Where Liberty is Reborn

Time left until Obama leaves office

Argue With Us! Your Second Amendment Rights

, / 1178

Point: The Right to Bear Arms—Within Reason

by Bailey O’Malia

In the wake of the Sandy Hook tragedy Americans and politicians have spent time reflecting on gun control.

We often hear that our founding fathers wrote our right to bear arms into the Constitution as a way to protect ourselves from harm; that they wanted us to have that right, even today.

But that’s not something I’m so sure about.

When the founding fathers wrote our constitution their idea of a weapon was a musket. Not an automatic weapon. The gun they had in mind would be used for safety or for hunting.

With this in mind I wonder, what the fathers of our nation would have said about civilians owning military-grade weapons that can shoot a hundred rounds in a minute?

Surely there is no need for a civilian to hold that kind of power in his hand. In fact, why should anyone have that much power over another human being? Do we really trust each other’s judgment?

I’ve been thinking about this for days and I can’t come up with one good reason that a person would need anything more than a handgun or rifle for “safety.”

So when the discussion of changing the gun laws is brought up I think, what a perfectly simple solution; ban all automatic weapons. This appeases the Democrats because they will have made steps towards gun reform, and the Republicans because they won’t be fully losing their right to bear arms. If you consider shooting an automatic weapon a fun hobby, they could still be available to rent at a gun range.

But this is a compromise. A concept politicians and Americans are unfamiliar with these days.

If you’re pro-guns at this point you’re probably saying “but it’s my right, and they’re taking away all of our rights.”

But it’s also your right to feel safe in this country. And despite the theorists who say “arm every person in the country, that’ll scare ‘em!” The lunatics that are shooting up movie theaters and schools don’t seem to place much value on their life or the lives of others.

So before you start spouting your founding fathers crap, take a second to think about the core principle that this country was supposedly built on: freedom. And I don’t know about you, but I don’t feel very “free” knowing that my neighbor could be housing an AK-47 in his garage.


CounterPoint: The Reason for the Right to Bear Arms

by Tim Young

As intelligent as I think Bailey is, she’s dead wrong here.  I do feel safer knowing that my neighbor could be housing an AK-47 in his garage.  Why?  Because I know most of my neighbors are honest, hardworking people who aren’t nutcases looking to shoot up schoolchildren.

See, what happens when these terrible tragedies occur is the media blows things out of proportion to spread their leftist views… and as much as I generally don’t yell and point fingers about how biased they are… this time, they really have showed their hand.  Somewhere in the middle of all the hype about how access to guns was the issue here, we forget what the Second Amendment was really about.

When the founding fathers wrote the Constitution and Bill of Rights, they wanted to ensure that all people were equal… equal with each other and equal with the government.  Yes, when this was all written, people only had muskets… but do you know who else only had muskets?  The government.

We had just finished overthrowing a tyrannical government in order to become a free nation, and the founders, who literally helped fight in that war, wanted the American people to have equal footing with whatever government took over, in order to prevent tyranny if necessary once again.  These guys were smart, they weren’t thinking inside the box of their time.  They were completely aware that technology would change, but they wanted Americans to be able to stand up for themselves.  How does one do that?  By having the same level of weaponry as the government!

The Constitution was written with revolution in mind, not the peace that we have internally had for about 150 years now.  I say 150 years, because we fought ourselves with our armed militias in The Civil War… we have been lucky to have had internal peace since then…  But you can’t closed-mindedly say that the Second Amendment was for limited weapons.  It just wasn’t.  It was meant to keep people on the same level as the government, so that they could fight for their rights if necessary.

And sure, if my neighbors had rocket launchers, I think I’d be scared just because they could blow up my house… But if original founders were still around, I think they’d be alright with it.


We want you to weigh in on this argument!  Type your comments below!





  • Nancy says:

    How many anti-second amendment people know that automatic weapons are already banned for general use? Only people who are specially licensed for them can own one. Semi-automatic weapons only fire one shell per trigger pull, and semi-autos are in general use. Most of these anti-2A people don’t know the difference between auto and semi-auto, and call magazines “clips”. One CO politician even thought that once a magazine was empty it was worthless–she had no idea it could be refilled. And these idiots have political and media power!

  • I am actually pleased to read this weblog posts which consists of lots of helpful
    data, thanks for providing these statistics.

  • Name says:

    Th ey going to do what they want any how wy doe’s it mater v

  • Ruth Lawler says:

    Governments have murdered hundreds of thousands of their unarmed subjects during the history of man. Unfortunately, history is not taught any more in our public schools since Jimmy Carter gifted us with the Federal Dept. of Education. We’ve given away our children to our government, and that was stupid. They are thoroughly indoctrinated in socialism and communism but know diddly squat about American liberty.
    We cannot expect brain-washed subjects to recognize that governments are far more dangerous than any drugged psychopath on pharmaceutical poisons. It’s time for us to become citizens again and take back our Constitutional freedoms.

  • My right’s to bear arms shall not be infringed, do you people really understand what this means?

  • duke says:

    the 2nd amendment calls for a well regulated militia
    not a bunch of paranoid a holes
    who answer to no one

  • Allan Yates says:

    Bailey O’Malia has no clue what she is talking about. Her idea of the government letting the people keep arms that are “within reason” as she says does NOT square with the original intent of the Founders: “Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, AND EVERY OTHER TERRIBLE IMPLEMENT OF THE SOLDIER, are the birthright of an American…. [T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.” (Tench Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.) The intent of the Founders is undeniably obvious: Coxe specifically wrote the words, “EVERY terrible implement of the soldier;’ he did not write “SOME implements of the soldier, as long as they are not too terrible and do not pose a threat to the absolute domination of the Political Class over the people.” At the end of the day, that is what this issue boils down to: CONTROL. Politicians loathe the idea that they must answer to anyone or anything. They chafe under the restraints of the constitution and resent the citizens who maintain the ability to remove them from office by force if necessary. That is the EXACT reason for the Second Amendment: To make it possible for the people to revolt against a tyrannical Political Class – and to prevail in that revolt. You do not prevail against a standing army that is armed to the teeth by using revolvers and O/U bird shotguns, but then the Second Amendment was never written with hunting in mind. As Mike Vanderboegh observes, “The Second Amendment is a political issue today only because of the military reality that underlies it. Politicians who fear the people seek to disarm them. People who fear their government’s intentions refuse to be disarmed. The Founders understood this. So does every tyrant who ever lived. Americans forget it at their peril.” Judge Andrew Napolitano is more to the point in his observation: “The Second Amendment was not written to protect your right to shoot deer. It was written to protect your right to shoot tyrants if they take over the government.” While Bailey O’Malia may recoil with horror from these assertions, they are in fact EXACTLY what the Founders intended with regard to the people and their right to arms in America.

  • rodrob43 says:

    I’m on the side of gun ownership. The founders put the 2nd Amendment into the Bill of Rights immediately after the right to free speech. The 2nd preserves the first and the rest of the Bill of Rights. If the government becomes oppressive, the 2nd is there to protect the people from the government. I see the government leading us into bankruptcy and as many of us have read a change in international currency. This may lead to extremely difficult times, especially for 90% of the population. The need to defend your family and property and to find food and water will become paramount.

  • badbob85037 says:

    I stopped reading after the Sandy Hook line. Putting all the evidence aside showing a false flag our government has been known for for over 100 years the parents of the supposed victims was all that was needed. The death of one’s child is the worst pain any human can bare. In that time only close family and closer friends can come close to easing the pain. I seriously doughty any, let alone all, of these parents of the so called victims would want to talk to media. Yet all these parents did. When they did I never saw one tear. As a matter of fact these parents acted like they had won the lottery not lost a child. Anyone who has taken a close look at Sandy Hook and the people involved know this was just another try at taking the only means to protect us from the government our founders warned us about.

    Fast and Furious didn’t work. An Atrtorney General of the United States for the first time in history was found in Contempt of Congress for what has grown to over 400 murders. With a stroke of a pen these real victims go without justice and all involved in their deaths go free

    I put the blame both a media that can be call only treasonous and criminal that has let this president get away with selling arms to our enemies to genocide and everything in between and the Congress of Enablers.

    Anyone telling you he wants to disarm you for your protection is dumber than a tree stump or a criminal tyrant. After Fast and Furious this president has proved to be both. Any attack on a document you swore to protect is grounds enough to kick a traitor to the curb. So we shouldn’t even be talking about the Second Amendment. We should be screaming this administration and members of both parties be tried and answer for their crimes. Not just Fast and Furious but Libya, Iraq……………..

  • DEFENDER88 says:

    The gang down the street has AK’s, AR’s, Mac 10’s and access to pretty much what ever weaponry they want.

    As long as they have access to these weapons (and they always will) I and my ‘good neighbors” should have access to these weapons as equal power to repel them as necessary. And this includes repel the Govt. as may be necessary.

    And if the “System” ever fails, like many of us feel is possible, it becomes paramount to have these weapons for self defense.

    The difference is, neither I nor my good neighbors are going to go to the stop-and-go or school down the street and start shooting.

    I demand and “WILL” keep my AR around for these reasons.

    Try to take it and you can expect(molon labe) ie a fight to the death.

    ie over my dead body.

    If you can find it.

    Better to go down in a hail of bullets than tortured to death.

    I don’t want to shoot or even hurt “anyone” but if you try to take my guns it will get ugly.

Leave A Reply