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

Well you exhibit many traits of a narc, so…you reject reality and replace with your own,. you misinterpret what I say. you bring up crap that has NOTHING to do with the topic, you go off on ignorant rants.

FYI, my points ARE logical, you’re just too busy with your own agenda to really look at what I say. You mistake what I say. I was reporting what SCOTUS said in two landmark cases and you reply to me like they were my opinions.

I said that , according to SCOTUS, our rights are not absolute, that there can be and are restrictions on them and I listed a few. YOU replied that folks can break the law. Well thank you Capt Obvious, but THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT I SAID! Then I reported what SCOTUS said in the two landmark cases about what "infringement means- that NO law abiding citizen can be prevented from RKBA and then surmised that the 3 day waiting period is NOT and infringement and the BG check is NOT, BUT permits ARE and banning IS and YOU reply with a story of a woman who was killed by her husband! WTF? THAT has NOTHING to do with what I said!

So then I blame the authorities who can prevent mass shootings and gave an example of the Parkland shooter. YOU reply with “So, other than the shooter, it’s the FBI’s fault? Who else could have prevented it? The Deputy?” SO you don’t know how ANY that works do you? Have you heard of NCIC? The Baker Act? Red Flag Laws? How about officers of the court? OK, school board members, the Police, DCF AND the FBI are officers of the court. ANY ONE of them can go to court and tell a judge that a certain person is troubled and should not have access to guns and the judge can adjudicate them and then they get reported to NCIC. THAT is what is checked on a BACKGROUND CHECK( ERGO, when they walk into a gun shop and try to buy a gun they will NOT pass the BG check). With RED FLAG LAWS a family member ( or the police , or the school OR DCF OR the FBI) can go to court and have them adjudicated. THAT is what the authorities are FAILING to DO. They failed at Parkland, at Las Vegas, at the Pulse club in Orlando, and the last 20 mass shootings- they walked into a gun shop, passed a BG check, bought a gun(s) and went out and killed innocent people. ALL of then could have been prevented!

You don’t know what you’re talking about. You don’t know what you DON"T know. You need to stop acting like you know everything and stop posting so much and go learn some REALITY

tumblr_ljh0puClWT1qfkt17.gif (275×210)

Remember ME? I may start to enjoy involuntarily opening a can of worms… hey, YOU! Get off my lawn!

Appreciate you Clarence5. I’m interested to learn of any sponsors of Bills which might make it easier for victims of Domestic Violence to be allowed some form of priority, especially when I hear of citizens waiting several months on end for a FOID or conceal carry permit. Although I’m also very much pro education & training.

I also respect your points on the authorities needing to enforce and be held accountable when someone’s FOID or carry permit needs to be reviewed to be revoked. Not to make it harder for safe, law-abiding citizens, but not to enable potential violent ones per se. I’ve worked as one of those mandated reporters.

Well, not only that but the 2A has what in Grammar is called DEPENDENT clauses and an INDEPENDENT clause.

The first two clauses are dependent clauses- they have a subject and a verb, but cannot stand alone on their own: “A well regulated militia”, OK, a well regulated militia , what about it? Obviously NOT a complete sentence nor a complete thought. “Being necessary for the security of a free state.” OK, ANOTHER open ended sentence, or DEPENDENT clause. Even if you put the two together: “A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state,” is STILL not a complete sentence, because they are dependent clauses. They NEED the LAST clause, to make sense.The ONLY complete, independent clause , the MAIN point, the sentence that can stand alone (in fact ,the 2A would still be complete with just that): “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
BTW, the reason the 2A is worded that way is because the of the Shay Rebellion. As a result of the failings of the Article of Confederation the Central govt and the state of Mass. were helpless to prevent or deal the rebellion (also, the AoC failed to provide the central govt with a way to enforce the states to pay taxes, so they had to rely on the states to simply pay. They didn’t ). Finally, a rich businessman in Boston formed a militia to quell the rebellion. So the 2A is worded that way for that reason, BUT to put it in modern context, it could say, “Being necessary to defend themselves, their homes, their property, and against tyranny, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be denied nor abridged.”

I’d like to point out, that the 2A is the ONLY amendment that says “shall not be infringed”. Most other Amendments, say “shall not be denied or abridged”, like` voting. Now, does anyone expect ANY “voting control” or “Voting machine control”? No , of course not. WE all take that for granted that the right to vote is carved in stone, NEVER to be restricted. Same with freedom of religion or speech or to assemble or redress the govt. or due process, or the right to not incriminate ourselves, etc. If any of those were restricted, there’d be an uprise, but for some reason, the 2A is not regarded that same way,

Well, I can tell you that a “FOID” is totally unconstitutional and in fact was deemed so by Il. Judge T Scott Webb, on April 2021. IN fact , ANY kind of permit to keep and bear arms is unconstitutional. SCOTUS has said, in Heller V .D.C. and McDonald V Chicago that “Shall not be infringed” means that law abiding citizens shall not be prevented from RKBA, so for ANY govt to say that if you don’t have a permit, you may not RKBA, is unconstitutional


Interesting that you mention domestic violence and that folks with permits need to be reviewed. Do you really think that the ONLY violent offenders are permit holders? Hardly.
Plus, I’m not talking about domestic violence offenders. IMO, the Red Flag Laws address that and enough priority is given. A woman can walk into any court and with very little or NO evidence, just her word can get an injunction.

I’m talking about the last 20 or so MASS SHOOTERS, who walked into a gun shop and as result of NOT being reported to NCIC, passed a BG check, then bought a gun and went out and killed and wounded multiple innocent people. FYI, those people aren’t law abiding, permit carrying citizens who just snapped. They are disturbed, troubled people, all their lives and are witnessed by several authorities. I clearly presented that when I used the Parkland, Fl shooter Cruz, as an example. Usually it’s the schools who first see the troubled child, and there’s plenty of authorities in a school. I know that there’s personnel that are trained to recognize abuse in children and report that. Then the local PD is usually the 2nd authorities to come in contact with the the troubled youth, with petty crimes. In Cruz’s case, FL Dept of Children and Families (a dept that intervene in families where abuse is happening. Usually, as a result of a court order [because DCF went before a judge and produced enough evidence], the children are immediately taken into custody and the parents are brought into court and then put on a case plan, where they have to attend parenting and anger mngmt classes and maybe rehab and drug counseling and satisfy several other orders before getting their kids back) made contact more than once, but it was because of Cruz, NOT his parents. HE was the one who was the trouble. They are DISTINCT authorities that work directly with the courts. And finally the FBI , now it doesn’t get MORE authority than that. YET, NOT ONE OF THEM REPORTED HIM TO NCIC or flagged him as one that may not have access to a gun, so he walked into a gun shop , passed a BG check, bought an AR and went and killed 17 HS students and wounded 17 more. The blood of those students are on ALL those authorities hands! The victims’ families should be able to SUE all those authorities, in a class action law suit and THAT will STOP mass shootings.

Kurt17 said: “Remember ME? I may start to enjoy involuntarily opening a can of worms… hey, YOU! Get off my lawn!” Nope,Btw, you ain’t no Clint Eastwood.

Also, cans of worms are for the meek and mild and weak of spirit and mind. I eat cans of worms for snacks, with a nice Chianti and Fava beans

Hello, Clarice.

HAHA! I got your clarice in a my pants, Sunshine. Either show me something substantial or go play with your gerbils.

I salute your service - and your ongoing self-reliance. My only ambition in this ugly world is to go to sleep - and not bother to wake up. Kudos.

At least two things I’d like to respond to. Your reference that at this era of time, some have different beliefs and values than 240 years ago, true enough. But philosophies on life haven’t changed that much through millennium. As I referred to before, folks want to live safely. The need hasn’t changed, I posit that how we get it hasn’t changed much either, despite technology,
In risk of overgeneralization, two broad approaches to satisfy safety has presently led us into a cold war, Progressive-Socialism vs Constitutional Republicanism. With the former, it’s government’s responsibility to protect us. (Hence, the passage of law is believed to be sufficient to force criminals to comply.) The other, whereas police are given the social responsibility to protect us, we recognize LEOs (law enforcement officers) can’t be everywhere and cannot materialize instantly (via 9-1-1) at the moment our life is threatened, therefore our natural right of self-protection (self-defense) is a priori. This latter is the touchstone of the 2A.
All that to say as you accurately bear out, many today do not grasp that understanding of the amendment. They lean toward the belief that more law (government) is the avenue toward social safety. Hence, I agree with you, that to refer to the 2A while addressing them speaks past their belief or avenue toward safety. “You care more about protecting your gun than you do about our safety!”
Indeed, it is better to discuss means of safety. What makes us safer? How can we ensure the greatest (imperfect) degree of safety? I appeal to their emotion and point that justified feeling toward reason and better research.
The 2A isn’t about protecting our right of gun ownership. It isn’t about the “gun.” It could just as easily have been swords. Or spears. Or slings. Or big clubs. Guns are merely the tool that provides us the greatest degree of personal safety against miscreants and tyrants. It’s about defense. Thus, the 2A isn’t about protecting our guns, but has always been about protecting our lives effectively. So in a word, yes, the 2A does protect the gun — that efficient tool of self-defense. Therefore, the 2A couldn’t be more apropos. Gentleman have worn swords for millennium. Annie Oakley bettered most men and strongly encouraged women to bear arms.
I recommend reading as starters “The Founders’ Second Amendment, Origins of the Right to Bear Arms,” and/or “Securing Civil Rights, Freedmen, the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Right to Bear Arms,” both by Stephen P. Halbrook, JD, PhD., historian and Constitutional scholar.
Some are correct when they argue no right is without limit. Even with the First Amendment, I have the right to speak, but not to defame (I would be liable for court). Us 2A folk aren’t arguing for a right to bear shoulder-held rockets. For that matter, most (that I’m aware of), aren’t even vocal about a right to bear fully automatics. SCOTUS has ruled that guns/rifles that are in common use (such as the popular AR 15), are protected. Research confirms as well that the AR is one of the best self-defense weapons in wide production today. For example, not a few women find the AR easier to aim than a handgun. For those who espouse we take our limits beyond reason, it’s because they don’t know guns. How someone feels about another’s natural right cannot supplant their right to express it. Especially when reason and research apply.

Good points. Thanks.
I find it interesting that those who present the Militia clause as proving the whole amendment is about the right of those in militia (military) service – under authority of the government – presents an apparent conflict of interest. (Or perhaps they have.) How convenient it is that a government, in control of their own armed militia (military) – is guaranteeing they won’t infringe on their own military’s right to keep and bear arms! How is a tyrant in control of the military going to guarantee to the citizenry that their freedom will remain intact? Happy Tyrant! Why hasn’t anyone pointed out that conflict of interest?

1 Like

Welcome Larry!
I would encourage you, read past any riff-raff, and you’ll find some gold nuggets.

Sorry to hear that, Please get some help. Is there anyone around you that you can trust? You can DEFINITELY trust me. Semper Fi. This is for you: Please read it and heed it:

Desiderata: Go placidly (undisturbed by chaos) amidst the noise and haste and remember what peace may be in silence.

As far as possible, without surrender, be on good terms with everyone. Speak your truth calmly, yet clearly and LISTEN to others, even the dull and ignorant, as they too have their opinions.

Avoid loud and aggressive people, as they are vexatious to the spirit.

IF you compare yourself to others, you may become vain and bitter, for there will always be greater and lesser people than yourself. Remain curious and never stop learning and growing. Step out of your safety zone once in awhile. Enjoy your achievements.

Stay interested in your career and safeguard your plans. However humble, it’s a real possession in the changing fortunes of time.

Exercise caution in your business affairs, for the world is full of trickery, but don’t let that blind you to what virtue is out there. ALOT folks strive for high ideas and everywhere life is full of heroism.

Be yourself and especially don’t fake affection and don’t be cynical about love, for in the face of all disenchantment, it’s as perennial as the grass.

Take kindly the council of the years. Gracefully surrender the things of youth. Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune. Don’t distress yourself with dark imaginings. Never verbalize a negative thought. Many fears come from fatigue and loneliness.

Beyond a wholesome discipline, be gentle with yourself. Be sure to take some “me time”. YOU are a child of the Universe, no less than the mountains and the stars. YOU have a right to be here.

And whether or not it’s clear to you, the Universe is unfolding as it should , so be at peace with God and no matter the trials and tribulations, be at peace with your soul. With all of life’s drudgery and shams and broken dreams, it’s still a beautiful World.

Be cheerful, Don’t worry, be happy.

Made sense, except for the part that “nature” can give you anything. Was that just being politically correct? I agree with Kevin1776 on the book and all of David Barton’s work.

Actually, yes. The 2A was written in the wake of a successful ARMED overthrow of an existing government and was intended to make future proto-tyrants in our NEW government pause before the threat of another popular armed rebellion. Since the technology of arms has progressed in the last two centuries, allowing the government to hold a monopoly on modern weapons and WMD means our ability to defend ourselves against that government is severely limited.

2 Likes

I appreciate your sharing “The 2A isn’t about protecting our guns, but has always been about protecting our lives effectively”; And “I have the right to speak, but not to defame (I would be liable for court).” Gems among gems, if I may say so.

1 Like

Thank you! I’ve burned my brain and sought God’s perspective on this. Not done yet.

1 Like

all i can say brotha is ,WORD!!!

Derrell1, I’m getting the vibe that you’re a Libertarian. IS that true? IF so, FYI, Libertarian is NO MORE than a theory, It has NEVER been put into practice, so it has ZERO hours of experience. I can tell you that it would implode in upon itself with GREATER weight than socialism.

YES, you gambled on NOT overgeneralizing and lost.

The TRUTH is, if we look even briefly at our American history, we will see quite a few interesting things.
WE ARE WHERE WE ARE NOW AS A SIMPLE MATTER OF NATURAL HUMAN EVOLUTION.
FYI, even before we became a Nation, there was turmoil and contention. YOU make it sound like ALL of "We the People " have been on the same page all this time and the EXACT OPPOSITE is TRUE. Religious groups came to avoid persecution,; Companies and business groups came to explore the resources and make money; Land speculators came for the same reason; Regular folks came out of desperation, because staying where they were was sure death; Gamblers, shysters, and criminals came for their opportunities as well. IN FACT, GA. was a Penal colony , for the Colonies. AT the time of the Constitution, there were no less than 6 political parties, ALL wanting something different, for the Country and there has been contention ever since, so NO , we are NOT a society in total agreement, in just about anything,and we never have been. AND I TOTALLY disagree that socialism or Constitutional Republicanism ( you saying that leads me to believe that you may be Libertarian, like that will EVER be viable idea- PFFT!) led us to the COLD WAR. .THAT is false! It was the the REALITY that Russia and China wants ( yes , still today) to expand Communism world wide and THAT is exactly opposite of American values. If you remember, in 1964, Russia was in Cuba. 90 miles off our coast, with missiles. THAT’S A REAL THREAT, NOT AN IDEOLOGY. The OTHER reality is the UN, THAT HAS GOTTEN US INTO BAD THINGS that WE HAD NO BUSINESS GETTING INTO MORE THAN AID, WAS KOREA AND VIET Nam , WHERE COMMUNIST CHINA WAS TRYING TO FORCEFULLY EXPAND COMMUNISM. Again, REALITY, NOT ideology. I was there and I am convinced that Socialists infiltrated colleges across the Country and incited protests and riots against Viet Nam, etc. AT 13, (1972) I read Karl Marx’s Manifesto ( SUN TZU, know thy enemy) and he said that they will win by infiltrating us and bring us down from within and THAT has been happening in my lifetime! Right now, Socialists are in Congress. Who would have EVER thunk it? MY grand parents would NEVER imagined such a thing, so in TWO generations, we have Socialists in US Congress. THAT is REAL, NOT Ideology. BTW Constitutional Democratic-Republicanism is the BEST thing that has happened to Humanity, in it’s ENTIRE history! YOU would do well to study history more. I’ve spent my life doing that.

BTW, back in the day , ALL the things on the Libertarian platform were in place, RIGHT HERE IN THE USA, but the attitude was different: IF it wasn’t illegal (and even if it was), it was OK to do: ALL drugs were not illegal, Prostitution was not illegal(, govt was minimal (as folks expanded out West), the borders were wide open, everyone pretty much depended upon themselves for security and safety. MANY PERISHED, so naturally people began to band together for safety and security.Wagon Trains and small towns sprang up. That was better. However, along with virtue, vices came along as well, especially in the mining towns. The vices brought down more than one town and group of people. AS most folks know the first gun ban laws ( in a mostly lawless environment) came about out West, with Wyatt Earp and the “Cowboys”. “NO guns in the city Limits” was the law. PERIOD. ZERO tolerance. BUT, the MAIN point is, LAWS came about as a RESULT OF THE THOSE THINGS BEING WIDELY AVAILABLE AND NOT ILLEGAL. DRUGS ALMOST WIPED OUT AMERICAN SOCIETY. JUDGES, AND DOCTORS AND COPS AND TEACHERS WERE HOOKED BADLY ON DRUGS. OD were rampant. It was a pandemic!The infant mortality rate was through the roof and multitudes of babies were born addicted to drugs. Finally “We the People” ( mostly women and church groups) said enough is enough and they made drugs illegal. THAT is why it is SO hard to get ANY recreational drug to be legal, to this day!. Suffice it to say, there’s a reason for everything we do now a days: Seat belt laws, cross walk laws, ETC. Most all laws come from people doing stupid things and dying.

The REALITY is, ONLY a small group of People want the govt to take care of them ( but that number has been growing to almost half. IN FACT, When Liberals win the Pendulum swings that way and then THAT leads to the pendulum to swing back the OTHER way). I CALL THAT BALANCE. YOU AMY CALL IT SOMETHING ELSE, I DON’T CARE, cause IMO, you are out of touch with reality or at least GREATLY misinformed out of ignorance of history. AT least, I’d like to think that, I’d HATE to think that you are aware of our history and simply are hell bent in bringing us down, too.
“Hence, I agree with you, that to refer to the 2A while addressing them speaks past their belief or avenue toward safety. “You care more about protecting your gun than you do about our safety!””

Well that’s just TOTALLY ridiculous! Anyone who says that is completely stupid! Think about it, how can we think MORE about our guns than safety, if the GUN is FOR our safety? The TRUTH is, we thught about safety FIRST: and then we thought, OK, the Police takes minutes , when seconds count, AND they testified to Congress that it is NOT their responsibility to "Protect and serve " anymore. Their job is to investigate crimes and apprehend criminals, so that’s no good, Then, water balloons won’t work, sling shots wont stop a hardened felon; Then we thought about pitch forks and Viking swords ( MY ancestors) but that is SO “yesteryear”. NOPE, guns seem to fit the bill nicely. Especially semi-auto pistols and AR, with lights and optics and High capacity mags ands 100 round drums and Semi -auto SG, and high capacity mags and many, many bullets. BUT first and foremost, it’s been about SAFETY, for sure… IN the state of Florida , where I was born and raised and NOW live, We have the right to defend our Castle and ourselves , ANYwhere we normally go, as if at home. We have the right to use lethal force against ANY forceable felony and run right through riots, as if through tall grass. BTW, we’ve been able to shoot looters on sight, during a hurricane and state of emergency, for decades now… We have ZERO tolerance for criminals and socialists/communists inciters of riots and mayhem, like BLM and antifa, et al…WE ARE NOT SEATTLE AND WE ARE NOT PORTLAND NOR ATLANTA NOR CHICAGO NOR MINNEAPOLIS NOR ANYWHERE ELSE WHERE THOSE PUNKS CAN SET UP SHOP AND BURN BUILDINGS AND RAPE AND KILL AND THE LOCAL GOVT TELLS THE COPS TO “:STAND DOWN”. NOT IN FLORIDA!!!

Lastly, I don’t NEED to read about the 2A,. I know EXACTLY hwy it’s written the way it is and what it means. FYI, the SHAY REBELLION is why it’s written like it is. Under the Articles of Confederation, the Central govt and the state of Mass were helpless to deal with the rebellion. They neither had the power to raise a militia to deal with the rebellion. Shay and his small army were able to ride around the state and take over court houses and return the land back to the vets. They wee on their way to Springfield to the Federal Armory to take it over, when a rich businessman in Boston raised a militia with his own money and they went and stopped them. THAT is why the 2A is worded the way it is. PERIOD. BUT NONE of that matters, the first two clauses are DEPENDENT clauses and means NOTHING. THAT was the reason then, NOW it’s for self defense and in case of tyranny. PERIOD The INDEPENDENT clause is the heart and soul of the`2A, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. PERIOD.