12 thoughts on “Here are three lies Democrats tell to pedal gun control, and how to debunk them.”
The right to bear arms is a corollary of the right to self defense which is itself a corollary of the right to life. OK, so what is a right?
The 2nd Amendment is there to insure that citizens have equal power to the government for self defense.
Yes. BTW: Will you post the definition of a right?
A right is something you have as long as you are able to defend it.
Thank you for trying but that doesn’t sound like much of a definition to me.
(Just because I can’t defend myself doesn’t mean I don’t have rights, like a right to my life. Further, it is those who are weak and vulnerable that bullies & tyrants prey on. Are they violating the rights of the weak and vulnerable or do the weak and vulnerable have no rights?)
No, the Second Amendment clearly states what its purpose is. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,” The Second Amendment is clearly defined to allow for the defense of the state, not a defense from the state.
http://www.guncite.com/index.html
The second is an individual Right that can be (but is not dependent on that use) used for a collective purpose. What do the people do if the town, county, state they live in become tyrannical and the federal does nothing? It’s self defense in a graduating scale upward.
I don’t understand your comment about it being a graduating scale upward. Upward to what? Upward from what? I agree that it is obviously an individual right. What individuals? The founding fathers didn’t even want non-land owning men voting let alone women or slaves. Does that mean that non-land owning men and women are protected by the Constitution and it’s amendments? They were not allowed to vote or have a say in the government prior to several reinterpretations of the Constitution (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_voting_rights_in_the_United_States). It seems to me that you are stating that you believe that towns, counties, and states have the individual rights to arm themselves. Do you believe that abstract concepts are people with the rights of individuals and that these constructs (government bodies) should be able to arm themselves? I for one do not believe this to be the case. I believe that standing armies controlled by government bodies are bad for democracy. Thomas Jefferson warned about the dangers of standing armies (http://thomasjeffersonleadership.com/blog/thomas-jefferson-on-the-danger-of-a-standing-army/).
Wrong
Sure, I am. I’m only quoting from the source material, so I am therefore wrong.
I consistently get the feeling that English is not IWB’s first language.
hmm. maybe if yalls PEDAL fast enough then yalls might realize that there is really no need to debunk anyone regarding anything. want to keep guns? then keep them – is that really anyone else’s business?
The right to bear arms is a corollary of the right to self defense which is itself a corollary of the right to life. OK, so what is a right?
The 2nd Amendment is there to insure that citizens have equal power to the government for self defense.
Yes. BTW: Will you post the definition of a right?
A right is something you have as long as you are able to defend it.
Thank you for trying but that doesn’t sound like much of a definition to me.
(Just because I can’t defend myself doesn’t mean I don’t have rights, like a right to my life. Further, it is those who are weak and vulnerable that bullies & tyrants prey on. Are they violating the rights of the weak and vulnerable or do the weak and vulnerable have no rights?)
No, the Second Amendment clearly states what its purpose is. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,” The Second Amendment is clearly defined to allow for the defense of the state, not a defense from the state.
http://www.guncite.com/index.html
The second is an individual Right that can be (but is not dependent on that use) used for a collective purpose. What do the people do if the town, county, state they live in become tyrannical and the federal does nothing? It’s self defense in a graduating scale upward.
I don’t understand your comment about it being a graduating scale upward. Upward to what? Upward from what? I agree that it is obviously an individual right. What individuals? The founding fathers didn’t even want non-land owning men voting let alone women or slaves. Does that mean that non-land owning men and women are protected by the Constitution and it’s amendments? They were not allowed to vote or have a say in the government prior to several reinterpretations of the Constitution (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_voting_rights_in_the_United_States). It seems to me that you are stating that you believe that towns, counties, and states have the individual rights to arm themselves. Do you believe that abstract concepts are people with the rights of individuals and that these constructs (government bodies) should be able to arm themselves? I for one do not believe this to be the case. I believe that standing armies controlled by government bodies are bad for democracy. Thomas Jefferson warned about the dangers of standing armies (http://thomasjeffersonleadership.com/blog/thomas-jefferson-on-the-danger-of-a-standing-army/).
Wrong
Sure, I am. I’m only quoting from the source material, so I am therefore wrong.
I consistently get the feeling that English is not IWB’s first language.
hmm. maybe if yalls PEDAL fast enough then yalls might realize that there is really no need to debunk anyone regarding anything. want to keep guns? then keep them – is that really anyone else’s business?