Why is the Second Amendment a priority?

[Queenmandy85]

Of all the rights available to our American neighbours, why is the right to bare arms the one that seems to be so sacred. Perhaps it is just the forums I lurk in but it seems to me that gun rights seem to outweigh the right to free speech, freedom of religion or a free press.

In the eighteenth century, firearms were a necessity for getting food and making up for an eastablished constabulary. Now, the US has lots of supermarkets and more police agencies than you can shake a stick at.

[Dougie93]

f

36 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Of all the rights available to our American neighbours, why is the right to bare arms the one that seems to be so sacred. Perhaps it is just the forums I lurk in but it seems to me that gun rights seem to outweigh the right to free speech, freedom of religion or a free press.

In the eighteenth century, firearms were a necessity for getting food and making up for an eastablished constabulary. Now, the US has lots of supermarkets and more police agencies than you can shake a stick at.

free speech, freedom of religion,  or a free press, comes first : in the 1st Amendment

after that,  comes the capacity to defend the 1st Amendment

by force of arms as necessary

in the 2nd Amendment

 

[robosmith]

Just now, Dougie93 said:

f

free speech, freedom of religion,  or a free press, comes first : in the 1st Amendment

after that,  comes the capacity to defend the 1st Amendment

by force of arms as necessary

in the 2nd Amendment

 

IF you pull out your gun to shoot someone who is denying your free speech, you will go to prison for murder (if he dies).

Individuals denying your free speech, or even the government, does not convey the right to use violence. Go to court and get your right restored.

[Aristides]

Lots of countries manage to have those without a 2nd Amendment. Makes the US look like a country that can't grow up.

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, robosmith said:

IF you pull out your gun to shoot someone who is denying your free speech, you will go to prison for murder (if he dies).

you won't go to prison if you overthrow the government itself

as at which point, like General George Washington. you can hang all the Tories from the nearest tree

[Aristides]

1 minute ago, Dougie93 said:

you won't go to prison if you overthrow the government itself

as at which point, like General George Washington. you can hang all the Tories from the nearest tree

How is that defending anything?  More like taking power by force and eliminating any opposition.

[Dougie93]

7 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Lots of countries manage to have those without a 2nd Amendment. Makes the US look like a country that can't grow up.

the greatest most powerful country in the history of the world

propping pathetic little Canada up as our vassal state

Edited November 23, 2022 by Dougie93

[Dougie93]

Just now, Aristides said:

 More like taking power by force and eliminating any opposition.

like the British once did on the Plains of Abraham

before they went broke and had to hand their colony in Canada over to America to rule

[Aristides]

If armed civilians take power in the US, it won't be to defend democracy or free speech. The opposite. 

[Dougie93]

Just now, Aristides said:

If armed civilians take power in the US, it won't be to defend democracy or free speech. The opposite. 

Canada will still be ruled by whatever comes in the wake

[Aristides]

Just now, Dougie93 said:

like the British once did on the Plains of Abraham

before they went broke and had to hand their colony in Canada over to America to rule

That was part of a world wide war between colonial powers as to who was going to be the big dog. It wasn't about defending anyone's freedoms.

[Aristides]

Just now, Dougie93 said:

Canada will still be ruled by whatever comes in the wake

It will be decided at the ballot box, not by armed thugs.

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, Aristides said:

That was part of a world wide war between colonial powers as to who was going to be the big dog. It wasn't about defending anyone's freedoms.

au contraire, it was about defending the Glorious Revolution of 1688 against the House of Bourbon

the British Parliament went to war against the French Autocracy

and British Parliamentary Supremacy won the war, in Canada & India, on the same day

the Birth of the British Empire, on 10 February 1763

[Dougie93]

5 minutes ago, Aristides said:

It will be decided at the ballot box, not by armed thugs.

there's no guarantee of that

I don't rule out Democrats and their Canadian cohorts being hung from the lampposts in a violent revolution

[Aristides]

13 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

au contraire, it was about defending the Glorious Revolution of 1688 against the House of Bourbon

the British Parliament went to war against the French Autocracy

and British Parliamentary Supremacy won the war, in Canada & India, on the same day

the Birth of the British Empire, on 10 February 1763

It was a war of global dominance fought between an alliance of Britain and Prussia led by Britain against another alliance of France and Spain led by France. 

[Aristides]

12 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

there's no guarantee of that

I don't rule out Democrats and their Canadian cohorts being hung from the lampposts in a violent revolution

So the 2nd Amendment is really about exterminating those who disagree with you, not about defending anything.

[Dougie93]

Just now, Aristides said:

So the 2nd Amendment is really about exterminating those who disagree with you, not about defending anything.

no extermination, Cornwallis was permitted to surrender at Yorktown

[robosmith]

29 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

you won't go to prison if you overthrow the government itself

as at which point, like General George Washington. you can hang all the Tories from the nearest tree

You have a vivid imagination. LMAO

[herbie]

One day he'll be dragged kicking and screaming into the twentieth century....

[Aristides]

6 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

no extermination, Cornwallis was permitted to surrender at Yorktown

Washington had a real army and wouldn't have won without French backing, not a bunch of armed thugs.

Edited November 23, 2022 by Aristides

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, Aristides said:

Washington had a real army and wouldn't have won without French backing, not a bunch of armed thugs.

but this is the 21st century

Marshal McLuhan's Information World War Three

I simply predict that the likes of you are going to lose the war in the end

[Aristides]

2 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

but this is the 21st century

Marshal McLuhan's Information World War Three

I simply predict that the likes of you are going to lose the war in the end

What war, the war that destroys democracy and personal rights? You may be right about that.

[Dougie93]

Just now, Aristides said:

What war, the war that destroys democracy and personal rights? You may be right about that.

democracy is the rule of the mob which is a dire threat to personal rights

personal rights endowed by God himself will overthrow democracy in the end

[Aristides]

The French Revolution got the French the Reign of Terror and an Emperor. Before the mid terms it looked like the US was headed the same way. I've delayed judgement on that but the US might just be taking longer.

Rights are a human invention and religion has a history of denying, not improving them. "God is on our side" has been responsible for more death and oppression than just about anything else.

[Dougie93]

11 minutes ago, Aristides said:

 "God is on our side" has been responsible for more death and oppression than just about anything else.

I none the less predict that God will prevail in the end

and His wrath will brought down upon the likes of you therein