HOME | DD
Cheatcodechamp — the second amendment
Published: 2011-09-24 02:34:38 +0000 UTC; Views: 1670; Favourites: 26; Downloads: 23
Redirect to original
Description
Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to be armed.Related content
Comments: 30
I dono about everyone else but, to me. It seems like things were alot harder but, simpler back in those times. I dono it's my opinion, and how I see it I guess.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Certain things dont change, like government corruption, and the British government back then used its power to keep people on their knees. Despite this many people supported the government and king because they felt (to a point of course) that the government would take care of them, care that the american colonies never received despite them being a part of the British empire.
Anyway, more to my point, while i am more of a peace loving guy, i believe full heatedly that should the need arise (from being robbed to complete government corruption and line-crossing) that people have the right to defend whats theirs, and nomatter the time you live in, the right to defend yourself being one of them.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I agree with you. You shouldn't be punished for the natural instinct to defend yourself, and what's yours.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The second amendment also got a fair number of American presidents killed.
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
Mmm, no it's still illegal to shoot the president.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The reason why the presidents gave us the second amendment was so that if the government became extremely corrupt, we could overthrow them.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
....Pfthahahahaha.
You didn't just say that, mate.
You kiiiinda missed 'that' oppurtunity, by a few bloody years.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
as well as those who pulled the trigger,
Gun rights are there to give the people power, but its up to the people to use it right.
Switzerland has the lowest gun crime rate, and every household has a gun in there home
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Switzerland is also not one of the biggest countries in the world.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Geographic or population size have nothing to do with percentages. The key word here is "rate," meaning that of the crimes committed in Switzerland, guns are involved in very few of them. It also means that the ratio of gun crime victims to ordinary citizens with boring lives is very low compared to other nations.
If the statement was, "Switzerland has the fewest incidents of gun crime in the world," your argument about Switzerland's size would be legitimate.
According to Wikipedia, for every 250,000 residents there is only one gun crime committed per year. Compared to three crimes for every 100,000 residents in the US, where many places restrict the Second Amendment.
Also worth noting, how come you never hear of a tragic mass shooting at a gun show or firing range?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
good point. I do hear of tragic mass shootings though.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
but there one of the safest.
those with the guns are the ones with the power, that's why we call the cops when we need help. and i would prefer to not let the government have all the power. thats how the Nazi's took over there own country
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
They took over because Hitler was respected.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Part true, First their party took over, then over the course of several years made small changes to their ways of life while removing or discrediting anybody who would stand up and object to him and what the Nazi's where doing. By removing free though, speech, and even religion, he gave himself great power, but that would have meant nothing if they could rise up, and that was a matter of time. Then, for the safety of the people, Hiter had the tools needed to defend themselves (guns), saying that the government would protect them. The price of the government giving them everything was that the government now controlled everything, and would remove any threats or impurity's with minimal resistance now that everybody was either brainwashed, powerless, or removed though force (jails, camps, and events like the night of the long knifes). Hitler didn't take over overnight, but he did take over by removing guns along the way.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Be that as it may never forget my friend, guns sole purpose are to to be tools used in the act of taking another person's life.
You don't need a gun to protect your so-called freedom.
But i'm not saying it doesn't help.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Then let me ask you something. Do you think Hitler would have been as successful if he never took the peoples guns? And if we dont need guns, what do we need when corruption sinks in?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm not sure, we'd have no way of knowing, but Hitler's greatest weapon was his charm, not his army or his funders.
We need a strong will, unity and conviction.
It might sound cliche, but it doesn't always have to end with the death of someone.
For instance, hopefully this'll hit close to home.
The US apparently killed Bin laden, what did it accomplish in the end?
Not a damn thing, our soldiers are still out there getting butchered, Afghanistan is still being destroyed by it's invaders.
The wheels are still turning, nothing is changing, and let me tell you my friend, there are alot of guns involved.
Trust me, it's not helping.
As for corruption, it's been sinking in for a very long time...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Corruption cant be stooped, almost every nation, country, and empire has had that problem, the question for the US is how we will respond when the line is crossed, and how we will handle it.
Guns have more then just one use, they are tools to kill yes, but they are also tools to defend ones-self from those who misuse power. Hitler sure as hell mis-used his power, and we all know how that went. In this posters case, the British where taxing the colony's while keeping them from growing technology past a certain point, they felt oppressed and we had our-self's a revolution.
In a more modern sense, guns are used to protect civilians from those who dont obey the law, since sadly police cant keep all the peace. Guns like anything else are tools, but a good tool can have several functions.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'd have to say it seems our views on the matter differ.
Where you see a tool, I see a weapon, and a manufacturer who supports war because of it's profit.
No point arguing a different opinion I say.
To each their own.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I agree, i dont want to start a fight here, i use the internet to unwind, not go to war.
For the recorded i do see your point, and agree with it to a point, but i have always believed every thing has more then one use, like warfare or home defense. That being said, i thank you for being civil about this instead of being an ass, its rare to have people actually talk politely online.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
To true brother, too true.
And touche, it is quite a sad realization though.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The use of power is a matter of perspective. I'll neither condone nor condemn anyone for wanting guns, but they're a power and should be looked to responsibly.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
and with that i will agree.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
That's why Canada doesn't have the right to bear arms. Why earned our independence by asking nicely.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
You not independent, your in a fantasy world. last time i checked no canadian was on your money but instead and old hag from england.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Technically, no. However, we are no longer a colony and she has no influence on us save for the ability to appoint a Governor General who's only power is to stop a corrupt bill from being passed. In other words, we are a self governed country whose only tie to the queen is a single representative with virtually no power. The only reason that her picture is on our money is because of tradition.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
That is also why canada has a higher crime rate higher crime rate than the U.S.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0