Seattle restaurant owner mocks death of 9 year old

[The Heretic]

I don't mean to be a 'noodge' but how do you know, unequivocally, the Founding Fathers also meant 'tanks to grenades' since these items did NOT exist at the time?

It is simple; the Founding Fathers meant for the populace to have the same arms as the government.

There are all kinds of quotes by them, the congressional debates, and history to support that assertion.

 

[Flopsweat]

The restaurant is in a area of Seattle that they will be supportive of them.
Whole bunch of people in that area with T.D.S.
Trump derangement syndrome.

This is close to where someone tried to spit on me once. The whole place reeks of self-righteousness. And well, urine. OK, that was a while ago. There could be some new smells there by now.

 

[Diamondback]

I don't mean to be a 'noodge' but how do you know, unequivocally, the Founding Fathers also meant 'tanks to grenades' since these items did NOT exist at the time?

Given that Jefferson would have had the Da Vinci concepts in his collection, and they ENCOURAGED private ownership of warships far bigger and more powerful...

 

[ActionHero1980]

It is simple; the Founding Fathers meant for the populace to have the same arms as the government.

There are all kinds of quotes by them, the congressional debates, and history to support that assertion.

Sounds about right to me.

 

[RVTECH]

It is simple; the Founding Fathers meant for the populace to have the same arms as the government.

It would be simple if the Founding Fathers specifically said:

the same arms as the government.

Did they specifically say this?

Don't get me wrong - I agree fundamentally however unless you are referencing specific, real, written statements then you are just 'interpolating' what was actually written.

 

[The Heretic]

It would be simple if the Founding Fathers specifically said:

Did they specifically say this?

Don't get me wrong - I agree fundamentally however unless you are referencing specific, real, written statements then you are just 'interpolating' what was actually written.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

It is right there in plain English

 

[The Heretic]

"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824

 

[RVTECH]

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Yes, I am well educated in 'plain english' however I do NOT see 'the same arms as the government'
In this 'plain english' statement.

Am I right or wrong? Is it there or not? This is a yes or no question.

 

[The Heretic]

"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops."
- Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787

"f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28, January 10, 1788

 

[The Heretic]

Yes, I am well educated in 'plain english' however I do NOT see 'the same arms as the government'
In this 'plain english' statement.

Am I right or wrong? Is it there or not? This is a yes or no question.

It says "arms". where does it say anything about limits?

The intent is clear. The armed populace is a balance of power against the government.

The principle behind the Bill of Rights is that it is a limitation on the power of the government, not a limitation on the rights of the people.

 

[ActionHero1980]

If the reason for the 2a is to preserve liberty and prevent a tyrannical government or force from taking control, then it stands to reason the citizens would require the necessary weapons to do so.

Considering what the founding fathers had just been through when writing the 2a, it all seems pretty straight forward. We are not talking about shooting deer.

 

[EPS]

If the reason for the 2a is to preserve liberty and prevent a tyrannical government or force from taking control, then it stands to reason the citizens would require the necessary weapons to do so.

Considering what the founding fathers had just been through when writing the 2a, it all seems pretty straight forward. We are not talking about shooting deer.

The second amendment doesn't have anything to do with shooting deer.
It's there for one reason only.
To keep the Government in check.

 

[RVTECH]

I think you are missing my point.

One more time in 'plain english' - Does the 2A include the 'the same arms as the government' ?

All i am asking for is a simple yes or no.

 

[ActionHero1980]

Yes, I am well educated in 'plain english' however I do NOT see 'the same arms as the government'
In this 'plain english' statement.

Am I right or wrong? Is it there or not? This is a yes or no question.

"shall not be infringed" does not mean shotguns, single shot rifles and what ever the government tells you

 

[EPS]

I think you are missing my point.

One more time in 'plain english' - Does the 2A include the 'the same arms as the government' ?

All i am asking for is a simple yes or no.

Yes I say yes

 

[ActionHero1980]

If anything, I would say we the people should be able to limit what weapons the government has and uses for professional security. How bout that

 

[RVTECH]

"shall not be infringed" does not mean shotguns, single shot rifles and what ever the government tells you

Does anybody understand my question?

Does the 2A include the statement 'the same arms as the government' ?

Yes or no?

 

[RVTECH]

Yes I say yes

Show me where it SPECIFICALLY states this.

Please do not offer your interpretation of this - does the 2A include 'the same arms as the government' in its draft?

Yes or no?

 

[The Heretic]

I think you are missing my point.

One more time in 'plain english' - Does the 2A include the 'the same arms as the government' ?

All i am asking for is a simple yes or no.

As I said, show me where it says 'no'.

The answer is, plain reading of all of the available history and quotes and the Second Amendment itself, says 'yes' because it doesn't say 'no'. Show me where the Founding Fathers said that you have the right to bear arms, but with limits on the type of arms.

 

[ActionHero1980]

Does anybody understand my question?

Does the 2A include the statement 'the same arms as the government' ?

Yes or no?

It does not include these words "the same arms as the government" it uses "shall not be infringed" to convey a similar meaning. Happy