Why liberals should love the 2nd Amendment

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Ghost of Cutten, Sep 6, 2010.

  1. If my guns aren't in my home, then I can't protect myself or my family, can I? Even though we live in what most people would call an "upscale" area, gang activity is on the increase and gang-related crimes are now occuring on our streets, especially at night as gangs become more brazen. Less than a year ago an elderly couple was taken hostage during a break-in and the man was killed. This happened less than six blocks from our house.

    It's unfortunate that some parents are irresponsible with their guns, but many parents are also irresponsible with children in cars, around swimming pools, etc. resulting in thousands of deaths each year. I recently saw an article about a child that fell out of an open window and died. What next? Do we ban windows? Or do we allow windows, but make it illegal to open them? The problem is irresponsible parents, not cars, pools, windows or guns.

    My wife and I have two children. At our home we have guns, cars, a swimming pool and windows that open. It's our responsibility to make sure that our children are safe.

    #21     Sep 6, 2010
  2. Lucrum


    (Year 2000 numbers)
    Over 2000 children die from abuse of parents and care givers every year. Apparently parents don't belong in the home either.

    Over 1000 children die from drowning every year, obviously pools don't belong in or near homes.

    Roughly 2000 children die from fire each year. Obviously matches, lighters and space heaters don't belong in homes.

    "Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of unintentional deaths to children. In the United States in 2000, 6,466 children were killed in motor vehicle crashes."
    Despite the strict laws already on the books.

    And you're worried about 700 deaths from firearms?
    You may want to rethink your priorities.
    #22     Sep 6, 2010
  3. 377OHMS


    Your dad is an idiot for not locking his guns up with kids around and you grew up to be a liberal asshole. How about I worry about my house and you worry about your own fucking house.
    #23     Sep 6, 2010
  4. When I see you guys crossing over to help out on the First Amendment (the ground-zero mosque being case number one; only Ron Paul, as usual, has shown any courage on this question) I'll consider crossing over to help out on the Second, which is after all, a secondary priority, considering the order in the Bill of Rights, eh?
    Until then, fuck off.
    #24     Sep 6, 2010
  5. I'm over. I believe the Muslim's have a constitutionally protected right to build their mosque two blocks from ground zero. I think it's a bad idea to build it there because it causes additional suffering to people who have already suffered greatly, but their right to do it is unquestionable to me. I put it in the same category as the church that's going to burn Korans on September 11th. I think they have every right to do it as a matter of freedom of expression, but I think it's a bad idea to stereotype and intentionally insult an entire group of people because of their religion.

    Almost all my shooting buddies feel exactly the same way I do. Now, how about you hop in and help protect my constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms?

    #25     Sep 6, 2010
  6. Bearmountain...if you allow the actions of irresponsible people or criminals to determine which rights that responsible and law abiding citizens have then eventually you will have willing accepted authoritarian rule. Would you allow the internet to be shut down in order to protect children from child predators? I am a responsible gun owner without a criminal record or intent, but under your thinking I cannot have a gun in my home for self defense...even though I do not have children? That right is denied me because of the actions of others? Take a moment, seriously, and think about where policies like that lead.
    #26     Sep 6, 2010
  7. Quite honestly, prior to joining this place I sounded just like that guy on the Daily Kos. But seeing the drooling idiocy down here in P&R, which occasionally gets displayed up in the Economics forum, combined with my real-life encounters with flesh&blood conservatives, has seriously put me off.
    Some amazing number thinks Obama wasn't born here; some other amazing number thinks he's a Moslem; the list goes on and on.
    Liberty to a typical right-winger consists of two things: the right to bear arms, and the right to make money while paying no taxes on any of it. If you don't believe me, just look around here on P&R, and tell me I'm wrong.
    I know, and can tell you exactly where it's laid out in the Federalist Papers, why that amendment is in there, and what the Founders defined as a militia, so I know exactly what that writer is talking about.
    I also know that right-wingers get exercised all the time when the ACLU attempts to hold back the constant attempts on the part of the government to infringe some freedom or other, and then turn around and yell about government intrusion as soon as it applies to firearms or explosives.
    If all your buddies really do feel that way about the mosque, by the way, why are the right-wing politicians almost universally arguing so hard against it? They must be seeing something in their constituency. What could that be?
    #27     Sep 6, 2010
  8. I don't know of a single person (conservative or otherwise) who's arguing against the mosque on constitutional grounds. I know many people who think it's a bad idea because of the pain it causes. Those are two very different things.

    #28     Sep 6, 2010
  9. 80 Million gun owners is a very very formidable check on tyranny...do not kid yourself. I know that the govt has JDAMs and armored forces and attack helicopters...etc, but that is not enough against the people as a whole. I am not talking about 2000 militia men...I mean the american people as a whole. There just are not enough soldiers sailors and marines to face off against and hold sooo many armed citizens. Take a look at Iraq and Afghanistan. Even if the govt used massive amounts of airpower they would rule over rubble.

    The second amendment is not meant as a means of people attacking the govt, it is meant as an ultimate check against the govt even attempting to rule the american people by force. The cost would be sooo high and the damage so extensive, that it would just be too impractical to even attempt such a foolish thing. This is the same sort of logic that kept the USA and the USSR from attacking each other and their close allies for 50 years. We all lived under MADD and although no one wants to admit it...it did prevent World War III.
    #29     Sep 6, 2010
  10. The ACLU argued for the right of the Nazis to march through a Jewish neighborhood, regardless of the pain that might cause.
    Liberty isn't something you get to divide up, and it's no one's business but NYC's and the folks building it where that mosque goes.
    Like I said, when I see you guys realizing this kind of thing, I'll speak up. Not before then.
    #30     Sep 6, 2010