JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Status
This is true, but we cannot rely on schools to perform such education as they've been turned into NEA indoctrination centers. Mom and Dad, you have to take this on yourself and be sure you raise children that are heads and shoulders above the crowd.
100% sadly parents would rather have a public organization/school raise their children rather than putting in the effort.

Hence the reason we are where we are and will continue to spiral downward until our country is ran by Muslim extremists and communists who are outbreeding us and slowly taking control of the political environment one seat at a time.

It's their goal. Eventually America will be lost. Unless something drastically changes.
 
I have had 2nd amendment absolutists rail against me on way more than one occasion because I align myself with the government and the ATF by getting a manufacturing FFL and SOT tax stamp. I keep records for the government and act as their bootlicking lapdog.

I am not kidding.
 
I have had 2nd amendment absolutists rail against me on way more than one occasion because I align myself with the government and the ATF by getting a manufacturing FFL and SOT tax stamp. I keep records for the government and act as their bootlicking lapdog.

I am not kidding.
You are every bit as bad as me. I was railed on for having the audacity to order some bullets from Midway USA despite the fact they weren't willing to send magazines to Oregon. :eek:

And we won't even talk about that "anti-gun grifter" @1775usmc who was more or less branded as such by Sig. :rolleyes:

I think it was @VinnieBoomBah who brought the phrase "purity spiral" to my attention. Sometimes I think gun owners may be the worst purveyors, much to all of our detriment. I see it all too often on this forum.
 
To me "2A absolutism" would be the idea that anyone, anywhere, should be able to buy any weapon at all, for any reason. I don't think that's a tenable position personally, though I haven't given it a lot of thought past that.

I'm definitely a 1A absolutist, though. Maybe a third amendment absolutist, too - I'm pretty firmly opposed to the government stationing soldiers in my home without my consent. Actually, I'm an absolutist on all the other amendments, so if I were a more logically consistent person I'd probably be a second amendment absolutist. But I'm not. Oh well. Nobody's perfect.

For what it's worth, regarding an earlier set of comments, the Constitution uses the words "citizen" and "people," and not interchangeably. Correspondence from the founding fathers, as well as Supreme Court precedent dating back centuries, indicates that this is deliberate.

In practice this means that there are some rights that only citizens have, such as voting, and there are some rights that everyone in America has regardless of citizenship, such as freedom of speech and religion. To @CamoDeafie's point, since the second amendment says "people," rather than "citizens," this means it applies to everyone on US soil, not just citizens.
 
You are every bit as bad as me. I was railed on for having the audacity to order some bullets from Midway USA despite the fact they weren't willing to send magazines to Oregon. :eek:

And we won't even talk about that "anti-gun grifter" @1775usmc who was more or less branded as such by Sig. :rolleyes:

I think it was @VinnieBoomBah who brought the phrase "purity spiral" to my attention. Sometimes I think gun owners may be the worst purveyors, much to all of our detriment. I see it all too often on this forum.
I'm very anti gun when it comes to SIG. And that's according to SIG.

Haha.
 
2A Absolutism: If any Federal, State, or Local police or government agency is allowed to own/possess/use any device, then so are the citizens of the US.
Without exception. Period.
 
2a absolutism means you think 2a says what you want it to and not what it actually does. Also tends to come with a dramatic flair.
 
Just got back from the rifle range....cleaned my rifle and now enjoying a cold beer.
I absolutely had a fun time...:D
That is about as far as I will go with "absolutism".

Something to consider about "isms".....
The tend to box you in , so to speak...and can limit you in many ways.

Something to else consider.....this is the internet...
Anyone can say anything....and be anything....but that don't make it true.
Some folks brag...and posture ...others not so much.
What is posted by someone may not be an accurate reflection of who and what they really are.

Also.whatever you post , can live forever and be seen by anyone.
It pays to be careful with what you say and where you say it....even if that means not fully and freely expressing yourself...

Andy
 
Just got back from the rifle range....cleaned my rifle and now enjoying a cold beer.
I absolutely had a fun time...:D
That is about as far as I will go with "absolutism".

Something to consider about "isms".....
The tend to box you in , so to speak...and can limit you in many ways.

Something to else consider.....this is the internet...
Anyone can say anything....and be anything....but that don't make it true.
Some folks brag...and posture ...others not so much.
What is posted by someone may not be an accurate reflection of who and what they really are.

Also.whatever you post , can live forever and be seen by anyone.
It pays to be careful with what you say and where you say it....even if that means not fully and freely expressing yourself...

Andy
Good word on the whole, though my astigmatism only tends to make things askew.
 
I think 2A "should" be like all the other rights. There should be no restrictions on it that are not fine on the other rights. Of course this is again a case of the genie is out and there is no putting it back. WAY too many gun owners have LONG been fine with chipping away at this freedom. :(
 
I do not consider myself a 2A absolutist, but I am curious what folks here think counts as 2A absolutism. My understanding is that it opposes any and all direct or incidental restrictions on purchasing, ownership, and use of arms whatsoever.

My view is basically that there may be some restrictions that are constitutional, but they would have to pass strict scrutiny (meaning that the restriction must be the least restrictive option that actually accomplishes a compelling government interest). By way of analogy, I don't think that the Second Amendment offers more protection to the right it enshrines than the First Amendment does for the rights it contains. The government is allowed to place some restrictions on speech and religious expression, so there may also be some restrictions on arms that are permissible.

Curious for the thoughts of the good folks of NWFA!
Inciting to violence is not protected speech, yelling "FIRE" in a crowded theater is not protected speech.


It's not protected from CONSEQUENCES, but nothing keeps one from actually doing those things except fear of the CONSEQUENCES of abusing your rights.


Same thing applies to the 2A, misuse and/or abuse your rights, you lose your rights.... and maybe your life. Just like the 1A
 
I have had 2nd amendment absolutists rail against me on way more than one occasion because I align myself with the government and the ATF by getting a manufacturing FFL and SOT tax stamp. I keep records for the government and act as their bootlicking lapdog.

I am not kidding.
We see a lot of that here. As new laws go in that gun owners here vote for many of the people who do nothing to fight then scream that business's will not stick their neck out and go against the laws. :(
 
Status

Upcoming Events

New Classified Ads

Back Top