Tyrants are driven into retreat by armed citizenry

[Ferryman]

For those who don't recognize these guys, they are the professors at the heart of the Evergreen college fiasco a few years back.

Read More

 

[No_Regerts]

Interesting. Makes too much sense.

 

[The B]

For those who don't recognize these guys, they are the professors at the heart of the Evergreen college fiasco a few years back.

help me out here.. i watched the video in its entirety and i have absolutely no bubbleguming idea what the hell they were talking about or what point, if any, was made..

 

[L84Cabo]

"...the right to personal self defense...I don't think is in the Second Amendment."

Part of the beauty, brilliance, and elegance of the COTUS is its simplicity and brevity. It's amazing how much ground was covered in such a small/short document.

I'm of the opinion that the Founders could have easily included a dozen other reasons why they gave us 2a...everything from personal self defense, to putting food on the table, etc. I'm fairly certain that these and a lot of other reasons were discussed/debated. To our founder's credit, they picked the single most important reason of all to help illustrate why they were giving us 2a.

And just like the Antifederalists were worried about, because the founders didn't mention "self defense" or anything else specifically, some people assume that it has no bearing and was/is not a right.

The founders, however, gave us the 9th Amendment to cover this eventuality...

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

I'm fairly certain that the founders viewed self defense and the ability to preserve ones own life as an unalienable right, granted to us by our creator. And if self defense is not a right, then please give me an example of what they were referencing in the 9th Amendment.

WOLVERINES!

 

[Yarome]

A good example of "learned" people delving too deeply into fractured commentary of an issue... then overtalking it to the point that their actual point is obscured and fairly lost.

The nutshell: Guns are good.

Kinda saying... The emotionally charged arguments pushing greater controls, as henious as recent events are, and which are in fact valid.... however, if we allow those greater controls, those events only represent a small fraction of the potentially greater and henious future injustices with the ever increasing and vividly appearant threat of tyranny looming over us.

That said, some of what he was saying was a bit of BS. Particularly in questioning and trying to "reasonably" argue what our forefathers intended those 2A right to apply to, IMHO. I'm quite sure they considered those elements of firearm ownership and obviously didn't feel the need to outline exceptions when those rights would NOT apply. Derrrr.....

 

[The B]

Kinda saying... The emotionally charged arguments pushing greater controls, as henious as recent events are, and which are in fact valid.... HOWEVER, if we allow those greater controls, those events only represent a small fraction of the potentially greater future injustices with the ever increasing and vividly appearant threat of tyranny looming over us.

weighing out the consequences of stricter controls over the consequences of doing "nothing" w regard to gun control - we lose X amount of children to school shootings, what ACTUAL effect can gun controls have over that, given that there are already 400,000,000 guns already on the streets in this country (people seems to totally miss this fact in the discussion - those guns are out there - they were already sold on 4473s, background checks passed, now theyre in circulation, uncontrollable)... against the harm that will come when its even harder for a divorcee to get a handgun to defend herself against a violent ex husband who has made threats against her and is one half bottle of wild turkey away from breaking into her casa and bubbleguming murdering her, et al, etc. when you need a gun, you need it NOW, not three months and a psyche eval from now.

this is one of the most successful varieties of arguments ive made with younger/lefter people in trying to get them to understand that guns arent just a symbol of old/white/christian/republican/conservative/racist asshattery.

make it make sense - sure, i can do that.

 

[titsonritz]

Wow really, whoda thuck it?

 

[Loc]

The gentleman appears to be making a couple of points:

1. That the gun control argument is logically over and the pro-2A side has won. It's just that the argument will continue because the antis can't accept defeat.

2. That tyranny is here, or at least more obviously on the horizon, and that necessitates 2A to be preserved at all costs.

3. That while concrete deaths such as NY and Uvalde are tragic and in no way justifiable, it pales in comparison to the historic risk of deaths in an unarmed population.

Was surprising to hear from that side of the aisle to be honest as it parroted a lot of what we all here have known for decades.

 

[Ferryman]

help me out here.. i watched the video in its entirety and i have absolutely no bubbleguming idea what the hell they were talking about or what point, if any, was made..

He's making the point that people who want to ban guns have not made a serious inquiry as what the world will end up looking like if guns actually are banned, but based on history it won't look good.

They just released a book on this theme;

A Hunter-Gatherer's Guide to the 21st Century: Evolution and the Challenges of Modern Life

Basic tenet is that modern life is changing at a pace that is faster than our ability to adapt to it, and therefore we are in the process of making some really bad decisions on how to manage everything. it's not about guns, at all, but rather about how evloutionary process affects our decision making skills. It's a pretty good read.

 

[red442joe]

Part of the beauty, brilliance, and elegance of the COTUS is its simplicity and brevity. It's amazing how much ground was covered in such a small/short document.

I'm of the opinion that the Founders could have easily included a dozen other reasons why they gave us 2a...everything from personal self defense, to putting food on the table, etc. I'm fairly certain that these and a lot of other reasons were discussed/debated. To our founder's credit, they picked the single most important reason of all to help illustrate why they were giving us 2a.

And just like the Antifederalists were worried about, because the founders didn't mention "self defense" or anything else specifically, some people assume that it has no bearing and was/is not a right.

The founders, however, gave us the 9th Amendment to cover this eventuality...

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

I'm fairly certain that the founders viewed self defense and the ability to preserve ones own life as an inalienable right, granted to us by our creator. And if self defense is not a right, then please give me an example of what they were referencing in the 9th Amendment.

WOLVERINES!

Unalienable.

Joe

 

[OldBroad44]

For those who don't recognize these guys, they are the professors at the heart of the Evergreen college fiasco a few years back....

Evergreen College had a traditional day in which black students left campus and met elsewhere, strictly voluntary. One year many black students tried to force all whites including faculty to stay off campus that day. Bret Weinstein refused. Various woke types went after Bret and tried to accuse him of racism etc. They chose the wrong victim. He simply does what he considers right, and cant be intimidated to do otherwise. In fact, at another institution earlier in his career, had been the one guy who stood up for and protected black women who were being exploited and abused by a fraturnity. So he was already exoerienced in doing the right thing even if it was unpopular. But also was actually proveably nonracist. At Evergreen black students who had never taken a class with Bret hunted him with baseball bats and the cowardly u president ordered the campus police to stand down . Anarchy reigned at Evergreen for several days. Black students who had taken courses with Bret universally supported him but were attacked and harrassed. Woke university administration tried to force Bret to apologize etc. He didnt. Ultimately he and his wife, who, by the way, were the most popular teachers in the school, were forced out. They got a settlement, but one trivial compared with the tenured positions they had. The woke corrupt u president was using the woke thing to get power for himself and eliminate all his enemies. After Bret and Heather Weinstein left Evergreen doubled down on wokeness. Enrollment dived and contracts every year. About half what it was when corrupt u president took over.

Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying moved to Portland. They are prolific youtubers. See the Darkhorse podcast.

 

[L84Cabo]

Unalienable.

Joe

Thank you. Fixed it.

 

[red442joe]

Thank you. Fixed it.

Joe

 

[red442joe]

The gentleman appears to be making a couple of points:

1. That the gun control argument is logically over and the pro-2A side has won. It's just that the argument will continue because the antis can't accept defeat.

2. That tyranny is hear, or at least more obviously on the horizon, and that necessitates 2A to be preserved at all costs.

3. That while concrete deaths such as NY and Uvalde are tragic and in no way justifiable, it pales in comparison to the historic risk of deaths in an unarmed population.

Was surprising to hear from that side of the aisle to be honest as it parroted a lot of what we all here have known for decades.

I don't think I have ever seen this so well stated!

Joe

 

[Member 34319]

It's always nice when someone realizes that the constitution is bigger than they originally thought.

That it is a beacon of things greater than ones media fueled rage and anger.

It's crazy to me that so many are so easily fooled by the media and politicians to the point that they will never fully grasp the importance of the 1st and 2nd amendment.