.
    of course the Second Amendment doesn't actually SAY "self defense", so that's an open door for the modern legal vultures to change everything to mean, 'what ever the rich say, that's what you have to do'
    the founders of the nation were hoping the country would never become to stupit.

    in the beginning of out nation, many founders of the country were planning never to have a "standing army", they were terrified of the (federal) government having power.
    now days we see why.
    the only person who had any power to detain someone was the local Sheriff, this person had to list the suspects trespass of law, and QUICKLY charge and try to convict the suspect who was presumed innocent.
    the only power of the government was to conduct a trial, only a jury of citizens could give the government power to jail or execute someone.


    the best way to think of American self defense is to imagine yourself with your home on the range.
    you are out in the middle of nowhere and a group of 5 men arrive and start stealing your cattle.
    that is their only crime depending on what THEY feel like.
    the Second Amendment is clear as to what your right is. you have the right, ...if you want, to confront these criminals, load your family up with rifles, and leave 5 dead theif-s in a pool of blood where they stood.

    there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Sheriff conducting an investigation to see if the facts add up on behalf of the government.
    however, the home owner being the only survivor of the incident, there is only one side to give testimony, and who is the Sheriff to dispute what the home owner says happened?

    American law was never meant to be perfect.
    in this case, the home owner becomes the suspect and he is presumed innocent until proved guilty.
    American law was written to leave this person alone unless the jury believes there is no doubt he committed a crime.
    with no witnesses, that would be near impossible to achieve.

    if the home owner has no right to kill these suspects, what is his rights?
    a modern legal disruptor says his right is "to call the police"
    so the right of the home owner would be to flee to the Sheriff's house, bang on the door, and tell him 5 men are stealing from his farm? ...then the Sheriff and the home owner would get their ass kicked by the 5 men.
    the idea is ridiculous.
    you say, 'well we don't have that anymore, we have police who are supposed to be there in 5 minutes'
    was there a major shift in the Constitution because a city decided to add a police force?
    when was the ratification of the Constitution to dissolve the Second Amendment and tell people they only have a right to call the police? that never happened.


    what is a police officer?
    a police officer is nothing more that a citizen who agrees to abide by certain rules, given by the public, to act as an impartial third party witness, for the goal of fighting crime.
    his word is no more valid than any other citizen.
    naturally a jury would rather believe an impartial police officer rather than a suspect, ...and there is nothing wrong with that, until is goes too far.

    now days we have police offers who are paid from extorted money from the public, police departments who only answer to government officials, and the government locks away people who police offers say lied to them.
    this is completely unconstitutional.

    what happens when police departments are ordered to ignore crimes?
    such is the case with illegal immigration and car burglary.
    what happens IF police departments are ordered to ignore home invasion robberies?

    do we decide cases because black people feel someone is guity?
    do we decide cases because some rights group says so?
    de we decide cases because someone has achieved the highest rank in government and he says so?

    HERE COMES A SHOCKING FACT FOR YOU.
    the right to self defense is protected by the Second Amendment,
    police departments are not!
    your right to own guns, protect yourself and your property, far out weigh the existence of any police department!!!






    for the last many years our government has placed , what they call vigilantism, as priority number one.
    what has our legal system accomplished by trying to prosecute people who defend themselves?
    our government has told the public that criminals are not to be touched.
    this is a very frightening concept considering our government picks and chooses which crimes they feel like enforcing.
    we have gangs and mafias who know how to exist under the radar, with no fear of the average citizen.
    this is not an improvement of society.
    if the government doesn't want citizens solving crimes for them, then the government needs to provide a system that works.
    I agree with you that we have that right...is it always best to use that right? I'm not sure

    In my opinion the Federal government is not to blame for failing local government....does the federal government hire the sheriffs or mayors, policemen or firemen? They don't...policemen are hired by the sheriff who is voted in office by us...if the local government is broken blame the official for not holding up his end of the bargain when he ran for office...or blame the voters for picking the wrong person.

    It's easy to look up to big Government and place the blame on them...but in the end the feds only put the programs in place...and the people we vote for are supposed to maintain those programs.

    People do not want to do their jobs....many crimes are over looked simply because a policeman or their boss does not want to do the paperwork.

    With this said do we sit here at our computers and complain that our local governments are failing or do we get up and do something about it?
    Last edited by AStudent; 05-02-2012 at 10:05 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,268
    I agree with you that we have that right...is it always best to use that right? I'm not sure

    In my opinion the Federal government is not to blame for failing local government....does the federal government hire the sheriffs or mayors, policemen or firemen? They don't...policemen are hired by the sheriff who is voted in office by us...if the local government is broken blame the official for not holding up his end of the bargain when he ran for office...or blame the voters for picking the wrong person.

    It's easy to look up to big Government and place the blame on them...but in the end the feds only put the programs in place...and the people we vote for are supposed to maintain those programs.

    People do not want to do their jobs....many crimes are over looked simply because a policeman or their boss does not want to do the paperwork.

    With this said do we sit here at our computers and complain that our local governments are failing or do we get up and do something about it? That to me is why our country is failing, not because of crooked government but because the people are too pleased by luxuries and entertainment AKA capitalism that we don't care or don't want to risk losing our stuff...because we have it good as long as there is a Mcdonalds and the ball game or reality show to come home to.

    Capitalism is a theory that works for the short term...greed makes the world go round as innovation is bolstered in this economy...but what happens with capitalism? Inflation...and the more inflation you have the more currency you need, the more bills you print the less your currency is worth.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,268
    Sorry for the double post.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Rochester, NY, USA
    Posts
    14,307
    an interesting diatribe.

    However, the Rule Of Law has been in the Colonies long before the Constitution was ratified.

    Robbery, Burglary, and violent crimes were all prosecuted as vigorously as they are today.

    Granted, the legal system didn't have the same tools that society has today, but violent crime was not tolerated then as it is today. Courts, lawyers and citizens all had the same rights. Even in the "wild west" killing someone had consequences. Contrary to popular belief, very few people went around just "killing people"

    However, Court was considered the paramount of society and above reproach. Judges, Prosecutors and lawyers, as well as Police offices are officers of that court. they were the educated members of society and the authority that everyone looked to in times of trouble.

    The problems arise when the educated members of society deem it necessary to legislate power over lesser members of that society, as we have today.
    The Last four letters


    American = I Can, Republican = I Can, Democrats = Rats


    any questions

  6. #6
    What we need is more Judge Roy Bean.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dCaJchTwBo&feature=fvsr

    The second to the last was fair,everyone else....
    FEN

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Florida Panhandle
    Posts
    4,378
    Quote Originally Posted by the mojo View Post
    What we need is more Judge Roy Bean.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dCaJchTwBo&feature=fvsr

    The second to the last was fair,everyone else....

    You Called??


    Roy
    "The perfect Totalitarian State is one where the political bosses, and their army of managers, control a population of slaves, who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude"

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,297
    I believe the second amendment is even more than self-defense against individuals but was intended as a right to overthrow a bad government as well.
    "No matter how thirsty your imagination, mirages contain no water"

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Afton, VA / Khorat, Thailand
    Posts
    2,469
    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh B View Post
    I believe the second amendment is even more than self-defense against individuals but was intended as a right to overthrow a bad government as well.
    BINGO.....and that is why lefties are sooooo nervous when the topic is brought up.
    Tough times don't last...Tough people do.

    Midnight Sun Astrophotography

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    SE Michigan
    Posts
    17,948
    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh B View Post
    I believe the second amendment is even more than self-defense against individuals but was intended as a right to overthrow a bad government as well.
    +2
    Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people.

    Theodore Roosevelt

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    2,204
    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh B View Post
    I believe the second amendment is even more than self-defense against individuals but was intended as a right to overthrow a bad government as well.
    Do you not do that every four years?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Rochester, NY, USA
    Posts
    14,307
    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh B View Post
    I believe the second amendment is even more than self-defense against individuals but was intended as a right to overthrow a bad government as well.
    I believe this was the primary reason for the second amendment, self-defense would be a logical step in maintaining a firearm.
    The Last four letters


    American = I Can, Republican = I Can, Democrats = Rats


    any questions

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Boise, ID
    Posts
    4,272
    Did any of you sign up for the Hillsdale College series on the Constitution? There were two series, the same course that is taught at the college. If more of our youth took these courses we might have a chance at survival.

    I hope they offer the series again....check it out.

    http://constitution.hillsdale.edu/
    If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what will never be. (Thomas Jefferson 1816)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event