Ther Second Amendment

[O'Dell]

When the Bill of Rights was penned, "We the People", had muskets and the military had muskets. The theory being, and even advocated by the Founding Fathers, if the government became too oppressive, the populous [you and me] could rise up and take back control. Today we have semi-automatic hand guns and rifles, and the military has automatic weapons, M1A2 tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles, F-22's, B2's, aircraft carriers, armed UAV's, and nuclear weapons. It appears that "We the People" have lost some ground in the last 200 odd years.

[ScottM]

I want an F22, but I wouldn't be able to afford even the fuel to warm it up.

[JohnR]

To be fair, in Revolutionary days the average colonist could afford a hunting rifle or musket, while today an F-22 is a little out of reach to the average Joe.

[muggsy]

I could bring down an F22 with a musket! :) Seriously, what makes you think that your son or daughter would use an F22 against you rather than against a tyrannical government. Would you obey an order from the government to kill your own people? Have a little faith O'dell.

[marshal kane]

Easy to see why with time, civilians lose ground against the military. After each war, the military gets more sophisticated weaponry paid for by tax payer money. We don't have that advantage. Add to that, the desire for the Feds as well as the States desire to maintain control over us so they do so by passing gun control laws. It's a wonder that we aren't all still shooting flintlock muskets.

[Armybrat]

Hey, even the price of powder ain't exactly cheap these days.

Still have a lot of flint layin' around my yard though.

[GA_Sheepdog]

So, what you're saying is that you would like our military to be less advance with less equipment so you wouldn't feel inferior to the government? Don't get me wrong there's a lot of things I disagree with that our government and especially our current administstion is doing. But I don't understand why you're complaining about how advanced and well equipped our military is. Do you want them to go back to the days of muskets and swords? That way a country like Liberia or any other third world county with a boat could take us over? They may not know how to use it but they have big scary "Automatic" rifles and if it was your way, our military would only have single shot muskets to defend our country with.


Please, what next? Are we gonna start talking about how the United States is a corporation and the 14th amendment ruined the country? Then we can all declare ourselves "Sovereign Citizens" and then we won't have to register our vehicles anymore and be immune to laws?

[Armybrat]

Nobody's complaining about our military - I think they want to make sure it ain't gonna be used against our own citizens for objecting to what the elitist Beltway nabobs are doing.

[GA_Sheepdog]

Nobody's complaining about our military - I think they want to make sure it ain't gonna be used against our own citizens for objecting to what the elitist Beltway nabobs are doing.


I get that. And as time goes on the gap between the civilians and and our government will only grow as more and more advance technologies become available. Its inevitable. But it's also a must for our military to stay on top with it's fighting prowess against other countries like China.

Believe me I know what you mean though. It would be nice if we were all trillionaires and could afford f-22's and battleships.

[O'Dell]

Obviously, I'm not complaining about out the advanced capabilities of our military. Fifty years ago I was a part of it and got to play with the latest toys of the time, including an F-4J Phantom II. However, think about who is in charge of our military, the CinC. Do you trust HIM? Would the military allow itself to be use against private citizens in any major way? I doubt it.......but?

In the sixties during the unpleasantness in SE Asia, it now known that LBJ and Robert McNamara leaked our targeting info to the NV through the Swiss Embassy. The increased defenses encountered by our AF and Navy pilots no doubt caused some deaths and and personnel captures. And that was over fifty years ago. Do you think the mood in Washington is more moral now?

The whole point is that in the fifties, we trusted our government to do the right thing. I can only speak for myself, but today, I DON"T, period. The terms "in the national interest" or " national security" are bandied about quite a lot today, and I, for one, wonder just how far they go.

Unfortunately, I don't have the answers, just the questions.

[GA_Sheepdog]

Obviously, I'm not complaining about out the advanced capabilities of out military. Fifty years ago I was a part of it and got to play with the latest toys of the time, including an F-4J Phantom II. However, think about who is in charge of our military, the CinC. Do you trust HIM? Would the military allow itself to be use against private citizens in any major way? I doubt it.......but?

In the sixties during the unpleasantness in SE Asia, it now known that LBJ and Robert McNamara leaked our targeting info to the NV through the Swiss Embassy. The increased defenses encountered by our AF and Navy pilots no doubt caused some deaths and and personnel captures. And that was over fifty years ago. Do you think the mood in Washington is more moral now?

The whole point is that in the fifties, we trusted our government to do the right thing. I can only speak for myself, but today, I DON"T, period. The terms "in the national interest" or " national security" are bandied about quite a lot today, and I, for one, wonder just how far they go.

Unfortunately, I don't have the answers, just the questions.



I'm sorry for the rant I had. I've been doing a lot of research on sovereign citizens since I've been running into some latley. I think maybe that's why I felt a little strong about the subject. I myself, like you have served in the military, although it was at different times.

[Planedude]

Hmmmmm... As quoted by one of our greatest enemies in WWII...

Isoroku Yamamoto

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."

And this too;

"The fiercest serpent may be overcome by a swarm of ants."

Some truths of these United States have never changed. Don't worry be (un)happy... and VOTE.

[marshal kane]

So, what you're saying is that you would like our military to be less advance with less equipment so you wouldn't feel inferior to the government?
All I'm saying is that it's inevitable that the military will have more sophisticated weaponry than civilians due to the reasons cited, nothing more. Don't read something into it that's not there.

[marshal kane]

Hmmmmm... As quoted by one of our greatest enemies in WWII...

Isoroku Yamamoto

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."

And this too;

"The fiercest serpent may be overcome by a swarm of ants."

Some truths of these United States have never changed. Don't worry be (un)happy... and VOTE.

While what you said is true, I might add: Yamamoto was an educated man and well travelled. He knew what the Japanese were up against. The typical ISIS mindset is living in the seventh century and is dangerous because he is willing to give his life to killing the infidel. Something akin to the typical Japanese soldier willing to die for the emperor.

[ScottM]

While what you said is true, I might add: Yamamoto was an educated man and well travelled. He knew what the Japanese were up against. The typical ISIS mindset is living in the seventh century and is dangerous because he is willing to give his life to killing the infidel. Something akin to the typical Japanese soldier willing to die for the emperor.

This is very, very unfortunately dead-on true.

[jeepster09]

Sadly our government has found loop holes around using troops against us already...

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14707922

I read the book on Blackwater and if true...it states the government used "guns for hire" Blackwater mercenaries at Katrina in largescale because they do not have to go by the rules that our police have to follow and this skirts our constitution of using military against it's citizens. It also talked about how Blackwater has larger military [without the bother of pesky rules/laws] than MOST 3rd world countries. We live in scary times.

[ScottM]

Corporate outsourcing. It's all the rage there days.

[muggsy]

I may go, but I plan on taking at least ten with me. :)

[yqtszhj]

I read the book on Blackwater and if true...it states the government used "guns for hire" Blackwater mercenaries at Katrina in largescale because they do not have to go by the rules...

I personally know if wasn't exactly like that. In the days after Katrina lawlessness prevaled partially because the NOPD let people out of the jails because they couldnt evacuate them. The gun shops, etc... were robbed and armed criminals were shooting at everyone after the storm. The company I worked for at the time had employees in NO during the storm trying to maintain public services which was standard practice. After the storm the employees were being shot at whenever they opened the door to the building. At that time the company hired blackwater as guards and escorts for employees to locations in NO while trying to restore public services. They were hired because the NOPD couldn't handle the responsibility. That being said Blackwater was what they are, and if ANYONE took a shot at them there would not have been an arrest because it would have been self defense. They didn't look for trouble but they didn't run from it either. They would without fear stand in an intersection alone and not let anyone through while looking for shooters. By the way, when they showed up, the shooters left.

The whole problem was the NOPD was way over their heads and actually took self defense weapons away from law abiding citizens leaving them helpless. I hope that whole situation doesn't happen again.