FARK.com: (7464867) The right to own a firearm was considered by the Framers of the Constitution in 1787 to be equal in importance to the right to speak freely, the right to peaceably assemble and the right to practice religion

If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

		The right to own a firearm was considered by the Framers of the Constitution in 1787 to be equal in importance to the right to speak freely, the right to peaceably assemble and the right to practice religion (americanthinker.com)		27
		More: Obvious, Framers of the Constitution, second amendment, due process clause, target shooting, Constitution of the United States, importance, U.S. Supreme Court, faiths

• • •

1705 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 Dec 2012 at 8:39 AM | Favorite | share:

Share this link:

URL:

http://fark.com/go/7464867

Bookmark:

Article Comments close

Voting Results (Funniest)

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Redisplay/refresh voting results (Smartest or Funniest) or Return to comments

Archived thread

Lansydyr		2012-12-03 08:34:58 AM

8 votes:

/oblig

Arthen		2012-12-03 08:48:07 AM

5 votes:

If you love 1787 so much, why don't you marry it?

whistleridge		2012-12-03 08:52:10 AM

4 votes:

Lansydyr: [thismodernworld.com image 720x672]
/oblig

Well...they're right, in a way. It's true: guns don't kill people, any more than chainsaws, lathes, forklifts, or any other piece of powered equipment kills people. A gun is just a machine. In fact, a machine gun has a lot in common with a lathe.

But the people...Jesus Loving Christ, the people...

What the gun nuts don't seem to understand is, it's not your guns that I'm worried about, asshole. It's you.

Your often-stated belief that Armageddon will happen in your lifetime. Your fervent endorsement of literally unhinged candidates like Palin, Santorum, Rand Paul, and Bachmann. Your honest acceptance of the idea that Barack Obama is the WORST. PRESIDENT. EVAR. Your total disregard for the environment. Your utter lack of understanding of basic financial principles. The way you think you can cut taxes, increase military spending, AND balance the budget - while fighting two wars. Your constant harping on how bad it is that teachers can't lead classroom prayers and Creationism isn't taught in school, while simultaneously complaining that Islam is beginning to pervade government and we're secretly trending towards sharia law. YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT SHARIA IS.

And this isn't about you being 'conservative', either. Reagan was a conservative's conservative. I didn't like him, but I could work for him. George H. W. Bush was a conservative, and while I didn't agree with his fiscal policies I did and do respect the hell out of the man. He's everything a proud public servant should embody. I don't agree with all conservative policies, but I acknowledge there is underlying logic to many of them, and - pay attention, because this is important - I can work with them.

But you...you're ignorant, uneducated, absolutist, utterly unwilling to compromise, and apparently divorced from reality. And no...I don't want you to have a gun. If you honestly think Obama was born in Kenya, the Ryan Budget can work, and war with Iran is inevitable, you aren't safe to trust with a bb gun, much less an assault rifle.

Cythraul		2012-12-03 08:44:37 AM

3 votes:

vpb: Which is why they limited it to state militias. Right.

I'm in a militia. We meet every week to chat about American Idol and the latest Twilight gossip.

homelessdude		2012-12-03 10:10:12 AM

2 votes:

Colonial era ammunition magazine........
farm3.static.flickr.com

Modern day ammunition magazine.......
blogs.courant.com

Approves of modern ammo magazine capacities and archaic laws.................
c498390.r90.cf2.rackcdn.com

Really approves of modern ammo magazine capacities and archaic laws..................
static.guim.co.uk

Really, really approves of modern ammo magazine capacities and archaic laws.................
www.jihadwatch.org

Really, really, really approves of modern ammo magazine capacities and archaic laws.................
timeopinions.files.wordpress.com

Really, really, really, really approves of stuff........but not really sure what or why.....but please sign that check at the bottom........you betcha!
2.bp.blogspot.com

ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha		2012-12-03 08:30:47 AM

2 votes:

The right to own a firearm was considered by the Framers of the Constitution in 1787 to be equal in importance to the right to speak freely, the right to peaceably assemble and the right to practice religion*

*Offer not valid to muslims

whistleridge		2012-12-03 08:30:22 AM

2 votes:

True.

They also thought white people could own black people as chattel, the vote should be restricted solely to white males over the age of 21 who owned property, the loser of a presidential election should become VP, and that black people counted as 3/5 of a person for voting purposes (but said vote would be controlled by the white person who owned them).

The Founders weren't saints, and the Constitution isn't the Bible. They were greedy hypocritical farkups who managed to achieve some amazing things in spite of those imperfections, and the Constitution is a living document that has been required to change with the times.

So grow up, and accept that some regulation of your overpriced penis-extending toys may happen. And if your preacher doesn't stop politicking from the pulpit, your church may lose its tax-exempt status too. Wah.

/ why do I even bother posting in these stupid threads

TNel		2012-12-03 12:31:55 PM

1 votes:

Anyone else scroll through this looking for funny pictures?

GanjSmokr		2012-12-03 12:02:33 PM

1 votes:

Cornelius Dribble: Of course. When your slaves revolted, the last thing you wanted was to find yourself unarmed.

/as true today as it was then

And the other last thing you want is to have your slaves armed when they revolt.

/as true today as it was then

skullkrusher		2012-12-03 11:12:32 AM

1 votes:

s2s2s2: Princess Ryans Knickers: Which part of 'well-regulated' do you not understand?

Which part of "the people" do you not understand?

that's racist

wait, sorry, that's "you people".
Carry on

Epoch_Zero		2012-12-03 10:51:38 AM

1 votes:

SlothB77: well, the left wants to take away all four equally.

i3.kym-cdn.com

bartink		2012-12-03 10:18:26 AM

1 votes:

I never understood why people supposedly concerned with liberty want their lives ruled by men that have been dead for 200 years.

jso2897		2012-12-03 09:44:32 AM

1 votes:

Who gives a shiat? Nobody thinks gun rights are under attack except for a few whiny paranoids.
Let them whine - I pay them no mind.

vygramul		2012-12-03 09:43:35 AM

1 votes:

mod3072: Oh crap! I had totally forgotten that the Kenyan usurper was going to confiscate my guns! Well, I better go cash in my retirement and buy a bunch of guns and ammo. That'll show 'em!

//pro second amendment, but I don't get the paranoia. I guess I should watch Fox News more often.

Fox News is the Cthulhu of television. The more you find out about it, the more insane you become.

Epoch_Zero		2012-12-03 09:40:23 AM

1 votes:

rufus-t-firefly		2012-12-03 09:31:38 AM

1 votes:

mr_a: Gun control, free speech.

Put them all together, and you get this nitwit using other people's tragedy to make his point.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x422]

Yes, because we should never talk about gun control after a recent tragedy involving guns. Which also means we will NEVER talk about gun control, since there's ALWAYS a recent tragedy involving guns.

rufus-t-firefly		2012-12-03 09:26:19 AM

1 votes:

ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha: The right to own a firearm was considered by the Framers of the Constitution in 1787 to be equal in importance to the right to speak freely, the right to peaceably assemble and the right to practice religion*

*Offer not valid to muslims

From that article:

Rather than allowing the building of more mega-mosques in the United States, we should halt existing projects and seriously consider shutting down existing mosques to prevent the proliferation of an ideology that has publicly pledged to destroy America.

Because freedom.

the_foo		2012-12-03 09:10:59 AM

1 votes:

/a little slow in places, but makes some interesting points

bwilson27		2012-12-03 09:03:04 AM

1 votes:

whistleridge:
I always like to state one counter-argument totally wrong in these idiot threads, just to see if people actually have the first idea of what they're talking about. :p

My degree is history, and I did my honors thesis on the Constitution and its Amendments.

Well aren't you just the most precious little man.

ChaoticLimbs		2012-12-03 08:58:02 AM

1 votes:

Guys, they discussed all of this on paper. You don't have to speculate or bring up fossil firearms.

What they felt was important was to maintain a certain level of the ability to do violence at the grassroots level, to mitigate the imbalance of power that exists whenever you have a government.
Governments always have the capacity to exert physical force. The 2nd amendment is to preserve the people's right to use physical force if necessary, both for self defense and as an impediment for tyrannical rulers.

They have discussed this at great length and in a number of important books and papers. Instead of speculating about what they meant, you should read the documents they wrote to explain themselves.

/scholarship- it works, biatches.

Cythraul		2012-12-03 08:57:09 AM

1 votes:

dittybopper: vpb: Which is why they limited it to state militias. Right.

No they didn't. The militia clause is a justification, not a limitation.

rjw57.github.com

Dr.Mxyzptlk.		2012-12-03 08:56:56 AM

1 votes:

Guns are like abortions. If you don't want one . Don't get one.

/ Only one these was written into the Constitution. They other one was mined out of abstraction.

JudgeItoBox		2012-12-03 08:54:39 AM

1 votes:

dittybopper		2012-12-03 08:52:23 AM

1 votes:

vpb: Which is why they limited it to state militias. Right.

No they didn't. The militia clause is a justification, not a limitation.

Philip Francis Queeg		2012-12-03 08:51:40 AM

1 votes:

Britney Spear's Speculum: Can't rape people and claim religious immunity.

www.wgbh.org

Cardinal Law frowns on your shenanigans.

Hobodeluxe		2012-12-03 08:50:28 AM

1 votes:

Britney Spear's Speculum: Can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater.
Can't threaten to hurt people.
Can't commit slander/libel.
Can't do the above and claim religious immunity.
Can't kill people and claim religious immunity.
Can't rape people and claim religious immunity.

BUT I HAVE RIGHTS!!!!

FriarReb98		2012-12-03 08:14:59 AM

1 votes:

I'm sure there's more of a point to that 225-year old "oldnewsisexciting.jpg" statement, but I'm sure as hell not clicking the article to find out what it might be.

Displayed 27 of 27 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.