Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Our Forefathers Dealt with Liberals.

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by DuneHopper, Jan 14, 2016.

  1. DuneHopper

    DuneHopper Douglas County. Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,878
    Likes Received:
    3,621
    I thought I would start a topic on the Federalist papers. I get so tired of everyone misunderstanding on all sides the intent of the laws and the discussions long before the 2nd Amendment was finalized. Here are some excerpts from the Federalist papers to read, next time someone says the 2nd Amendment means something else tell them this. These are some small parts of discussions and speeches showing clear the intent and reasoning.




     
    Koda likes this.
  2. PaulB47

    PaulB47 Hillsboro Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,808
    Likes Received:
    2,493
    I don't have much use for a power-centralizer like Alexander Hamilton (just another lying politician), and I'd rather read the anti-Federalist papers. That's just me though...
     
  3. DuneHopper

    DuneHopper Douglas County. Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,878
    Likes Received:
    3,621
    You do realize that these speeches and meeting let to the Amendments completion?
    I agree that many a politician are dishonest however without the events of these speeches and meetings there most likely would have been no existing 2nd Amendment.
    The framers (minus several dissenters) and other Federalists vehemently argued that a Bill of Rights was unnecessary. The Anti-Federalists exploited this apparent weakness by methodically attacking nearly every clause in the Constitution as a tyrannical mandate subject to no constraints. In order to outmaneuver the Anti-Federalists at the ratifying conventions, the Federalists compiled a list of the least restrictive Anti-Federalist demands and promised to have them passed through the first Congress when the Constitution was ratified. The predecessor to Madison’s Second Amendment came from dissenter George Mason’s proposals at the 1788 Virginia Ratifying Convention. In Section 17 of the proposal, Mason combined, word for word, a portion of the Massachusetts’ Declaration of Rights stating that the people have a right “to keep and to bear arms” with Article 13 from Virginia’s Declaration of Rights (which he also helped write) concerning a well-regulated militia as the defense against a standing army.
    The Anti-federal view was based on the English ( not American) Bill of Rights however they only protected individuals from the crown, not from the Parliament. The American conception of constitutional rights drastically differed from the English conception. For this reason, when Madison introduced the Bill of Rights in Congress, he specifically said the reasoning behind the English Bill of Rights is “inapplicable.” The founders did not need to look more than a decade back in order to find a much more relevant example of the danger of standing armies. On September 1st, 1774, General Thomas Gage had a secret military detail seize publicly owned gun powder in the Charlestown powder house. By October 19th, 1774, the British had halted all arms transportation through Boston. To put this in perspective, when the Governor of Virginia seized some public powder and had it placed on a British vessel, Patrick Henry lead a historic march to obtain possession or reimbursement. This explains why Massachusetts was the only state at the time whose declaration of rights included “keeping” as well as “bearing” arms. It also explains why Mason chose to borrow specifically from Massachusetts and not other states declarations with “bear arms” language.

    This is just my take on it. hopefully others will chime in.
     
  4. PaulB47

    PaulB47 Hillsboro Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,808
    Likes Received:
    2,493
    Well, I know this led to the trashing of the much-superior Articles of Confederation. So excuse my lack of enthusiasm for it.

    As to the 2nd, I don't need it. What I need is the will to kill anyone who attempts confiscating my guns. That is what deters the bastards, not some writing on parchment. You think they take their oath of office seriously? The oath is merely the first lie they make while in office.

    I will admit the existence of the 2nd motivates ordinary people - to a certain extent anyway. But 20,000 gun laws seem to demonstrate it doesn't do the job very well. Determination and will is a lot more reliable motivator.

    http://javelinpress.com/hologram_of_liberty.html
     
  5. Koda

    Koda Oregon Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    2,160
    Likes Received:
    2,938
    good thread Dunehopper. None of us would have any guns today if it wasnt for the 2nd Amendment. I do think its important to understand why our founding fathers put that in our constitution, its evident in many of their quotes. All things considered I think its amazing it was added makes me wish todays politicians had the ethics our founding fathers did back then.