|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
The origins of the Second Amendment
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The idea that people can overthrow a tyrannical government may be admirable in theory, perhaps, but the US does not have a good record of accepting the theory when applied against Washington. The US was not happy when the Confederate States tried to put this idea into practice in 1861; nor when the Black Panthers advocated it in the 1960s; nor even when angry farmers in Pennsylvania tried it in the Whiskey Rebellion in the 1790s.
The core problem, in practice, is who speaks for the people?
Besides the collective right to keep and bear arms, the Second Amendment was probably also designed to defend the individual’s right to bear arms. |
| Comment by:
MarkHamTownsend
(11/18/2017)
|
The right ISN'T COLLECTIVE, it is an unalienable INDIVIDUAL right.
Revolution does not come with a built in gaurantee of success. Our Revolutionary War could have been lost, with Washington, Franklin, Revere, et al, either dead or POWs. There were several points during the war the matter could have gone to the Brits.
Wanna gauran-damn- tee? Buy a toaster oven.
But the right remains.
YOU HAVE TO WIN THE WAR!!! |
|
|
