Let's say Obama appoints a liberal Supreme Court Justice and somehow they are confirmed. And then let's say they rule that the 2nd Amendment is not meant for private citizens. How would they enforce that? I'm not afraid to die or go to jail, but I have a wife and two small children. Call me a coward or whatever, but I'm not ready to leave them alone over a material possession. I'm not saying I'd give them all up, but I'm not willing to die for them either. What say you guys?
I also have a wife and 3 small children. I'm not about to leave them or my household defenseless against any potential violent criminal threat. It's not about the material possession of firearms. Don't fall into that dialogue. It is set up for you to lose.
At any rate, I don't think a ruling like that would set well with a great many state govts. There would be significant pushback up to and including secession. (At least one would hope so). The second amendment has been widely regarded as an individual right amongst the people since the nation was founded.
At any rate, I don't think a ruling like that would set well with a great many state govts. There would be significant pushback up to and including secession. (At least one would hope so). The second amendment has been widely regarded as an individual right amongst the people since the nation was founded.
Goes both ways...sure I dont want to leave my family behind. But also dont want to set the example to my children that rolling over belly up to whatever the govt decides is the right thing to do.
In the words of my grandpa "You're growing up in a different world than i did cowboy. Dont let them take your guns. If they do...they can tell you to suck their d*ck and youll have to do it because they have them and you dont."
Is it an instant death wish? Military weaponry vs civilian is so lopsided. What % of the military will blindly follow orders like a dog and fire upon citizens standing up for their rights? How many big talkers are actually prepared? Im certainly not and yet still much better off than the vast majority of my family and friends. When the time comes im afraid their will be a lot fewer citizens reaching for their firearms to fight than we would like to believe.
In the words of my grandpa "You're growing up in a different world than i did cowboy. Dont let them take your guns. If they do...they can tell you to suck their d*ck and youll have to do it because they have them and you dont."
Is it an instant death wish? Military weaponry vs civilian is so lopsided. What % of the military will blindly follow orders like a dog and fire upon citizens standing up for their rights? How many big talkers are actually prepared? Im certainly not and yet still much better off than the vast majority of my family and friends. When the time comes im afraid their will be a lot fewer citizens reaching for their firearms to fight than we would like to believe.
Not worried about it. I have other things that really could happen to worry about. Like, will I need new screws for the replacement wood stock I have on order?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
the Senate must refuse to confirm any appointment....the R's gained a majority in the house and refused to stand up to the o - saying "we need a majority in the Senate as well" - they got that and refused to stand up to the o.....if they cave on this as well then nothing short of insurrection will do.....we live in dangerous times....
If anything like that happens, it will be on the state or local level, as we are a long way from there being enough anti votes in the national legislature to even pass expanded background checks or magazine capacity bans, much less outright confiscation. Even in the states, I think confiscation will not be the route that they take (outside of crazy places like San Fran, where they just passed a law requiring everyone in the city to get rid of any "hi cap" mags in their possession). In any case, it won't be happening in Oklahoma any time soon. The question for most of us will be do we help in other states that are facing a more serious situation?
In New York, Connecticut, and Oregon, there is mass disobedience of their new laws, in some cases quite publicly, and there hasn't been hardly any prosecution of the laws. This means the enforcement arms of the State are afraid. This is good -- it means the old 2A still has some of its deterrent effect. Sooner or later though, someone somewhere will call our bluff, and will have to be reminded why they need to be afraid.
You say:
I say the pertinent question isn't whether I'm willing to die for the RKBA... it's whether any son of a ***** in this country is willing to die trying to deny it to me. It would behoove some folks to remember what John Milton wrote about how even the weakest among our species is capable of killing the strongest, and everyone is vulnerable sometime, somewhere.
In New York, Connecticut, and Oregon, there is mass disobedience of their new laws, in some cases quite publicly, and there hasn't been hardly any prosecution of the laws. This means the enforcement arms of the State are afraid. This is good -- it means the old 2A still has some of its deterrent effect. Sooner or later though, someone somewhere will call our bluff, and will have to be reminded why they need to be afraid.
You say:
I say the pertinent question isn't whether I'm willing to die for the RKBA... it's whether any son of a ***** in this country is willing to die trying to deny it to me. It would behoove some folks to remember what John Milton wrote about how even the weakest among our species is capable of killing the strongest, and everyone is vulnerable sometime, somewhere.
Si. No comprende ingles. Muy bueno Henschman.
The Supreme Court has already ruled that the 2nd is an individual right. Any realignment of that would have to come from a new case being heard. I don't think there are any in the pipeline right now.
Similar threads
