Misunderstanding the Bill of Rights and the 2nd Amendment included therein

Are you seriously that upset? :rofl:
I am laughing out loud for real in front of my wife about your repeat responses. Guess you don’t have a sense of humor. Life’s too short to be butt hurt over anything on a social media forum. Take a deep breath. Everything is going to be alright.

FYI, if you payed any attention to my posts you’d realize I’m a disabled veteran with some serious disabilities that can’t quite be overcome. Please don’t try to trigger me simply because you can’t take a joke.

1 Like

Ha ha, funny bunny.

1 Like

Folks read Krisanne Hall’s book "Not a Living Breathing Document ". She explains the reasoning & 100’s of years of history behind it all in a non boring short book.

2 Likes

Who, but the politicians in the Democratic party, are passing the “gun control” laws? Who, but the politicians in the Democratic party, are in control of the states with the most restrictive “gun control” laws? What party in Virginia did not even bring Constitutional Carry out of committee in this year’s legislative session? What party was responsible for passing the Jim Crow era laws? What party has passed Constitutional Carry in 20+ states?

Yes, the RKBA should not be a political issue, but it is, due to the Democratic elites not believing in our inalienable, natural rights.

5 Likes

I have heard this as well. Calling it the Bill of Rights is misleading. As what they are intended to do is limit the government’s REACH into our personal freedoms.

1 Like

Ha ha ha ha!
I remember some years ago, two people in my family were having a heated political discussion. After several rounds, the fiscal conservative was making some headway, and the die-hard progressives yielded that he was making valid points. Immediately after that, for reasons I still don’t understand, the conservative used a racial slur for Palestinians, and lost all ground he had gained about fiscal responsibility. Apparently they were somehow related, in his mind, and the progressive family members were able to equate fiscal conservatism with racism.

Point taken. When we’re talking about 2A, we need to focus on the issue. Obviously there are political considerations, as there are with any issue, but the moment we introduce political parties or religion or anything else, people will go into defense mode and they won’t hear a thing we’re saying about the right to keep and bear arms.

1 Like

The 2A is about weapons, all about weapons, “arms,” the God-given, natural right of every person to acquire, keep, bear and use “arms,” weapons, to save, protect and defend themselves from anyone, especially tyrants in government, who would try to infringe upon not only that God-given, natural right, but all of our other rights, as well. The 2A is not about hunting or recreational activities.

1 Like

Oh, I haven’t lost any ground, at least not with any thinking person who has read what I’ve written. Also, although I could add here that I “stand by” what I’ve written, there’s no need for me to do that, because if I didn’t “stand by” it, I wouldn’t have written it in the first place.

Also, the 2A is very much about politics and religion. It acknowledges our God-given, natural right to keep and bear arms (weapons) as tools to protect and enforce all of our other God-given, natural rights, including without limitation our right to assemble and discuss politics and our right to practice our faith. The reason the Left, which has taken over the Democrat Party (and whose Satanic spirit has possessed that yellow dog (pronounced yow-ler) that great grandpa and granny used to vote for), wants to steal away our right to keep and bear arms (weapons) is so that we will have no tools to fight with when they come to steal away our other rights. It’s all ultimately a total control thing.

By the way, speaking of religion and use of the phrase “Ha ha ha ha” in what would otherwise be considered intelligent discussion, there is something in the Proverbs that mentions persons who laugh during debate.

Y’all have a nice day.

1 Like

Had fighter jets, tanks and automatic weapons exist during the Revolution do you thing the 2A would have included them?

1 Like

Slow down, brother. I wasn’t responding to you. I was sharing a story from my own family. If it resembles your own family, that’s coincidental. If you’re just looking for someone to throw shade at, that’s fine, but don’t come throwing your proverbs at me if you think I was looking your direction.

Hello and welcome @John506 @Mizery @Michael1309

1 Like

Not sure who you’re talking to. I assume me, but doesn’t matter either way. I don’t really care one way or the other. But as I say, the 2A is very much about politics and religion.

Also, I found that Proverb. It’s 29:9. Best read in the NASB.

If anyone wants to respond, fine with me. But I’m out of here and doubt that I’ll read or follow any of this any further.

Y’all have a wonderful rest of the week.

1 Like

Sorry but politics are very much involved, the Democrats are trying their best to take away your God given and constitutionally protected rights to free speech, guns, a fair election, and etc. If you don’t realize that we are sorry, but it’s a fact, and we are battling to keep the rights and freedoms.

4 Likes

I can see how the actual 2A can be viewed from a religious and political perspective. And that is ok, because it’s a natural human response which we cannot control and should not want to, IMHO.

But I can see how anything can be viewed from a religious or political stance, as it’s so common. When I take a step back, I must respect it, even if I don’t agree with it. I see that as “opinion”. Still, I also admire the writers of the Constitution, supporting freedom of religion, for to not allow such freedom to me would be oppression.

Being interested in educating those to appreciate the value of firearms, I’m interested in including those who are not religious, non political, or who are even from a political party one might not associate with firearm freedoms.

To defend firearm rights, I tend to believe that our best supportive evidence is its value for self-defense (not the actual 2A), because the opposition’s fuel is the gun-violence and mass shootings of today.

I worry about invoking religion or politics with firearm freedoms, because we may alienate or isolate those who are not religious, not from our own religion, or if they are from a different political party per se.

And I want to appeal to the opposition and more of those in the general public or who are “on the fence” with this hot-button issue/emotionally laden but important subject of our time. Stay safe friends.

2 Likes

thought this was going to be a real conversation, yep thought wrong again size versus politics again, Garbage.

Hello and welcome @Larry164

While I see both political parties as being more evil than good. The truth is I don’t keep and bear arms because of the bill of rights or the constitution. I do it to keep my family safe. Once I became disabled, my own mortality became extremely clear. There are many who would ruin our rights and others who would abuse the right. Neither is a factor in my decision-making process nor would I consider god as giving me this right. Self-defense is a choice, either you will defend your family at any cost or there is a limit to how far your willing to go. That is not to say it’s not great that there is something there to cover us legally. But the legality of taking a life vs the legality of protecting a life only comes into play after you have made the decision to do it.

The truth is, we follow the laws because that is who we are. We defend our families because that is who we are. We will or will not stop at anything to defend our families because that is who we are. Owning a firearm does not mean we will defend our families at all costs only some will actually do that. Just like there are many that don’t own a firearm who will stop at nothing to keep their families safe. What god gave us was the determination to do that. What man gave us was the weapons to assist with it. What our founders gave us was a law saying we don’t have to be imprisoned after the fact. We should all pray that day never comes but if it does, let’s hope we all have the courage to do what we have trained for.

4 Likes

It is only political due to the fact that we have politicians doing everything they can to criminalize legal firearm ownership. It is spiritual/religious, due to the fact that self-defense is not a government law, it is innate in all of nature, hence it being a Natural Law, not granted or given by Man or government. Those that are religious take that to mean it is endowed by our Creator, which is the language used by our Founding Fathers in speaking about Natural Law and inalienable rights. The Founding Fathers were well-read and the idea of Natural Law came from Thomas Hobbes and furthered by John Locke.

1 Like

I would ask you Sir re your approach to the “old” Constitution, written so long ago, that today’s views by necessity must be interrupted differently than in late 1700. That is the classic approach by liberals who argue that the “Living Constitution” needs to be updated (changed) to match today’s society.
What exactly has changed from 1700s to 2021?
I posit the answer is technology.
Has human need changed? We need substance (food/water), we need love, we need health, and safety (among other natural needs) from those who would cause us harm.
History (and current) evidences provide there will always exist in government those who either are unwise, or toxic to our natural rights. Technology changes nothing.
It is to these realities the wisdom of our fathers sought to protect the people of this union from despots.

4 Likes

If a lie is repeated often enough, people who do not think for themselves will believe it.

2 Likes