The Second Amendment

Shane ,I am pleased that we are an armed society,,several HUGE mass shootings ,SAND CREEK MASSACRE, CLEAR LAKE MASSACRE,WOUNDED KNEE,WACO,,,all commited the US government.

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Art. 4 of the Kansas Bill of Rights use different words and have slightly different coverage. The Kansas Art 4 was amended and ratified by vote of the public in 2010
The U.S. Bill of Rights was written in 1789. It has two clauses and one comma as adopted. In 1959 when Alaska and Hawaii became States they copied the Second Amendment exactly with one comma.
In 1789 the considered adding the words FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE as a limitation on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. That was rejected by vote in the Senate in September 1789. The Supreme Court got it correctly in the HELLER case.
The ability of the people to form a militia, not a standing select or organized militia is what has to be protected. In 1939 the Supreme Court said speaking of the militia members, "appear bearing their private arms" of modern kind in service. MILLER 1939.
As has been said already, gun mass murders always happen in so-called gun free zones. This may be because the killers avoid places where they expect to be opposed by armed victims or just that the killers die before they can kill dozens or hundreds.

Go ahead and run on back to your "safe space" guy, and watch out for those who disagree with they're "micro aggression's".

Here ya go champ, right in the news section of the gazette, i will just go ahead and paste it for you since your probably to lazy to do any real research that dosnt fit your narrative.SHAWNEE, Kan. (AP) — Two people were critically injured and a good Samaritan killed a suspect during a confrontation in the parking lot of a suburban Kansas City Wal-Mart.

Police said the incident Sunday afternoon in Shawnee began when two suspects hit a woman in the head from behind as she was putting her child in her car.

Shawnee police Maj. Dan Tennis says a person in the parking lot who tried to help was shot several times. Another good Samaritan then shot one of the suspects, who died at the scene.

The second suspect fled but was caught near the store.

The female victim and the other person who was shot were both hospitalized in critical condition.

Tennis said a motive for the initial attack on the woman is not yet clear.

In other gazette news a armed patron stop's a armed madman from beating a women and child, and shooting one other bystander(could have been more) in a walmart parking lot in Shawnee.

Yet another disingenuous rationalization.

First, the Second Amendment, as submitted to the states, ratified by the states, verified and posted by Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, had only one comma. There are two clauses, not four, and generically the sentence says "Because of THAT, we are guaranteeing THIS." Note that the first clause announces the reason for enumerating the guarantee; it is not a condition upon which the right exists. The right is assumed to exist already, it is declared as the property of the people, and the government is succinctly foreclosed from interfering with it.

The author labors arduously over immaterial minutia. None of what he writes has anything to do with the existence of a fundamental right of the people. Rights need no rationalization; they exist as our birthright, they are self-evident, and they are unalienable. The right doesn't exist because of the Second Amendment, the Second Amendment exists because of the right.

Yet folks like this gentleman persist in trying to defeat the invincible.

I wouldn't be in some of America's major cities without one, Chicago,New Orleans and Baltimore come to mind. Unfortunately i lost all my gun's in a boating accident on the Cottonwood river so they are gone forever (cough).

Interesting how rabid and defensive the responses are. Frightening!!!

You want to infer the lie that all shootings are mass shootings, then we see where all these MASS SHOOTINGS WERE PREVENTED!

Amazing how armed self defense by law abiding gun owners saves tens of thousands of lives a year from injury and death eh...

http://www.wkyc.com/.../witness-family-dollar.../290079852
http://www.breitbart.com/.../da-15-yr-old-justified.../
http://www.wndu.com/.../Victim-shoots-suspects-during...
http://www.clarionledger.com/.../jackson-teen.../87396190/
http://www.azfamily.com/.../was-deadly-shooting-outside...
http://www.mrctv.org/.../gun-owning-pokemon-go-player...
http://www.mysanantonio.com/.../Elderly-homeowner-foils...
http://bearingarms.com/.../armed-robbers-outnumber.../
http://newschannel9.com/.../police-sister-used-self...
http://www.walb.com/.../armed-robbery-kidnapping-victim...

moderation = censorship

Mental health as a weapon against the people is communist in origin..

Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

Deceptive Transformation: The Truth of Soviet Influence in America and Gun Control..
The idea of using mental health as a weapon against the people is communist in origin, and the social sciences, or the studying of human behavior has its roots in early twentieth century Russia when Ivan Pavlov developed his "classical conditioning" theories. In fact, Pavlov was disturbed that Vladimir Lenin would use these conditioning methods against the people in order to get them to accept communism. Since that time the social sciences have been used as a means of maintaining control over populations and getting them to accept their own down fall. This is happening today in the United States as our universities and public schools have long ago adopted educational techniques based on the social sciences and classical conditioning methods. Subjects like White Privilege and Multiculturalism are used to demoralize our population, create a guilt consciousness and silence usinto accepting a new agenda based on the idea that we have been unfair, and our lifestyles are oppressive, and offensive to others. This agenda dates back to the early twentieth century; however, it saw some of its most major advances in the mid 1900's after the U.N. was created in 1945. While many people today view the Democrat Party as being made mostly of communists or socialists; the sad truth is that the Republican Party is just as responsible for what we are seeing in education and culture in the United States today.

freedom outpost

There are over 370 "mental disorders" listed in the latest version of the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.) The list includes "Tobacco Addiction Disorder" among other equally mundane and ridiculous so-called "mental illnesses."

If the DSM is the standard by which politicians wishes to remove our rights to own guns, then I'd guess 90% of the American people could probably be classified with a mental disorder of one kind or another.

BEWARE, BEWARE

Re: “it might be appropriate to have a civil discussion about the language and context of the Second Amendment.”

Try having a fact based, cordial discussion on the Moms Demand Action or Everytown for Gun Safety Facebook pages and you will be banned and your posts will be deleted. The bottom line is these people are driven by emotions and are not interested in a discussion, they just want to ban all guns from private ownership. In contrast, the NRA’s Facebook page will tolerate an anti-gun discussion but you better be prepared with facts.

Re: “it is time for stricter regulations concerning the purchase and sale of firearms”

No - it’s time to start enforcing the laws already on the books. You could start by quit allowing people who use a gun illegally to plea bargain away the illegal firearms offense. The feds are one of the worst offenders. Straw purchases and lying on the 4473 form you have to fill out for a background check to purchase a firearm is a felony punishable by 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine - yet in 2010 76142 people failed the background check, 4732 were deemed worthy of prosecution and only 62 were prosecuted. Another thing you could do since most of the gun homicides are caused by gangs or repeat offenders is to advocate for a law that would impose a mandatory death sentence on any recidivist with a violent criminal history that uses a firearm to commit a crime regardless of childhood upbringing, economic impoverishment, mental health, age, IQ or ethnicity.

Re: “Allowing anyone the ability to own automatic or semi-automatic weapons that can hold 12 to 36 rounds per magazine seems to go too far.”

The guns are not the problem. The first semi-automatic handgun was invented in the late 1800’s and the most popular version went into production in 1911. It is also noted the so-called evil “assault rifles” with standard capacity 30 round magazines are not new technology. A harbinger was invented in 1890 and the current versions evolved and were mass produced in the late 1940’s and have always been available to the public (note the “47” in AK-47 stands for 1947, the year the firearm went into production). As a matter of fact fully automatic versions (i.e. machine guns), which are true military grade rifles, were readily available to the general public until 1986 and background checks on firearm transfers weren’t required until 1994 - yet nobody talks about mass shootings with any version (semi-automatic or automatic) of these guns during the 40’s, 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s so it’s a relatively new phenomenon and logic would indicate it’s being caused by something else.

Note also that the worst mass killing in a US school occurred on May 18, 1927 in the Bath schoolhouse in Michigan where the killer used dynamite. And rather than immediately rush in an emotional tizzy to pass new laws to restrict the sale of dynamite, cooler heads prevailed and it took 43 years until October 15, 1970 when the law was changed. Up until that date anyone over 21 could walk into a hardware store or farm coop and buy dynamite and blasting caps

Re: “No matter how many mass-shootings happen in America”

According to the CDC in 2013 there were about 11208 people murdered by firearms in the US which works out to about 31 people per day. These are the “word doctored” figures the news media and anti-gun folks like to publicize because people relate to the magnitude of those numbers and it sounds like a lot of people until you realize this is out of a population of 319 million Americans. In that context, it works out to about 1 person out of every 28,000 people being murdered by a firearm. Dwell on the magnitude of your individual significance next time you are in a stadium with 28,000 people. To me, 1 in 28,000 is an acceptable cost to help ensure the security of a free state and the right to own a firearm that has harmed no one. It is also estimated there are 109 million gun owners in the US which means on any given day 108,999,969 gun owners didn’t kill anyone yet because the news media magnifies these relatively isolated and infrequent events to the level of an epidemic, the anti-gun folks answer is to take the guns away from people who harmed no one. The number of homicides with a firearm will never be zero. So given the fact that deranged individuals and murderers are an intrinsic part of the human race and we currently live in a free society, what number of illegal firearm homicides would ever be acceptable to you to the point you would say “we don’t need any more restrictions on the private ownership of firearms”?

Re: “Why not allow mentally-stable adults the ability to purchase and own hunting rifles and shotguns?”

The Second Amendment is not about hunting, home defense, or target shooting. As I’ve stated elsewhere, it’s about preventing or deterring a “misconstruction or abuse” of government powers so the “people” can ensure the “security of a free state”.

Re: “it is time for stricter regulations ”.

In 1934, 1938, 1968, 1986, 1988, 1990, 1993 and 1994 I suspect similar arguments were made for “stricter regulations” when more restrictive federal gun laws were passed. Since all of the regulations derived from these laws are apparently not enough, maybe you can understand the reluctance of gun owners to entertain the idea of quietly accepting the any more. The problem is the real agenda of the people leading the charge for more gun control is to ban all guns except for the government and governments (unlike individuals) have the track record for killing people that don’t agree with them. This is really just about using relatively infrequent, isolated incidents of gun crimes to whip lawmakers into an emotional frenzy to goad them into quickly advancing the agenda of gun control irrespective of any facts in more incremental “progressive” steps in order to set a new baseline and move the goal posts to the point where an unscrupulous government would have the option to do what ever they please.

Re: “the Second Amendment”.

The purpose of the Second Amendment is clearly stated in the preamble to the Bill of Rights - specifically “The convention of a number of states having at the time of their adopting of the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse, of its powers that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added”. Note that when the Second Amendment was written, every weapon was a weapon of war, there were no restrictions on the private ownership of weapons and the militia was equally matched with the regulars. After all, if they weren’t equally matched, it would be pretty hard to deter or prevent a “misconstruction or abuse, of the government’s powers” - so in reality, the citizen militia of today should have the same firearms as the current US military. Unfortunately we are no longer equally matched because we have let our gun rights be eroded by buying into this notion if we just compromise to accommodate the people who - for whatever reason - don’t like guns they will quit trying to take away our gun rights. History has shown that no matter how much we compromise, it’s never enough so we need to stop compromising.

Re: “During the 1700s, rifles could only be shot about three times a minute by a skilled rifleman”

Not true. There were harbingers of modern firearms in the 1700’s - to name a few; the 1718 Puckle gun, the 1757 Ferguson Rifle, and the 1781 Giordinni Rifle.that was carried by the Lewis and Clarke expedition commissioned by President Thomas Jefferson who was a supporter of the Bill of Rights

Re: “A well regulated Militia”

In the 1700’s when the Second Amendment was written, well regulated didn’t mean government control - it meant “to make regular” or “be in good working order” which in today’s military parlance is often referred to as maintaining good order and discipline. To put it another way - if you have a “well regulated” bowel movement, does that mean the government controls it? See http://constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm

Re: “In America today, we do not have a militia “

According to current US law, there are 2 types of militias - organized and unorganized. The National Guard is part of the organized militia and everyone who is not in the organized militia is in the unorganized militia - see 10 USC 311 at http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311

Do we have a militia? Absolutely. Such is enshrined in federal law: 10 USC Section 301.

Did weapons exist other than muskets at the time the Constitution was ratified, which were held by "the People"? Absolutely. Privateers had naval ships and cannon. History shows that private citizens often had weapons more capable than the soldiers of the standing armies. A flintlock rifle was effective at distance because of accuracy over a smoothbore musket, allowing for those so armed to engage at an advantage., which is one reason the colonials won over the British.

Additionally, the placement of the 2nd Amendment, in the Bill of Rights, means that it applies to individual citizens. The prefatory clause lists only one purpose for the Right. You will find others set out in State Constitutions that pre-dated the US Constitution and Bill of Rights, including defense of that State, defense of self, and of others.

Closing your eyes to what you choose not to see doesn't make those facts disappear, it only shows that you are the mental equivalent of the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal.