2A argument left hates

[OwenP]

I saw a recent post on the argument that ends all arguments on 2A


some argue from the left that the 2A was only for times where gaskets were the gun of choice andno longer apppies to guns of today….yet the same state free speech is meant to adapt beyond the typewriter to any form we see it as today- so you can have it both ways folks! You can't say 1A is meant to adapt to times but 2A rights should not- all in all the 2A should be as strong now as it ever was!

Read More

 

[nvshooter]

You can't say 1A is meant to adapt to times, but 2A rights should not. All-in-all, the 2A should be as strong now as it ever was!

Those who say the First Amendment applies to communication technologies that allow Australians to watch-- on live television-- the results of Olympic competitions in the United States have allowed their politics to corrupt their ability to read simple English when they say the Second Amendment applies only to wheppins with which the Revolutionary War was fought. The men who wrote the Constitution and its attendant Bill of Rights were absolute masters of the English language, with some of The Framers quite able in other languages. James Madison was right there, in the thick of the writing of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Madison was able to speak and to read Greek, Latin, Italian and French. With such astounding ability in languages, we can be sure that there is nothing vague, ambiguous, convoluted nor less than specific in the verbiage of the Second Amendment. Only liberals read things in it that aren't there. Only liberals fail to read things in it that are there.

It's my argument that the Second Amendment is God's promise to me that I do not have to stand there and be murdered by a violent criminal-- nor by a criminal government. It is my birthRIGHT to defend my life, the lives of my family members, my property, my home and my nation. If the force of arms is necessary for me to prosecute such defenses, then so shall it be. The Second Amendment provides for the American People to own and to use firearms for all purposes moral and just. The Framers would be aghast to see that their political descendants have ideas that to reduce "gun violence," Americans who do not commit violent crimes with firearms must be disarmed because there are criminals who do commit violent crimes with firearms. The Framers believed in law & order: Punishment is to be swift and sure. Today's libturds use sympathy and emotion to mitigate the severity of the violations perpetrated by the particular thug in custody, and we have dain-bramaged juries who fall for such cretinous crapola.