TargetTalk

“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” -Samuel Adams

Greetings,

Samuel Adams, he is the Beer Guy, yes?

Cheers,

Dave

Thanks for these wise words, Rover. As always, our founding fathers seem to be almost divinely inspired. Never before in history, or since, for that matter, has such an assemblage of wise men gathered together at one time and in one place. Our country is truly blessed to have been founded by such selfless men.

Many (most?) may not think so, but I think we may be engaged in a war for the very soul of our country. Unfortunately, far too many these days are more than willing to trade freedom for security and will, therefore, receive neither. If you have not committed to defending our values, rethink where you stand. I took my first oath of enlistment in 1965 and every four years thereafter. Never did I hear or read anything indicating it had an expiration date, so for me, it's as valid today as it was over 50 years ago.

Many members post meaningful words regarding patriotism and our freedoms, but doing so here just isn't enough. We MUST dedicate our fortunes and our time to ensuring that candidates dedicated to our personal freedoms win in the upcoming elections. Put in your time with your local political organizations. Contribute your money to deserving candidates. DO SOMETHING, and do it now, before it's too late.

Dulcmrman

What we should always remember is that the founding fathers wanted mentally ill teenagers to access assault rifles without let or hindrance.

The Founding Fathers vested within us the Right to defend ourselves against the Tyranny of the Majority.

atomicgale wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:14 am The Founding Fathers vested within us the Right to defend ourselves against the Tyranny of the Majority.

The founding fathers vested within us whatever the reader wants the founders to have implied.

For example, the right to keep and bear arms - which I suspect the comment is intended to underline - is the protection against foreign tyranny. The "Right to defend ourselves against the Tyranny of the Majority" was always seen to be political (You know: things like elections, courts, impeachments, etc.). And please don't bother trying to argue based on Jefferson's "tree of liberty" quote. Some of us know the context.

Keep and bear arms relates solely to members of a militia, not for truck defence for your average peon.

JamesHH wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:02 pm Keep and bear arms relates solely to members of a militia, not for truck defence for your average peon.

I don't believe that for a second, but I DO believe this quote:

"When you disarm the people, you commence to offend them and show that you distrust them either through cowardice or lack of confidence, and both of these opinions generate hatred."
Niccolo Machiavelli

Nice quote from Machiavelli, but....
A very different time - first half of the XVI Century.
A very different place - Italy at the height of the Renaissance.
A very different context - advising a virtually absolute ruler how to prevent, among other things, popular uprisings (You know, Rog, those pesky precursors to democracy).

I had no idea Machiavelli was involved in writing the constitution.

George Mason: “I ask you sir, who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people.” (Elliott, Debates, 425-426)

George Washington: “A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.”

Patrick Henry: “The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.” 3 Elliot, Debates at 386.

Sir George Tucker: “The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest possible limits…and [when] the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.” – Sir George Tucker, Judge of the Virginia Supreme Court and U.S. District Court of Virginia in I Blackstone COMMENTARIES Sir George Tucker Ed., 1803, pg. 300 (App.)

One must wonder how Mason, Washington, Henry, Tucker and others might react if they were to come back to life and witness the daily carnage extreme (mis?)interpretation of their idea leads to.

"In 2017, the most recent year for which complete data is available, 39,773 people died from firearm-related injuries in the U.S., according to the CDC." That's over 100 persons a day, primarily homicide and suicide. Even allowing for inflated statistics - if the total is reduced by half it's still 50 a day. Who really believes that Washington or Mason would consider that an acceptable price to pay for ideological purity?

william wrote: ↑Thu Dec 26, 2019 7:18 am One must wonder how Mason, Washington, Henry, Tucker and others might react if they were to come back to life and witness the daily carnage extreme (mis?)interpretation of their idea leads to.

"In 2017, the most recent year for which complete data is available, 39,773 people died from firearm-related injuries in the U.S., according to the CDC." That's over 100 persons a day, primarily homicide and suicide. Even allowing for inflated statistics - if the total is reduced by half it's still 50 a day. Who really believes that Washington or Mason would consider that an acceptable price to pay for ideological purity?

I would guess that a great many (most?) of us here believe that they would consider that an acceptable price to pay. We are a country of approximately 330,000,000 million people, 100 deaths per day is statistically insignificant. Life is dangerous for all kinds of reasons. At any rate, it's pretty easy to see that more gun laws do not result in less gun crime.

"...it's pretty easy to see that more gun laws do not result in less gun crime." Well, that's certainly true if it's your opinion going in.

Our founders were, above all else, profound humanists. They created this nation, not as an abstract philosophical exercise, but as a real-world attempt to improve the human condition. They would be repelled by the very idea of 100 preventable deaths per day of very largely innocent victims being "an acceptable price to pay."

william wrote: ↑Thu Dec 26, 2019 6:43 pm "...it's pretty easy to see that more gun laws do not result in less gun crime." Well, that's certainly true if it's your opinion going in.

Our founders were, above all else, profound humanists. They created this nation, not as an abstract philosophical exercise, but as a real-world attempt to improve the human condition. They would be repelled by the very idea of 100 preventable deaths per day of very largely innocent victims being "an acceptable price to pay."

Preventable how? What kind of laws do you think the founders would pass if they travelled through time to modern day and saw the carnage caused by automobiles? Alcohol? Diabetes? All very preventable. The founders very much did improve the human condition, and their actions and ideas have had a profound effect on the entire world. These were not weak men who would change their minds about liberty because of unfortunate (and not unexpected) side effects to personal freedom.

“Live free or die” was a long time ago for New Hampshire, wasn’t it?

The second amendment is an INDIVIDUAL right to bear arms (read self defense) and is responsible for more lives saved then lost. The militia is US, and the tyrannical government reference is domestic not foreign. The second amendment guarantees a tyrannical government does not forget the content of our constitution.

It is an individual right to bear arms in defense of " the security of a free State[.]" If one insists on bringing up that old bugaboo, context, one is obliged to tether his anchor to the founders' aversion to standing armies. Hence their reliance on an armed population - militia - to defend their new nation.

To accept this statement: "The militia is US, and the tyrannical government reference is domestic not foreign[,]" is to justify the TREASONOUS Southern action at Fort Sumter.

william wrote: ↑Fri Dec 27, 2019 7:51 am It is an individual right to bear arms in defense of " the security of a free State[.]" If one insists on bringing up that old bugaboo, context, one is obliged to tether his anchor to the founders' aversion to standing armies. Hence their reliance on an armed population - militia - to defend their new nation.

To accept this statement: "The militia is US, and the tyrannical government reference is domestic not foreign[,]" is to justify the TREASONOUS Southern action at Fort Sumter.

Of course you have neglected to answer my questions. Your view of the founding fathers as shrinking violets who would trade liberty for the illusion of security is laughable.

Why are you a firearm owner at all? The only sure way to prevent all deaths by firearms would be to eliminate all firearms entirely. Why are you not living by the courage of your convictions and surrendering your own? As a firearm owner, are you not part of the very problem that you are so repulsed by?

You are exactly who the quote in question was intended for.

"Of course you have neglected to answer my questions." Several years ago I gave up for lent answering "When did you stop beating your wife?" questions. I never got around to taking up the habit again.

There is really no arguing with absolutists who perceive any limitation as tantamount to abolition, so I'll let those folks have their day to claim hollow victory.

Speaking of quotes, I spotted this one today that I kinda like:

"Gun Control - A theory espoused by some monumentally stupid people; who claim to believe, against all logic and common sense, that a violent predator who ignores the laws prohibiting them from robbing, raping, kidnapping, torturing and killing their fellow human beings will obey a law telling them that they cannot own a gun."