I think it’s safe to say that if the writers of the 2nd amendment could have foreseen what the 2nd amendment would turn into…well, there’d be no 2nd amendment.
Electoral College idiocy
- Thread starter Loyal Coug1
- Start date
Maybe this is what you meant, but…
Slaves were counted as 3/5 of a person in order to suppress populations of slave-holding states and reduce their representation. The free states didn’t want slaves to count as people at all, the slave states wanted them to be counted as full persons. It was all a numbers game to avoid giving the south control of Congress.
The aversion to a standing army was part of it, but another big part was in reaction to actions by the British early in the revolutionary years. They would go to homes and seize weapons in order to prevent men from being part of the militia. In those days, especially toward the frontiers those guns were pretty frequently used for putting food on the table and warding off attacks by Indians, animals, and the unruly, so was a big area of contention by colonists.
It’s pretty doubtful that a lot of the Boston, Philly, and New York population really needed their guns for their basic livelihood (and that’s where most guns were seized), but it made a convenient flashpoint for the framers to use to whip up the natives. So, they codified the right for the population to have them.
Frankly, under an originalist lens, I think the amendment would be satisfied if able-bodied men 15 and up were issued a rifle and ammo and allowed to go shoot it. There’s nothing in the 2nd that indicates guns have to be available for sale.
There were three amendments to abolish slavery and implement Reconstruction. The process for amendments is in Article V.
It is. Because they wanted slavery to eventually be illegal, and they knew they would never be able to do so if the south were allowed to use their population of slaves to gain greater representation, and hence power. The south knew this too. So this compromise was a way to blunt the south’s power. It wasn’t put in to keep slaves down, but quite the opposite, to suppress the south’s ability to keep them down permanently.
And your point is exactly right. The south wanted them counted as full persons, but nobody in their right mind would think the south actually considered them full persons. In the context of this part of the constitution, less than full person was a means to suppress the slave states and push slavery out of the country.
Um, so? You go back 30+ posts to find one of mine to pick at? Who f-ing cares about the process?
I’m not so sure. State of the art instruments of war, including cannons, warships, bombs, etc were owned by private individuals. Letters of marques and reprisal (part of the constitution)presumed private individuals would have the ability to overcome enemy warships and other military strongholds. In order to do so, private individuals would have to have the ability to actually overcome the enemy, which would require armaments capable of doing so.
It wasn't used so much to blunt the souths political power, rather to get them to agree to sign onto and ratify a constitution. If anything, it gave them outsized power, shown by 4 of the first 5 presidents coming from Virginia!
Slavery was a problem to be put off into future generations for them to deal with. Taihtsat
That's all true, but that kinda just demonstrates that less than 85 years after ratification, the post Civil War generation didn't take the "originalist" position too literally. Taihtsat
Both can be true. The north wanted no counting of slaves (0/5 of a person). The south wanted full counting of slaves (5/5 of a person). The south wouldn’t ratify with 0/5 and the north wouldn’t allow 5/5. So, the 3/5 compromise was a way to both blunt the south’’s power and give them enough for them to ratify.
Remember, this was prior to the Industrial Revolution, and the fledgling US was mostly agrarian. The relative populations of even the free were skewed to Virginia (VA was the cultural and economic hub of the US then). By 1820, use 30 years after the founding, the north had a larger population, even counting slaves (reference). The south’s power was waning before the Civil War and was accelerated by the Industrial Revolution as factories in the north ramped up.
True that. The Constitution even had a clause that said slavery couldn’t be considered by congress until 1808 (Art I, Sec 9). Another bone to get the south to ratify. And a clear sign that slavery would be a real issue. Frankly, I think the founders knew it was on its way out and would dissolve under the weight of its own inefficiency. The writing was on the wall.
Just to be a little pedantic, I think the founders certainly hoped it would collapse, but by the time they all were dead, it was still going strong and gaining steam with the additions of Kansas, Nebraska and texas/new mexico which eventually lead to April 1861.
But I know you're quite aware. I appreciate your discourse! Taihtsat
Why haven’t you closed the thread yet? I think you are secretly enjoying the classes. Or you are a masochist?
Maybe a rename will move things along?
I'm still going to say that the 2nd Amendment was written in a bygone era and is no longer relevant to the way that it was written. Following is a list of the size of the US Army by year based on Brittanica.com:
1775: 27,000
1783: 80
1789: 595
1791: 2,400
1792: 4,000
1798: 7,200
1800: 4,800
1802: 2,400
1808: 8,800
War of 1812: 60,000
1816: 10,000
1821: 6,100
1838: 8,000
1840: 12,600
1842: 8,600
1846: 30,000 (plus 60,000 volunteers) (Mexican-American War)
1848: 10,300
1860: 16,400 (prior to start of Civil War)
1865: 1,000,000
1866: 54,000
1874: 25,000
1878: 20,000
1898: 50,000 + 166,000 volunteers (Spanish-American War)
1899: 65,000
1901: 100,000
1917: 3,685,000 (World War I)
1919: 125,000
1939: 125,000
1940: 269,000
1941: 1,460,000 (World War II)
1943: 7,000,000
1945: 8,300,000
1946: 3,000,000
1948: 554,000
1950: 600,000
1951: 1,500,000 (Korean War)
1960: 860,000
1963: 1,000,000
1968: 1,460,000
1991: 700,000
Current: 453,000 + 325,000 Army National Guard + 177,000 Army Reserve
So, when you look at the 18th and 19th centuries, the Second Amendment made a lot of sense because the US didn't have a large standing army and they didn't have a large standing army because of the experiences that they had with the British Army in the 1700's. The Spanish-American War led to the creation of the National Guard and World War I led the US to further strengthen that National Guard and to increase the size of the regular army. World War II cemented the notion that the US was going to field a large standing regular army.
So, all bullsh!t aside, the only reason why the Second Amendment still exists is because Americans love owning guns. The idiotic notion that citizens should own guns to protect themselves from an oppressive government is a red herring thrown out there to justify avoiding gun regulations. Our military would wipe the streets with the bullsh!t "militias" that exist on the fringe of our society....but they won't because a) no politician is dumb enough to attack our own citizens and b) the men in our Army would not agree to carry out those attacks unless those militias initiated a conflict.
I love owning and shooting guns. I have as total of six firearms and they are enjoyable and fun to shoot. I don't think that gun ownership should be illegal. That said....we have a gun problem in this country and we need to figure out a way to make our country safer without making guns completely illegal. It should not be a monthly event to hear about large numbers of people being shot by lunatics with guns. Our country is not a safer place when everyone has a gun on them. In case you haven't been able to tell by this board....people are over-reactive, angry, spiteful and vengeful and prone to do stupid things in the heat of the moment. Guns should be the very last resort....not something you have at the ready.
I think this is more of a 200 or 300 level class Loyal. This is for history majors/Minors not some BS course you take to satisfy credits needed.
Interesting stats. I can see why they added it given our almost non-existent regular military. Kinda wonder why it was necessary though. I imagine that everybody and their dog had a gun or could go buy one. Must have been something that spurred it.
Flash forward 250 years. According to family, the guy who invented the AR-15 is quoted as saying it was something that was "never intended for civilians" (article link below). Kind of interesting reading. I always thought the AR-15 was a descendant of the M-16. Turns out the AR-15 came first and was renamed M-16 by the army.
So now what, after yet another AR-15 mass murder? And millions of these things floating around? I believe that I can still buy one in Washington, albeit limited to 10 shot clips?
Well here is an idea or five. First of all, assassinate Wayne LaPierre. Next, get rid of all these bloody video games. I grew up just fine playing Donkey Kong and the one where the little critter runs around and gobbles up treats . WTF is the name? (edit Pac-man!) Goddam dementia. Third, how about lowering the hate level in this country, starting with the Senate and House. All they do is sling out hate (both sides) and tell lies. You telling me that this doesn't contribute to young adults going off the deep end? Fourth, somebody has got to assassinate Trump (preferably with an AR-15). Throw in AOC and Tlaib and Taylor-Greene and Goetz. Hell a 10 shot clip would be two rounds each. No worries! Finally, institute some kind of registration. Hey I own 5 guns, and I would be happy to register them if everybody else had to. Used to have 9, but the ex got 4 of them, including my 12 gauge and varmint rifle. All this BS about the government then taking them all away is just that - BS. We register ourselves (Driver's license), register our cars, etc. Don't see anyone trying to confiscate my Subaru.
Family of AR-15 Inventor: He Didn’t Intend It for Civilians
The inventor’s surviving children and adult grandchildren spoke exclusively to MSNBC, commenting for the first time on their family’s uneasy legacy.
www.nbcnews.com
Edit: You know, upon reflection I wonder if the key to this amendment was really all about this: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State". In other words, if the US needed to form a well-regulated militia, the volunteers/whatever needed to own a gun? Something to think about as these NRA types interpret it to mean everybody should be able to buy military-meant rifles, bazookas, whatever. No limits whatsoever.
Last edited:
Of course, you need to keep in mind that there is not an amendment that guarantees your right to own said Subaru. And there are a LOT of folks that really would like to confiscate that gasoline burning monster-Newsome, AOC, Gropey Joe, etc.Interesting stats. I can see why they added it given our almost non-existent regular military. Kinda wonder why it was necessary though. I imagine that everybody and their dog had a gun or could go buy one. Must have been something that spurred it.
Flash forward 250 years. According to family, the guy who invented the AR-15 is quoted as saying it was something that was "never intended for civilians" (article link below). Kind of interesting reading. I always thought the AR-15 was a descendant of the M-16. Turns out the AR-15 came first and was renamed M-16 by the army.
So now what, after yet another AR-15 mass murder? And millions of these things floating around? I believe that I can still buy one in Washington, albeit limited to 10 shot clips?
Well here is an idea or five. First of all, assassinate Wayne LaPierre. Next, get rid of all these bloody video games. I grew up just fine playing Donkey Kong and the one where the little critter runs around and gobbles up treats . WTF is the name? (edit Pac-man!) Goddam dementia. Third, how about lowering the hate level in this country, starting with the Senate and House. All they do is sling out hate (both sides) and tell lies. You telling me that this doesn't contribute to young adults going off the deep end? Fourth, somebody has got to assassinate Trump (preferably with an AR-15). Throw in AOC and Tlaib and Taylor-Greene and Goetz. Hell a 10 shot clip would be two rounds each. No worries! Finally, institute some kind of registration. Hey I own 5 guns, and I would be happy to register them if everybody else had to. Used to have 9, but the ex got 4 of them, including my 12 gauge and varmint rifle. All this BS about the government then taking them all away is just that - BS. We register ourselves (Driver's license), register our cars, etc. Don't see anyone trying to confiscate my Subaru.
Family of AR-15 Inventor: He Didn’t Intend It for Civilians
The inventor’s surviving children and adult grandchildren spoke exclusively to MSNBC, commenting for the first time on their family’s uneasy legacy.
The US is not losing soldiers in the Russian invasion of Ukraine. It’s a steal! Even former President Regan would have fully supported this arrangement and happily. Russia is an evil Empire.
No shit. See below. And yeah, Ukrainians killing Russians is the best thing that could ever happen.
Of course we have our tongues sticking out wanting to throw money at Israel. I'm not against supporting them, but exactly why do they need our money and weapons? And use it to kill hundreds of civilians at a refugee camp to get one guy?
Wow...Now this is pure gold.
So basically...
1. We need to lower the hate in this country.
2. We need to assassinate Republicans.
Way to lower the hate there Loyal.
No. Two of them on my list are Democrats. Wake up!
And yes - if you want to stamp out bad, take out the bad people.
You are correct. I just re-read your post and you have 2 squad members on your list. I quit reading after the first 7 or whatever were Republicans.
Anyhow, what you are referring to is something banana republics do. We are better than that.
Oh get over yourself. There were 3 R's and 2 D's. You know that but "I quit reading after the first seven". And you know I was tongue in cheek on the assassinations. Although it would improve things. That LaPierre (Head of the NRA if you didn't know) is a horrible human being. The other items? Dead serious. Don't tell ne those bloody video games don't stick in the heads of some disturbed kids.
I actually agree with the video game stuff.
I just found it funny " we need to stop the hate" followed by "assassinate"
I didn't take a roll call on your targets because you usually rail against republicans...or repugnents as you like to call them
I think what he’s trying to say is kill all extremists. Sounds easy.
Well that would gut the Deep South and all the coffee shops in Seattle. And yeah, easy (I know you are tongue in cheek). Just ask Israel.
Speaking of which, I am flirting with starting an Israel/Jew thread, but I'm afraid it would blow up. What I just don't get is the Jewish hate over here in America. Israel is a country, like 'em or not. And yes, they are predominantly Jewish. So rail against them, not against our fellow Americans. Wasn't Jesus a Jew? So many people equate Judaism, a religion, with Israel, a country. WTF?
and guess how 99% of these jewish haters vote. All the anti-Israel protests you see on college campuses and elsewhere...it certainly isn't republicans.
But to answer your question, it is basically the oppression olympics.
For example...women are oppressed...but then when a biological male wants to change in their lockeroom, well...sorry women, your opinion on the situation doesn't matter because trans people are more oppressed than you.
And so it is with this current situation.
The irony is, these same people protesting for trans rights and hate Isreal don't stop to think what would happen to a trans or gay person in Palestine or other muslim countries where being gay can result in a brutal death.
And it certainly doesn't help when the squad members are pro Hamas...or at least refuse to condemn them.
Same thing in my book.
Last edited:
Hey we agree on something. Which is why 2 Squad members are on my hit list. I am a moderate. All this woke shit and "women" with dicks attached can use women's restrooms and compete in Women's sports? All f-ing BS. But the D's are just as afraid of the left wingnuts as the R's are afraid of Trump.
The whole trans thing just kills me. Hey if you want to grow boobs and look like a woman but still have that dick swinging between your legs go for it. It is none of our business and should stay that way.
This country is so F-ed up. Sick of it.
1. Israel has owned, lived in Israel on and off, since Abraham, Moses, etc.
2. The Palestinians only took over the land, area, AFTER Israel got conquered, scattered by Babylon, Persia, Syria, Greeks, Romans, etc, etc.
3. Israel was rightly restored back to their land.
4. Even tho they are minorities, Israel has a lot of different races, ethnicities, is a diverse MELTING POT. And those people live in both the Israel cities, Jerusalem, and in Gaza, West Bank, etc. And they are treated well, protected by Good Israeli law, constitution, courts, etc.
5. The only reason why Palestinians either aren't, an or sometimes not treated good, treated badly, is because they attack Israel with rocket attacks, terrorism attacks, and the only choices Israel can do is either do nothing, thus not hurting the Palestinians, or doing retaliatory strike, thus hurting Palestinians, and civilians in Gaza, etc, by, via COLLATERAL DAMAGE.
6. If they don't want hurt Palestinian civilians, then don't attack Israel.
7. Instead of attacking Israel, they need to do peace talks with Israel.
8. They have sabotaged peace talks with Israel.
9. Israel has tried and still tries to do peace talks, but get their efforts continually shot down, sabotaged.
10. There is a Arabian Nights style gold dome religious tower called the DOME OF THE ROCK. It is in Israel, Jerusalem. It is built on top of the destroyed Israelite temple. Arab, Persian muslims believe that the Dome of the Rock is where Muhammed talked to Allah(God, the same God of Israel, Jews, Christians, that have different beliefs about the Same God). It's a extremely sacred place to muslims. The Israeli government has given absolute sovereign, autonomy, etc, status, kind of like a Embassy, or like how the Vatican is a sovereign independent nation inside Italy, etc. The Dome of the Rock is controlled by Arab, Persian Muslims.
Reason mention that, is that is further proof of how diverse, how well Israel treats all people. If Israel were as bad as people say, they would take control of the Dome of the Rock(And probably provoke a Holy Jihadist War with Muslims, and Muslim Nations, in the process(Not that that would matter as some to semi most muslims, Muslim nations hate Israel, and at least are secretly supporting anti Israel sentiment, those that attack Israel, etc(That said, Israel taking over Dome of the Rock would probably only make it a heck lot even worse)
11. Because of all the above, all the anti Israel hate, etc, is just PROPAGANDA, to try to eventually destroy, subjugate, control, etc, Israel.
12. A lot of those that believe such propaganda, are either stupid, or are manipulated into believing such propaganda DRIVEL.
13. Almost all in USA, that hate Israel, etc, are either Liberal, socialist, MARXIST, communist, social justice warriors, democrats, side with such people.
14. Not all Democrats hate Israel, and some blue dog moderate Democrats, etc, support Israel.
15. No conservatives, Republicans hate Israel.
The reason why Arabs, Persian Muslims hate Israel so much, is that hate goes back to when Ishmael(Think that was his name)was born to either Abraham's, Isaac's, Jacob's 2nd wife, mistress, concubine, slave, etc. I forget her name.
And then either Isaac or Jacob(Israel) was given the inheritance over Ishmael.
Since then the descendants of Ishmael(Arabs, Persians, etc, have hated the descendants of either Isaac or Jacob(Israel), and that has caused Arabs, Persians, Muslims to hate Israel.
You are conflating anti-Israel/anti-Zionist/anti-settler sentiment with anti Jewish sentiment. In the US of A right wing Americans have a pretty strong monopoly on Jew hate.
I'd agree but these college pro-Palestinian, anti-Jew demonstrations are pissing me off. And those Ivy league students aren't right wingers.
Your full of BULLSHET. YOU DONT KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT.
The Majority of Right Wingers, Conservatives, Republicans, etc, DO NOT HATE, ARE NOT ANTI ISRAEL, AND ACTUALLY SUPPORT ISRAEL.
About 7% to 10% to 13% to 15% are hardcore Nazi's, White Supremacist, KKK, OPENLY RACIST AGAINST Blacks, Hispanics, Oriental, Jews, etc.
About 9% to 15% to 24% are racist towards blacks, but are not racist to Jews.
About 27% of conservatives, Republicans are semi racist in some way, whether hardcore, or whether lightly, or whether openly, or whether closet, or whether they don't know or think they are racist, etc.
And even if I were to be slightly off, wrong about how many are racist, anti jew, anti Israel, etc, your still WRONGLY SAYING, MEANING, IMPLYING, ETC, THAT ALL OR MOST are anti jew, anti Israel.
Also even tho I can't stand trump, don't support trump, etc, it was trump that helped move the capital of Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, and has come out in direct support of Israel, Jews, etc.
Your just FLAT OUT WRONG, PERIOD.
Similar threads
