. .
Home » Big Issues » Argue With Us! Your Second Amendment Rights

Argue With Us! Your Second Amendment Rights

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.

Get the latest news & reviews into your inbox.

By submitting above you agree to the AbsoluteRights Privacy Policy

Like Absolute Rights on Facebook

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!

 

253 comments

  1. Bailley O’Malia must believe that you could protect yourself from some criminal with a musket. The criminal would have a semi-automatic weapon and you would be toast. The same is true of an out of control government, though the anti-gun crowd think that argument is insane. While the founders could not envision all new technology, They were well aware that firearms would evolve, having seen, even in their day, the evolution in weapons. I wonder if Bailley ever tried to own a fully automatic weapon? I’m sure she has not, because the hassle and cost make it quite restrictive. She then goes on to say that no one would need a “so called assault weapon” for hunting. Anyone familiar with an AR-15 knows that they are increasingly being used for hunting varmint with the .223, and larger game with larger calibers like the 6.8 and .308 cartridges. It is almost perfect for hunting in dirty and wet conditions, since the stock is not wood and the design is lightweight and proven to be reliable in most conditions. However, this wonderful design is also the very thing that makes people think of it as an assault weapon. How backwards is that thinking? Any person with a firearm could reek the same carnage with a so called hunting rifle in 30-30 or 30-06 with a smaller magazine if they are proficient with that firearm. We practice “tactical reload” many times, and whether the magazine holds 30 or 10, it would not matter for an experienced shooter. Somehow, anti-gun people can not fathom that thought. I think I know why. Most, if not all anti-gun people do not own guns. They have never even fired a gun! They know next to nothing about how a firearm works, nor do they care to. They sell a bag of goods to the public about firearms that is all bad. They look at black guns and tell people how bad and terrible they look. Somehow, a 10-22 with a wood stock is ok, but put that 10-22 into a synthetic black or camo stock, and it becomes an assault weapon! Same caliber, same inner workings, but in the synthetic stock it changes everything! It is because they are ignorant. What makes it worse though, is that they have no desire to learn about the very subject that they think they can make judgement on. When I hear them talk about firearms, I can tell that they do not have a clue about them. I’m sure people reading these comments know this is true. Anti-gunners just espouse their ignorance and think that most people will believe what they say. They use fear to turn people against guns. They use fear to turn people against those that own guns. I think it is disgusting!

    (0)
  2. I’m so tired of hearing about all the lunatics. If they didn’t have guns they would use bombs. I have a right to bear arms against home invastion and a tyranical government if that sad fact ever came to pass. Hitler got rid of all the guns before he loaded those innocent people into box cars and poisened them. Are we really going to allow that here? Killers will find a way to kill and people who are smart will find a way to protect themselves.
    Stop second guessing what the constitution meant. It means we can bear arms. Get it?

    (0)
  3. One fact about our 2nd Amendment rights, which never seems to bear mentioning, is that the concept has its origins in English Common Law. This harkens back to a time when “arms” consisted of swords, knives, flails, and battle axes.

    (0)
  4. Didn’t read through all the comments and just have one. Tim is right, we all need 50 nuclear bombs in our basement so we have the same military capibility as the government……

    (0)
  5. @themerryinfidel
    January 6, 2013 at 8:03 am
    Jdetroit, You have a couple of good points, but you better hope no intruder enters your home with the intent to do you and your family harm because by the time you can get to your weapon you and your family will be dead! Keeping it in the basement, in a safe, behind a false wall might be a good place to hide it from the authorities, but it will be useless in a situation where you truly need it. My pistol is on my hip when I leave the house and on my nightstand when I retire for the night. I might be one of the few that make “Good” gun owners look bad, but
    …You made an assumption. I keep my ar15 secured in my gun safe at all times when I am not using it but I always, as you do, carry my 1911 on my hip and have it on my nightstand when sleeping. He never said he did not carry a pistol.. His comment was well placed I feel.

    (0)
  6. The right to bear arms was given to us not only for our personal protection,
    but also against a tyrannical government. It seems to me that our government, which
    at present is wanting to broaden its powers at the expense of the people and the
    constitution, is becoming what the Founding Fathers feared would happen, hence providing
    us with the power to defend ourselves. Knowing that this power is in our hands, our
    government wants to take it away, at all costs, and will use whatever means to get what
    it wants. These stories of these senseless killings are emotional and certainly are upsetting
    to all Americans, even those who have guns in their homes. Again we realize that the
    stories that prove that good citizens who can prevent these tragedies such as the case in
    San Antonio, are never brought to the forefront because it would prove the opposite
    to the case the government is pushing for, which is “guns kill people, and it’s out of control”
    Compromise is a good thing, but if we lose sight of the big picture, the government wanting
    to expand its powers and to lessen ours, then we can see that compromise will still
    lessen our rights and privileges. We will lose. If they take one thing away, they will go
    after it all incrementally. If we give in on one, then we will eventually give in on all. With
    our rights, where do we draw the line?

    (0)
  7. I believe our founding fathers were right on the mark. They wanted us to have the right to defend ourselves. If you come and take every weapon I have today
    I could replace them all tomorrow on the black market. Why should criminals
    have rights that we don’t. Go ahead and take our weapons and you will be
    taking our lives with them. America has never been invaded simply because
    other countries know we will beat them down. Take our weapons and any nutcase
    can still get a gun if they really want one and still kill. A person could
    still do a lot of damage with any gun if they wanted. I have sent a letter
    to Governor Haley in SC and the NRA outlining a way to ensure the safety of
    children in schools. We have enough law abiding citizens that have already
    passed a S.L.E.D background check to carry a weapon to form a all
    volunteer security service for our schools. It would only take 10 people for
    each school. Two a day working only 4 hours one day a week and two people to
    stand by incase someone could not make their 4 hours shift. The school would
    be locked down and the volunteer guard would sit at the front door with a 40
    cal Glock. If anyone started to the school with a weapon this guard could
    keep them from entering until the police arrived. This would not cost the
    state any money and it would ensure the safety of our kids. Tell me what you think
    John at jwcros@yahoo.com

    (0)
  8. now i where to relocate to! finally, a politician who makes SENSE!

    (0)
  9. I was searching through all these post looking for one person who was in favor of gun control and got tied of looking- everyone one agrees don’t take away our guns. Oh currently I don’t own one put all this talk of taking them away in the media makes me want to go out a buy one. I like my knife its the same as Navy Seals use and I’m advanced in the martial arts so a gun is just a extra for me. And just to set the record straight I’m not right or left I’m A-political but live by a high code of honor.

    (0)
  10. I don’t read the lady complaining about the guns that took Osama b. Laden out. Did she mention Fast and Furious? Or the Border guards who were killed by Obama/Holder’s game? Who and what have kept this country free from now speaking German and Japanese? In Alaska, we came close to it, but thanks to our men and women with guns, we avoided that. Why aren’t these people working as hard at giving us answers to Bengazi? Thesee issues are being swept under the rug. These people who have open minds by appointment only, are so close to brain dead. Can’t think or reason beyond their nose. Settle the standing problems before trying to cover up with something none of us have control over. Think of what these ‘progressives’ are doing to the families of the children who are the losers. Have they no pity for them? Shame. The Progressives have no mercy except for the wrong reasons. And if the gun chasers get their way (God forbid) people who rely on their guns to hunt and provide subsistence food for families year around, will be hurting. Where would their food come from? Would they send help to us? These people don’t know the words ‘help thy neighbor’.

    (0)
  11. I’ve been browsing online more than 3 hours nowadays, but I never discovered any fascinating article like yours. It’s lovely value enough for me. In my view, if all website owners and bloggers made good content as you probably did, the internet might be a lot more helpful than ever before.

    (0)
  12. well you may be right about the founding fathers and the style of weapons that were at that time, all being flinters. Now 200 years in future, we need to keep up with the powers that could take away all our rights from the constitution. If you say we cant have semi-automatic weapons to defend ourselves, then we will pry them from our enemies cold dead hands. So once again we will have semi-automatic weapons.

    (0)
  13. Name me only one:
    Criminal who will register his guns
    Bad guy who will ask for a back ground check of another bad guy so he can sell him a gun
    Gang banger who will report his gun stolen or lost
    Terrorist who will subject themselves to a background check to buy a gun
    Weapon that jumped up, loaded it’s self and ran around shooting
    Politician who dosen’t know 98% of the people are law abiding, 2% are criminals and politicians

    (0)
  14. To keep government in check and be able take care of my security here…

    (0)
  15. that was a reply to paul’s link.

    (-1)
Add Comment Register

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Captcha + =
Captcha + =