Poll : Do you think that the 2nd Amendment has protected us from losing the others?

rights Poll : Do you think that the 2nd Amendment has protected us from losing the others?The Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights protects us from losing all of the others –  if we lose the Second Amendment loss of others will quickly follow…. Don’t Tread on Me… Come and Take Them… Molon Labe…

We have all heard those things or similar words countless times, but do those words hold any weight or force behind them today, considering the fact that our Constitutional rights are being  eroded, stomped on and taken away with nearly every stroke of the legislative pen.

For example you have no longer have a right to privacy, they can and do imprison American citizens without proper due process and even execute American citizens without a trial – and they’ve done all of this with the Second Amendment still in place (with a few restrictions that only effect law-abiding citizens of course), so today’s poll questions is…

 

Please explain your answer in the comments below….

my family survival

Comments

  1. I voted no simply because the people have no desire to USE the second amendment to cast off tyranny, as happened in the 1770’s. People will simply submit.

    • I also voted no because the government is already dismantling portions of the Bill of Rights. All the president needs to do is issue an executive order… no waiting for congress to get off their backsides and do something. And once it’s implemented, congress lacks the backbone to stand up and take back the power that the constitution gave them!

      • Keep in mind that in the end, they work for us. The only reason that they attack our right to keep and bear arms, is that they all realize that if push really comes to shove, an armed populace would be a real problem for them. I absolutely think it has helped preserve the other rights, keeping in mind that the attack comes clear from the international community through the U.N. which recently lost their first attempt at small arms regulation. The way we keep this right intact is to support our national gun organizations like NRA and GOA as well as your statewide association. When they look at the NRA and 5 million members who can shut down the switchboards, it gives them all pause and lets them know that their jobs are one election away from ending.

        • The Constitutional Rights are slowly eroding, but an armed populance will slow the process. Hopefully, something good will happen in November that will slow the reduction even more. Remember, everyone counts. Sign the petitions, write letters, and make those phone calls. Certain people are worried about not being reelected. Hold those in D.C. accountable. Let them know you are holding them acountable. I let a certain Senator know the gun bill vote was the most important one is his political career. I got an immediate response from him. Right now, he is fighting for that political career!!! If he fails, one more republican in the Senate. :-)

        • Don Duncan says:

          “… they work for us.” No! They promise to work for us if we give them power over us. After 200+ years of steady betrayal of that promise it is clear that we must revoke their power and protect ourselves. The American Dream has been betrayed by the political system of delegated authority. It did not work. It is our responsibility to reclaim our power and moral authority by repudiating our self proclaimed protectors, and practicing self governance. Nothing less will save us.

          • Don,
            It has always been our responsibility to claim and maintain self government and those in the 2nd amendment arena have always seen and known that. One of our motto’s since NFA 68 has been that “the cost of freedom is eternal vigilance” and fortunately many people outside of the gun culture are discovering this and joining the fight. I only hope that we are not all too late.

      • Mike Hoskins says:

        “EXECUTIVE ORDERS” can only be used on internal government issues. Not on the FREE people!

    • The tyranny that you are talking about started much earlier. It took many 10’s of years for the oppression of rights, before action was taken. And it was the other side who used guns first (subject to debate of course). The Stamp Act of 1765 (as I recall) was the first organized rebellion by the Colonies to GB. The shooting started in 1775 and ended in 1783.

      And this was a period where communications and transportation was very limited. The press was much freer to express it’s opinion (although some of the press releases were politics by another name).

      The biggest issue between then and now, is people are very much less independent. They “need” government. They will loose their “benefits” and have to actually product something without the government. I think this is what is fueling the “allowance” of the restriction of civil liberties. It’s not so much that they (the government) are taking them as we are giving them away to preserve out “handouts”.

      • Yes, the # of people who rec benefits from US govt has increased a lot (at least in food stamps) in recent yrs. I’ve not seen recent stats, but in the late 90s, the # of homeschoolers was increasing quite rapidly, altho a small percentage. It seems like the # of preppers is also increasing. After the ’08 election of Obama, I read that the # of people involved in non-govt-related militias increased significantly, but has decreased in the last couple yrs. My pt is: Don’t get discouraged, but there are signs that the # of Americans who want to exist seperately from govt, is also increasing. & we all saw the pushback last year when Obama & dem’s tried to make some kinds of guns illegal.
        While it may seem like independent-minded people would never organize a “real rebellion” to the govt, I’m sure that it seemed that way for decades in the mid-1700s too. Also, look at the slavery issue in the 1800s -it too festered for numerous decades b/4 an actual shot was fired at Fort Sumter, that led to a real civil war. Is it possible that the current situation in the US is moving that direction?

    • I agree, Spud- but would transfer the word ‘desire’ to ‘absolute unwillingness’ to use the 2A.
      People, especially men, these days are more concerned with providing the basics for their family and ensuring a comfortable retirement than are interested in defending such nebulous ideas such as ‘freedom’.
      Above all, no one wants to strike the first blow for Freedom- the rational fear of “What good will it do if I’m the only one?” And therein is the reason the 2A has not protected us from losing the others- which any honest person will admit, the Second is the only one we haven’t totally lost. CT may prove this otherwise.

      • patientmomma says:

        I think it depends on where you live. I used to live in Northern Virginia and also in Florida. Most of the NVA folks worked constantly and most of the FL folks were retired and out for a good time. I live in TN now and almost everyone I know (the welfare segment excepted), hunts and fishes year round,owns at least two guns, and are fiercely protective of their freedoms and their land and proud of their heritage. They rally, they march, they go to city, county and other meetings to voice their opinions, and they let their elected representatives know they will be voted out if they slip up. Just saying…..

    • The people in the 1750’s to 1776 had no DESIRE, and in fact it was a relatively small amount who actually had the fortitude to ‘cast off tyranny’. It was a very small group of brilliant, dedicated men who started in the 1760’s who tried to work within the ‘system’ of the day to gain peaceful liberty and it ended with about 3 percent of the colonial population fighting for it instead. By the end they were supported, financially and through resources by about 20% of the colonial population. So what WE need today, is the type of dedication and fortitude of that small group.

      • A small group of 3% today, would be over 9 million strong. We would be out gunned in terms of firepower but not out manned. It would be long and bloody… But, we would prevail.

        • Actually it could probably start with a group as small as 600 or so broken up into small groups across the country. Cut power at the places the individual grids connect, destroy the ability to transport goods via rail and interstate highways. Chaos would ensue.

          • tommy2rs, I don’t think it would take 600, and chaos would indeed ensue. A couple or three dozen acting alone or in pairs (anything bigger would guarantee government infiltration), if they were decently trained, smart, and cautious could do enormous damage.

            The problem with that kind of sabotage is that it would completely discredit in the public mind anything the saboteurs advocate. The government and news media would absolutely love to see pro-2nd Amendment people turning off the electrical grid and the ability to use the highways. It would be the worst nightmare the pro-Constitutional government side could be faced with.

            People would understandably demand government crush the rebels, and would tolerate any level of government power to do so. Attacking our infrastructure wouldn’t bring down the government: It would feed the government steroids.

            Which isn’t to disagree with you at all, just to say that it would be the worst of all possible responses to tyranny.

          • Rider of Rohan says:

            I’m pretty sure there are teams of Islamic terrorists associated with Hezbollah and the MB in the US right now who are planning just such attacks in the event the US and Iran ever got into a tiff.

            • In Massachusetts we supply welfare and housing subsidies to Islamioc Terrorists aka The Boston Bombers. Then they write articles about what did “we” do wrong! The government is still not talking about their Watertown, MA location – probably had an FBI informant there. There was no reference after the TV newscasts as far as I know.

        • OK, say we end up fighting an outright tyranny or occupying force, and we are totally outgunned.

          One does not go toe to toe with a tank, using a rifle! This is the spurious argument given by gun grabbers “you’re outgunned so why bother”. No – that’s what asymmetrical warfare is for.

          Instead one finds out where the tanker’s (or better, his commander’s) family lives, or one sabotages the tanks when they are parked. You strike where they are weak, not where they are strong. You strike when they are not expecting it, not facing them down. You only attack when you can get away quick.

          They have to sleep sometime. They have families. Yes, that’s evil but if we’re being made war on and occupied, one fights to win.

          One, if forced to work for the enemy, works poorly and as slow as possible, and looks for opportunities to sabotage without getting caught. Like not tightening bolts enough, for example, or tightening them too much, or getting something dirty that needs to be clean to work right, and always noticing their weaknesses, routines, and assets for later exploitation. One never forgets one is still fighting, one never gives up EVER.

          Oh, and NEVER give yourself up as a POW just because you are cold wet and hungry, or even wounded. You will suffer worse as a prisoner, no matter what an enemy might promise you.

          I hope never to be in these situations but I will never willingly enter a prison camp except to mess it up or liberate it.

          • PP,
            All campaigns run on logistics and intelligence. You keep your OPSEC to starve the Intel and strike the logistics when and where you can. A perfectly good functional vehicle is worth nothing without fuel. Soldiers are seriously impaired without beans and bullets. Work smart, not hard.

          • All is fair in love & war!!!!

      • Don Duncan says:

        One third remained loyal to the king. One third were neutral. One third chose independent governance. However, most of the resistance was expressed as violent collective action, e.g., a regular army. This proved futile because it was not morally or socially a philosophical change. The change came when the independent spirit was expressed by the spontaneous violent resistance of the militia and the non-violent resistance of others. This is what saved the Revolution, not Washington’s troops. However, with the creation of govt. came a govt. slanted history. For example, Washington was NOT the first president. There were 14 previous presidents under the Articles of Confederation. This was America’s first govt., not the Constitutional one which replaced a decentralized system with a centralized federal system explicitly hostile to property rights, as made clear by taxation and eminent domain laws.

        • Don I understand what you are saying about presidents. The weakness of the Articles of Confederation was that they had no central authority figure except the President of the Congress. That was one each year from it’s ratification in 1782 until being “superseded” by the Constitution on 1789 (8 different “President”). Now if you put in the President of the Continental Congress prior to this, back to 1775 (?) we might come up with 14 (Seems John Hancock served under all of the titles at least once).

          However, your point, I believe, is that the Articles were our 1st try at a National governing document. This first attempt showed many of the flaws of a loose confederation of states trying to live independently yet interdependently. That was why the Federalists had such a strong following, because of the failure of the Articles.

          I’m not sure where the balance point tipped toward national power trumping states rights (perhaps the Civil War and just prior). I do fear that we have gone too far toward the national side and a fight is coming to bring us back toward the states rights argument.

          • Don Duncan says:

            “…states rights…” is a false concept. Only individuals have rights, e.g., no group rights exist. States have delegated privileges, which grow unchecked with time. It’s the old “divide and concur” trick.

            The Articles only failed in the sense that they failed to create a federal govt. strong enough for the politically corrupt. This was corrected by what I call “The Counter American Revolution” or “The anti-American coup”.

        • Don,
          Don’t forget that we had a lot of help from France. We’ll not get that kind of help again; however, my hope is that there are still enough active dity members of the armed forces who take their oath seriously, and see the domestic enemies around us. They could well be the new France.

    • I voted NO for the same reason. It has the power to do so, but I don’t think the America people have the backbone to use it, unfortunately.

    • That wasn’t the question.

    • I disagree and I suspect Connecticut gun owners will be a litmus test to see how far we’ll let the tyrants go.

  2. Rider of Rohan says:

    I voted yes because we don’t know what could have happened had the 2nd Amendment not been in place. Were it not a deterrent to their plans they wouldn’t be trying so hard to get rid of it.

    • Nebraska Woman says:

      My thoughts exactly, Rider. Maybe the 1770’s will happen soon. There hasn’t been a really good President since Calvin Coolidge (Ronald Reagan notwithstanding).

    • Rider of Rohan,

      Can you elaborate a bit on your comment and explain how the 2nd Amendment is / has been a deterrent to their plans, or kept the federal government from eroding the other rights listed in the Bill of Rights?

      • MD,
        I think I can sum it up in one word. Fear
        Better that they fear us, than we fear them.

        • OhioPrepper,

          Are you sure that they fear us more than we fear them?

          • OP & MD:

            I think the fear is there and is real. Why else work so hard to further restrict firearms ownership, when there is currently nothing you can do with a firearm illegally that is not already on the books as a crime.

            Gun Control is easy to sell. Crime Control is hard. In an unscientific study it has been found that most criminals don’t obey the law.

            • lol I like that comment JP. I have also long believed most criminals don’t obey the law.

              Just as most if not all murderous pyscho’s do not obey “gun free zones”.

            • lol, JP, I too love that last paragraph! Great stuff!

            • Crime control. Therein lies the problem. The lefty legislators cannot antagonize their powerbase. In NJ, that equates to the unentitled entitlement base, which literally goes by the busload to the polls.

          • MD,
            That would depend on who “us”is; however, in general, I think they understand the ultimate potential consequences, which is why they try at every chance to disarm us.

          • A famous quote, I think by Thomas Jefferson: “When the people fear the government you have tyranny; when the government fears the people you have democracy.”

        • If the pols had any fear of ‘us’ commoners, there’d be no question such as what this poll is asking.

          • Rider of Rohan says:

            If the pols had no fear of us commoners, as you say, you wouldn’t be able to comment here cause MD wouldn’t have a blog. Or at least a blog like this one. It’s not respect for freedom of speech that has prevented them from shutting this blog or any other entity down that opposes their plans.

      • Rider of Rohan says:

        I will try to elaborate on my thinking, and explain the reasoning behind that conclusion, MD. Thanks for asking.

        It’s quite obvious to anyone who isn’t in a coma that our Constitutional rights are being eroded, piece by piece, part by part. We see instances every day of people being bullied, pressured, beaten, falsely arrested, etc. Many of these instances would lead a thoughtful person to conclude we’ve lost our rights. And they wouldn’t be wrong to some extent. But a little history is necessary to understand what “could” have happened vs. what has actually happened.

        The 1960s bred a cadre of leftist radicals in this country, many of them hiding behind legitimate causes such as civil rights for black people, and opposition to the war in Vietnam. Not to delve too deeply, but many of these people were heavily influenced by communism/socialism, and saw these systems as a way to control America, and institute their agenda, which was centralized control of the economy, radical environmentalism, population control, and numerous other things that aren’t important to the subject at hand. The key word is control. That’s the backstory.

        The day you see a mass roundup of people who oppose this regime will be the day you know the 2nd Amendment is no longer a deterrent. Because these people have no qualms about violating the rights of others, especially those who they see hindering the path to their vision of utopia. One of their “mentors” is none other than the terrorist Bill Ayers, who according to an FBI informant called for the imprisoning and murder of 20 million conservatives. I interact with some of these people on Twitter, and believe me the hate they project leads me to believe them fully capable of violating rights and worse.

        Ohio Prepper hit the nail on the head. Fear. That fear is the only thing stopping mass arrests, re-education camps, denial of medical services & gov’t benefits, etc. And that fear comes from an unknown, which is the armed citizen. So that’s why they push, incite, inflame, and insult us on the edges, not doing what they really wish.

        The 2nd Amendment, as it is now being interpreted, is the only thing stopping them. They are working hard to overturn it, disparage it, change it, contort it, etc. So you can thank the 2nd for your right to comment here, and for MD’s right to publish this blog. Believe me, these people would have no heartburn about forcing the closing of these types of blogs. In fact, they would relish it. Which would in itself be another indicator that the 2nd A was no longer a deterrent.

        • I agree with you, Rider.

          One quibble: As I recall, when Bill Ayers was fantasizing about their revolutionary victory, he said that some part of the American people would be incapable of being re-educated, and that they would therefore need to be liquidated. My collection is that he did not say 20,000,000, but in a day when the national population was a little over 200 million, he said that probably 100,000,000 would have to be liquidated.

          So the guy who provided his living room for Barack Obama’s start in elected politics was fantasizing about killing half the population, and Obama has never repudiated him. Pol Pot only murdered a third of the population of Cambodia.

          Hold on to your guns.

        • A lawyer can twist any of the words so that they say “the right of the people” must mean militias – give me a libtard break! It isn’t the judges and lawyers preserving freedom – they are the new royalty.

          • Rider of Rohan says:

            Yes, I agree, that’s why I said “as it is now being interpreted”, with full knowledge we are 1 judge and 1 court decision away from its loss. Meanwhile, it survives, though diminished, for now, and we had best take advantage of that fact.

        • Rider,

          I agree with your position. There’s a reason Hitler and Stalin disarmed the populace. You can’t control people who have the capacity to fight back. I hear Oath Keepers was camping on the banks of the Potomac River a few months back. A few chains were rattled.

        • patientmomma says:

          absolutely right!

  3. What good is it if it is not going to be used?

    We are in the S#@! and losing ground daily…

    • Hognutz,
      Perhaps it’s time for you to get more involved if you are not already. Join a local Tea Party or 9/12 group, join the national and statewide pro gun organizations, keep on top of things and call your congress critters.
      We as a nation have redress with 3 boxes:
      • The jury box
      • The ballot box
      • The cartridge box.

      If we are eternally vigilant with the first two, perhaps we will never need the third.

      • OP
        How right you are! We belong to the tea party in our area, although we can not participate at this time we have in the past and every time you take a stand those slugs back off…..
        if only for a little while.

      • Nebraska Woman says:

        +100

    • Rider of Rohan says:

      I use the 2nd Amendment all the time, in fact multiple times per day. Every time I buy a gun, go to the range, carry my weapon, etc., I exercise that right. Believe me, when there isn’t a 2nd Amendment, you or no one else will legally own a gun unless you are a part of the ruling class.

  4. riverrider says:

    make NO mistake, if the 2nd were gone, so are the rest. the 2nd is the only thin thread holding tdl and his evil at bay. look at south africa. i rest my case.

    • I have to respectfully disagree at this point. The Powers that be KNOW the people will never stand up armed in mass numbers. That’s why they are so blatantly moving forward, marginalizing those few who would stand up as “right wing nutjobs” and characterizing the founding fathers as “domestic terrorists”.

      • Spudweb:

        Yet look at those who will not stand up to the government. Look at their motivation. Then look at all the conflicts where people have stood up to government oppression. What percentage supported the government, what percentage stood by and watched, and what percentage actually did something? You will find that the majority of any population do not care who rules them. It is only a few on their end that make the difference. That’s what scares the government, not the masses, but the exceptions.

        • JP,
          You wrote in part, “but the exceptions” which would be more proper as, “but the armed and trained exceptions”. Think Oathkeepers.

          • OP:

            In modern terms, I would agree. But when you get time check out the WHO’s that were at Concord, MA. Classified as Militia, poorly trained, self equiped. But willing to stand up to the “best trained Army in the world” (or at least a portion of it).

            These people also had the support of those who didn’t carry a gun. They provided food, money, communications support, and many other things. They did not stand alone.

            I feel that you do not have to be trained with a firearm to protect and fight for freedom. But you must be ready to make sacrifices, possibly the ultimate sacrifice, for the cause(s) you believe in.

            • JP,
              Very good points. Even in the regular military there are perhaps a dozen non trigger pullers doing Intel, Logistics, Medical, Transport, etc. to support each trigger puller.

          • nick flandrey says:

            See also: Three Percenters, Threepers, patriot movement, III, Citadel.

            There are movements, people seem to be taking action and making preparations, or possibly it’s all internet talk…

            nick

      • Sad to disagree with you, RR- but I don’t see where there is one Amendment that hasn’t been abrogated the last five years, as well as years prior. (Consider R. Regan’s signing NSDD47, among even more previous nefarious directives by those before him.)
        At best, the Second is currently the last ‘freedom’ we’ve not totally lost, just as the others: by encroachment, piecemeal.
        I also believe there will come a day that someone- actually a group- is going to say “Enough!” and then the dance will begin. Will it be CT? Will enough patriots there decide they’ve got the backing of patriots from other states to assist, because it’s absolutely certain one state cannot do anything by itself, not even Texas with its monster size ego.

        • riverrider says:

          jsw, you make my argument for me. if 2a were truly gone we would have much worse than we do now. yes 2a has taken a beating, and so it was before the rev part1, and rev2(war of northern aggression) for many years leading up to same. rev2 really began in 1850 with a gridlocked congress just like now. will the peace last 10 more years? i doubt it. we are two nations thrust together by geography. such a house cannot long stand, short of ruthless dictatorship. not far from that now tho.

      • riverrider says:

        mr. spudweb, if they know this as you say, why are there no tanks running down main street? they fear it alright, and the veteran march last november reinforced that fear. that’s why they work so hard to overturn the 2nd. they know there will be a line crossed at some point that will bring down the thunder. they inch along daily testing to find that line while ridiculing and marginalizing 2a supporters.

    • Rider of Rohan says:

      Or Venezuela, where the disarming of the populace by Chavez is making the evil work of Maduro possible.

      As for SA, the genocide of rural whites is ongoing. Disarming them was the prelude, as it always is everywhere. That the US was complicit in the disarmament is cause for thought on the situation here. I’m like you, were it not for the 2nd, we would already know worse, much worse.

  5. I voted YES, we as a nation must keep the rights granted to us. If one falls, the rest will go as well. Those who feel loosing the 2nd amendment will not cause the others to go…read riverriders comment again and again until you ‘get it’.
    They are trying to put monitors into the TV stations, and that was a no go……..for now. Just use your imagination……oh, sorry we are of the visual age where using the mind to see the future is not possible. You must understand we are at WAR, now, it just has not come down to the beans and bullets phase-yet.

    • Becky, have you not noticed that we have already completely lost many of our Constitutional rights? They continue to pass and uphold unconstitutional laws and the second amendment has done nothing to stop them.

      “They are trying to put monitors into the TV stations, and that was a no go……..for now.” Do you really think that the second amendment had anything to do with that decision? btw don’t worry they will bring that one back up and will eventually put it into place…

    • Sorry, Becky- we’ve already lost all the rights afforded in the Amendments.
      As to the ‘monitors’ the FCC wants ot put in news rooms… no big deal that they were denied: there is nothing you can write or read that uncle fedster does not know about; you have no thoughts said uncle cannot know about even before you do. As one of my nephews said of his position in the CIA… “I know more about you than you do yourself.”

  6. BTW I am a strong second amendment supporter but I can also see what has happened and what is happening now and can see from those actions that the second amendment has not stopped the federal government from stomping all over the other amendments.

  7. I voted yes, because TPTB fear an armed citizenry. The Founders knew that armed citizens stand as a wall between tyranny and freedom. Sooner or later a test will come. The TPTB have militarized the police for that very reason.

    • Carl, do you really think that anyone is going to stand up against tyranny armed and in large enough numbers to do anything? News flash… our constitutional rights are already gone and no one has done anything about it. It’s amazing at the people that think they are still free or have constitutional rights… I’m all for the second amendment but the reality is that it has done nothing to keep us from losing the others… sorry, folks but look around…

      • Glad someone else ‘gets it’, Gault.

        • @ Gault,
          News flash, which Rights are “Already Gone”?
          The fact that you can post what you did and the fact that I own some firearms, or go to the church I wish to, pretty much covers #1 & 2.

          Please explain your statement.

          • First Amendment – Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

            Free speech and the right to assemble – Only days after clearing Congress, US President Barack Obama signed his name to H.R. 347 on Thursday, officially making it a federal offense to cause a disturbance at certain political events — essentially criminalizing protest in the States.

            Freedom of Religon – No prayer in schools, remember

            About the assault on christians in the military
            http://www.frc.org/clearpresentdanger

            Second Amendment – 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.

            Can you carry your guns openly everywhere and every place in the US? Does the government tell you what guns types you can have and what types you can’t have? Do you have to fill out a form 4473 to buy a gun from a dealer? Do you have to get permission from the government (in the form of a tax) to buy a class 3 or a silencer? When I was a kid we had gun racks in the back windows of our trucks and could have them there while at school. Try that today. Yep that right is definitely infringed. Not gone but under heavy assault.

      • well I guess I am a bit nieve to believe we have some thing left of the constitution and I “get it” . I am just not ready to throw in the towel. I do hope that there are enough patriots left to defend our heritage. I am probably wrong, but hope we do.

      • Nsaneprepper says:

        “Our constitutional rights are already gone”…I agree 100%. I liken it to what women “jokingly” say about their husbands…just let them think they are in charge. I think the govt is just letting us think we still have some rights until they feel the time is right for swift implementation of their master plan.

        • Nebraska Woman says:

          Nsane: The man is the head of the house, the woman the neck, which means she can turn the head any way she wants!

  8. I vote yes. without it, all else is loss. if we lose it, hard to tell if we could ever get it back. guess it depends on the people to get it back. I am 60 years old, retired military and have seen the rights/freedoms of the people going to the wayside. the protesters of the Vietnam war had their rights/freedom protected. now, not. look at the occupy wall street protesters, arrested. Cincinnati protesters was arrested for being in a park for their protest. yes most of our rights/freedoms are going away, slowly. but with out the 2nd, they would go away a lot faster.

  9. When God told Moses, “You shall not murder” , God Himself established a fundamental right to life. Thus, each and every living Being has a Right to Life and a Right to defend life. Which is why our Founding Fathers wrote that we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights of , LIFE, LIBERTY, ect.

    The Government has to power from God, to protect the innocent and maintain order, punish law breakers, but not to erase Rights that God has established.

    Has the 2nd. amendment protected us, I’m not sure. Do I have a God given right to protect myself and others….

    Dam straight I do, and no Government can take from me what God has given me!

  10. I vote no. The second amendment is no more or less important that the others in maintaining our freedoms. The problem is that all of the bill of rights are being eroded not just 1. An Even bigger problem is that if a right isn’t listed then they act like it doesn’t exists . An example of the eroding of the right to bear arms is the restriction of felon who have served their time to on firearms. This originally sounded good as these people had proved to be lawless and a danger. Then all they had to do was increase the number of thing that makes you a felon . The same can be said for many other small footsteps down the road to slavery .
    Going of subject . We have a government that doesn’t follow the constitution that is there to limit them so why do we think they would follow a balance budget amendment ?

    • Fixit,
      It would depend on the way the balanced budget amendment was written. If I’m writing it, exceeding the budget would immediately term limit anyone who voted for it. They would not be able to run in the next election and would be banned from running for or serving in the US congress for life. They would in essence have to get a real job. With 535 members of congress and 300+ million people in the country, filling those positions would not be all that hard.

    • Exactly right, Fixit. “Then all they had to do was increase the number of thing that makes you a felon ”

      Like lying to the government, even when not under oath. Just ask Martha Stewart. They didn’t imprison her for insider trading, they got her for lying to our servants, even though the Supreme Court has ruled that our servants can lie to us.

      Now she can’t vote, can’t own a gun, can’t get a security clearance, can’t do any number of things. Felonies used to be extremely serious offenses like forcible rape, armed robbery, murder, treason. Now people commit all sorts of felonies without even knowing they are breaking the law.

  11. As long as there are people on this planet, there will be firearms to be had. Just look at the bottom of our lakes and rivers, there must be 100,000+ AR-15 dumped into them in boating accidents.
    Just say’n

  12. I voted YES (if you couldn’t have guessed by now). Yes, our Constitutional rights have been eroded. But we need to look at the why and the how. Governments, but their nature, are oppressors. Laws only restrict activities, they do not promote them. The more laws, the more restrictions. Many of our laws were passed to “protect the innocent”. I put forward that the vast majority of these laws only cover up the underlying problems.

    Drug use is bad; people can hurt themselves and cause themselves problems; we must protect them. So to protect some, we tax all and make things people are going to do illegal. This creates an underground economy, which goes against what the government wants, so they “attack”. Now we are down to unwarranted search and secure, shooting of pets, and killing of innocent people because the cure is now worse than the problem. They tried “legislative social engineering” with Prohibition. That worked well didn’t it.

    Do I believe that the 2nd Amendment is more important than the others, no. Do I believe that the degradation of our Constitutional rights would be happening faster or have already been completed without the 2nd, YES!

    Look to Katrina and learn. One of the first things the government did was start confiscating weapons, many times in exchange for food and water, before they came in to aid the victims. There is a price to pay for any handout. ALL government programs come with restrictive strings! Be Aware!

  13. Did anyone else notice that the major of those who say NO are new? I clicked on some of their links and they go nowhere.

    • Actually, LP, I noticed just the opposite.
      I’m certainly not ‘new’ here and I am strongly saying No, the Second has not protected the others. If I’m not mistaken (which I do often enough to be wrong), Gault also has been here quite a while.
      Though he didn’t give his opinion, I feel pretty certain that our Host also feels the Second has not afforded protection to the other ‘rights’ ennumerated in the BoR. Surely he isn’t ‘new’ here. But then, I don’t want to put words in MDs mouth. He’s a big boy and can speak for himself.

      • JSW:

        You are correct in that you, and several others, are not new; regular commentors, and able to express your views. And, I believe, your views are respected.

        Having said that, when you list a website and it does not go to your website, I begin to question your authenticity.

        • JP,
          What links are you talking about?

          • OP:

            When the commentors name is highlighted, like yours, and you click on it, it should take you to your blog/website. Yours does; a couple of the others do not, they come back to this site.

            It’s just something that gives me pause. It does not mean that they are some nefarious person or being disruptive. I just find it curious. It could also just be an error in setting up your “log in” for this site.

            This is an open forum type blog. All people are welcome to express their opinions, share their experiences and research. As long as it stays “family friendly” I don’t care. My opinion in no more valid or valuable than anyone else’s.

            • Tactical G-Ma says:

              Well, I don’t have a blog or a website or YouTube movies and I don’t twitter. MD knows my real name. I don’t have a business I am promoting or stuff I want to sell you. Does that then mean I am suspect? There are all kinds of people and MD knows that if he says the word, I will never be back.
              I suspect that some of you with links to other sites may have ulterior motives.

              • Ta GM:

                No that’s not what I said. Whether or not you have another Blog/website is not the issue. The issue I was making is that these DID have a reference, but it was back to this site. I have seen others in the past whose reference when no where. All the ones I remember (and it may be just my short memory) only were with us for a few comments, then left.

                Most of us do not have a blog/website, whether it’s personal or promoting a product. To me, that does not matter, although it might give me a clearer view of your views.

                Please don’t take offense where none is meant or given. As with any one-way media, we miss the other means of communication that go with a conversation. Body language, tonal inflection, etc.

                • Tactical G-Ma says:

                  My point was that I don’t have any other web places because a. I find no need and b. I am technically challenged.
                  And I didn’t take offense just saying I can’t prove I am benign, but those having links can’t either because they were created by their owners. I’ll bet there are a few as technically challenged as I and some truth in what OP, ROR, and you all say.

            • Rider of Rohan says:

              If you read my last comment on the Conflicted Tuesday thread, JP, you would have seen the latest revelations from the spying scandal. The government is paying people to troll conservative-leaning blogs and sow confusion and deliver misinformation. You can be 100% sure some are on this blog right now commenting.

            • JP,
              Gotcha. I suspect that it may be confusion on the parts of some new folks expecially. Thefield for name and email are rather self explanatory, and the one for a website may not be, and since it is not marked optional, some folks may just use this site’s URL.

              • That could be, OP. I sometimes clik on a red name to see what their website is like, and in the past I have noticed a fair number of the names link back to this site as well. I figured it was a glitch of some kind, and still do. You may well have explained it.

        • My apologies, JP. I didn’t realize (‘cuz I never checked) that hi-lited names went some place. Funny mine doesn’t since I have a blog (but no longer maintain it) and I do some YouTube stuff- (SandRiverWolf, if I can self-promote), but I don’t post frequently there, either.
          That sites as this are under direct attack by spammers and trolls is, unfortunately, a sign of how little our rights are respected and are, inadvertantly- in my mind- an abrogation of our First Amendment rights, since we do know who is doing the snooping/trolling, and why. All in all, I think that even supports the loss of our freedom of speech, and that the Second has not preserved any.
          Then we get into Boston and illegal searches in homes, pulling residents out at gun point; the gun point searches of vehicles in CA during the hunt for Dormer; the right to choose to worship religiously as we please has been removed by GLBT laws forcing churches and Believers to serve the minority community (as today in AZ)… we can all go on and on about how our rights have been taken, we just have to face up to it: America is no longer the free country we want it to be.

          • JSW and RoR:

            Perhaps there is another reason for the “trolling”. If there is complete agreement, there might be action. This would bother some folks (Those That Shall Not Be Named). If we are getting “spammed” and “trolled” perhaps we should look at that as a positive. We must, however, remain vigilant!

            • Rider of Rohan says:

              JP, there is no question that the strategy of this regime is divide and conquer, and keep people at each other’s throats. One need look no further than the divide BO has caused in race relations in this country to know his strategy. Hundreds or maybe even more attacks are ignored by the media while good people, many of them vets, are being killed and wounded by roving gangs of thugs. Yes, he is using criminals as his shock troops, he learned it from Chavez. I saw a clip today of Venezuelan Army troops alongside street gangs clearing out a neighborhood in Caracas. I was disgusted by it, but was encouraged when I saw people throwing firebombs at them.

              The overthrown in the Ukraine was achieved by the oldsters mostly, many of them Christians. I hear that one of the new rights they are demanding is the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Pretty neat.

  14. Chuck Findlay says:

    I don’t think Obama is smart enough to fear the american public. And he’s also arrogant enough to think he can do whatever he wants without suffering any results. This works for a while, but the more you push the more the push-back will be. He i’m sure doesn’t think there will be a push-back. And the push-back may not come during his reign, but it will come.

    • Chuck Findlay,

      “And he’s also arrogant enough to think he can do whatever he wants without suffering any results.”

      Looks like he has been right so far…

      • I may be the naive one, but I think I see stirrings from at least a few in Congress. There are quite a few lawsuits working their way through the Supreme Court dockets. All the tryannical “pen and phone” activity may be severely rescinded when the NLRB case is decided. That will start the ball rolling. I voted YES, that the Second Amendment helps protect all the others. On the one hand, I am starting to fear my government. But on the other, this is a very large country, and I really don’t think they can get all of us. I think the propaganda mills feed the narrative that all is lost, but in reality I believe there are many of us out there, and we, when push comes to shove, can push and shove as necessary. Unfortunately, I think we have to go way down to get mad enough to push back up.

    • He’s going to do his best to insure he is the first to have an unending reign, Chuck. I don’t see a ‘2016’ happening in this country.

      • JSW:

        I really hope people wake up before they allow it. I remember when Arnold became Governor of CA. There was a loud group that wanted to change the requirements for being president then.

      • seeuncourt says:

        I agree

    • ChucK;

      I believe you are right. If you compare his words to his works, they don’t match up. They only thing that he has accomplished is to “fundamentally change this country”. I was wrong when I said he really couldn’t. Most thought it would be for the better. Looks like we are all in a sinking boat.

  15. For a moment of levity in this serious conversation, and harkening back a few days to the blog ‘you know you’re a prepper if…’
    You read through all the comments on a prepper blog.

  16. I voted yes, we who own, and practice with our weapons know that we are a force through the second Amendment that has protected our freedoms. The left fears us. They know that they can not achieve their goals while we are armed, if this were not so, why would they try so hard to disarm us? It can not believe that they think guns are “evil”, that is just a ruse, a straw-man argument to deflect their desire for power and control. While some state are foolishly going down the path to disarming their population, others are standing side by side the folks, defying the current administration and its suedo-european thinking.

  17. I had to vote no on this, however, when they take the final stand on taking our guns away, there will be many that says NO, it will be bloody. The issue is that they are taking away all of our rights a little at a time, just like other gov’t’s have done in the past. All nations seem to fall. Ours is going down fast. I recommend listening to & sharing with others a class on the constitution. I am about 1/2 way through and it is great, and you can start and stop it anytime. We are the ones that need to wake these sheep up.
    Check out Michael Badnarik on You Tube. Taking back the rights we have already lost will be very difficult.

  18. Thomas The Tinker says:

    I am in the NO category. While I find the 2nd. amendment has not been attacked from the front many of the others have taken a lot of damage. Freedom of speech? say the right word in public and you will be charged with hate crimes. Provide the Feds with a “Clear and present Danger” in the form of protest and printed protest and you will be charged with the support of your supreme court. “Clear and present” being defined by… the Fed. Freedom of association.. to meet.. ? Destruction of our Constitution is not only a matter of Federal but State, county and ‘City’ governments.

    Open a cool aid stand. Sell your cupcakes at the garage sale… have more than one garage sale without a ‘sellers permit’. Examples are legion.

    The Second amendment…. has taken many a small wound on the flanks and rear areas. Points systems ala the BATFE regarding after market additions to your imported military firearm… Magazine load limits… Caliber limits… Barrel length… Registration for any reason… How many you may own and/or of what type, caliber. or measurements… there I go again making out a laundry list……..

    For me, I voted NO as it (the 2nd. amendment) has been danced around while the others have been directly clipped.. edited.. redefined.. defeated via ‘Regulation’. The ‘2nd.’ while we all look to it as our last hope, is the only one ‘Government’ fears to reduce or remove in the Congress directly. If every… THING we do in protest is redefined as a terrorist act, racist, homophobic, yadayadayada….. and ergo a crime….. Dare you take up arms?

    Those of us that would .. ARE .. a small small minority that had best be very well connected with one another and willing to take on the pain of our actions.

    Are you guys at NSA getting all this? Do I warrant an Email to the BATFE… again? Did you give me a hail and hearty … “HOLYCRAPPOLLA” when you booted up my list of registered .. personal firearms?

    Shucks… I’m a bloody prepper… I is a part of a small small minority… End of prattle .. End of rant. Thank for the space MD.

    • We ain’t bloodied yet, Tinker- but if this tyrannical government keeps on the path it is, we’ll get bloodied soon enough. I pray for peace, train for war, and know God is in control.
      So be it, I am only a Free Man.

      • JSW:

        I tell my DW all the time “I sure hope the kids are really mad at me after the funeral, when they find this stuff. Means I died wrong (or maybe just before it happened).

        I don’t want to be right. I want to live a fat, happy, long life, doing nothing more dangerous than bathing and driving. I just make other plans.

        • Hunker-Down says:

          Haha. Yesterday the DW wanted to donate some of her old clothes and I asked her to keep them as barter items after TSHTF. She said, “when we die our kids will be mad at us, having to go through all this junk”.

  19. Thomas The Tinker says:

    Gawd… I went to Moderation land…. I knew I shoulda watched my mouth…

    • TTT:

      We must be special. Mine almost always go to moderation. I’m actually surprised when one doesn’t.

    • My first posting usually does get moderated- and I don’t blame MD for that at all since I can get pretty darn mouthy, the following are ‘free’.

  20. Hunker-Down says:

    The second amendment is barely surviving. If it had full power we could buy any gun anywhere anytime. It (and we) has been raped.

    There are separate laws and benefits for congress and above. Holder just told attorneys general to ignore any law they want to. Politicians, lawyers and police have been doing that for years, they are just now bold enough to put it into words before the public. And we do nothing.

    Elections are rigged, and no one goes to jail. For those in power, this is a lawless country. The laws that are enforced are there so that their boot heel will not slip off our neck.

    • HD:

      It really took a nose dive with the Gun Control Act of 1934. WE didn’t help our cause when we no-showed the final portions of the debate and the government really won by default.

      Of course this Act was a result of the gun violence brought on by Prohibition, with it’s huge profit potential for criminals. It used to be as easy to buy a BAR as a bolt-action 22 LR single shot (just more expensive).

      • @JP,
        Those were the days, “A chicken in every pot and a Tommy Gun under every bed”!

      • Hunker-Down says:

        JP,

        I remember magazine adds for the BAR and thinking, “that thing is too long for hunting and besides, that floppy thing at the end of the barrel will make aiming (standing up)harder. Hey, I was 10. I didn’t know you were supposed to be prone when firing.

      • Somewhere I have some old gun magazines with ads to buy surplus Lahti L-39 anti-tank weapons. Ah those were the days!

  21. Tactical G-Ma says:

    I voted yes. I am not a student of history or constitutional law so my reasoning is probably flawed. BUT having 3 children with MA’s and 1 with a JD, I believe institutions of higher learning teach our kids the liberal philosophy. But the more we preach to them and the more they experience life the more reality sinks in.
    Having the right to own and bear arms, I believe reminds all Americans that we, the people, cannot be enslaved. We have the right to over throw a repressive and unjust government.
    Having such a diverse population, someone will always feel like they are on the bottom of the pile. But should the time come that the elitists have total disreguard for the citizens, we will rise up and do have the means and the right to do so. If there isn’t a change in the direction of our government in 2016, the time may be sooner than later.
    There are those who will never resist the gov but they would not resist the people either. They just go with the flow and let rock stars and philosophers lead them by the nose.
    The government fears the power we have to say no.

  22. recoveringidiot says:

    I think the 2nd was a much stronger deterrent in the past than it is now. I see the militarizing of our police as a counter to an armed populace or at least to a large degree. As one poster above stated our arrogant president and his lacky Holder openly s**t on the constitution without any fear. If they get away with the things that have already come to pass we are surely lost. I do think our representative republic is already largely lost forever anyway. Graft and corruption openly rule today, at least they used to hide it now they do it openly without fear of any reprisal. I still support the 2nd every chance I get with whatever I’m able to contribute.

  23. Donna in MN says:

    The question didn’t show up on my screen but I get the jist.

    I would vote yes. The second amendment was put in place for our right to bear arms to protect us from tyrany and protect the constitution under certain circumstances. Unfortunately the dl is creating a unstabilizing influence so bad that if congress keeps allowing his lawless power to ignore our constitution, the people will rise up and use the second amendment to correct this criminal action if forced upon us.

    For example martial law is declared and all communications shut down because people are upset from this tyrany. Will the armies, or National Guard who has been cheated benefits and being disrespected by this gov’t stand with the tyrant and turn on their families and the constitution they swore to uphold?

    Even some liberals are upset the way tdl has pushed our constitution to the “tipping point” and are very concerned what it will do to our country and they say it is bad. So where will this military for a tyranical leader come from? Unarmed anti gun activists? Tree huggers? drag queens? Anti-hunters? global warming cultists?

    • Donna

      I believe that the skinny tyrant would call in the the blue heads in a second to put the screws to Americans. The UN is not our friend and the countries that it represents hate us. They would love to come in and hold court. The powers know they may have some problem with the military but they can count on the blue heads.

  24. mom of three says:

    We might as well, put a match to our constitution, the goverment is taking more and more of our rights. What separate us from the rest of the world, is our constitution if it goes up in flames this country, is for ever gone. We are treading on a very, very fine line.

  25. Suburban Housewife says:

    I voted yes – up until recently anyways. I think an armed citizenry at the very least makes them think twice about how far and hard they can push, and is one of the reasons they are so adamant about disarming the people.

  26. I didnt vote because I think the answer is both. No, because we are losing our rights more and more every day. But at the same time I also think yes, it has protected us from worse. Without the 2nd, I think things would have gone downhill much faster.

    Right now we have the illusion of freedom, so many people are content with that. But people are getting restless. Maybe not everyone, and maybe not for all the same reasons, but I have noticed that there are more groups of people banning together over one thing or another.

    The tipping point may surprise us. I wouldnt be surprised if its the anti-gmo food group that tips the scales. It may sound odd, why them, but with food being a primal instinct and the government backing Monsanto, I think someone is going to go a little too far in their protests and it will kick off a major backlash.

    Right now they are doing petty things, such as moving food to the pesticides isle, putting ‘toxic’ stickers on food and other little things. But, when pictures of gmo fields being burnt show up, there are a lot of comments about, ‘wheres the torch’ or ‘point me in the right direction’ mostly it is said as a joke, but all it would take is one person to take the initiative and it will explode.

    Unfortunately, my crystal ball is broke, I cant see into the future. But I do believe that more and more people are waking up to one thing or another. It may be what I mentioned, it could be the dollar collapses, or something else entirely, but I do believe that things will come to a head before much longer.

  27. Just like a door lock keeps honest people honest, so to does any single amendment. Since those in charge are not honest and do not respect any amendment they become useless. All amendments have been modified and changed by the courts as they see fit with no regard to the original intent and plain language of the amendment. I do not see anywhere in the 2nd amendment that allows the government to require background checks or license to CC. Or that fully automatic weapons can not be owned. Plain language “shall not be infringed” means just that.
    Being a people of law we fight our battles in courts that are being stacked against us with lawyers and judges who attended liberal law schools that teach that the constitution is outdated and only a working document. That international law must be taken into account when determining US law and so on.
    Electing officials to public office is another recourse to perserving our freedoms as originally intended and as granted by our creator. That system has been severly damaged with the status quo and Washington elititst who also have no regard for the constitution.
    This all leads us to only a choice between two different outcomes. Accept the change to socialism or armed conflict to perserve our republic.
    I don’t think it will get to armed conflict because I believe they will collapse the economy to take control during the chaos that ensues.

    • Dan:

      I heard a man say once “I like politicians. Everyone should own 2 or 3.” Even though he made it in jest, it gave me the willies.

  28. Pineslayer says:

    I voted “no”.
    We still have the “Bill of Rights”, but they have been used as TP by the 2 ruling parties. I do not need to cite the laws that have been enacted, because you all know them.
    Until the 2 parties, whose names I will not utter, are subjected to second class status, we will not fix are problems peacefully. Elect leaders, not parties, and we may stand a chance. We can bitch and moan until heck freezes over, but unless we refuse to give them money and votes, it will always get worse.
    Campaign Finance Reform is our best bet to fix a corrupt system. We cannot send good people into a horrible system and expect to change things.

  29. I voted no, they believe they can do what they want with homeland security backing them, dumb thing there doing is downsizing the army, men will be coming back with no jobs and there rights being taking away, someone going have a problem.

  30. DB Prepper says:

    Wow this is a good topic, lots of good comments already.

    I have to admit I voted no initially, but I am now being swayed slightly by some arguments listed. The 2nd amendment IS helping stave off some drastic changes the government wants to make to disarm the populace among many other issues they seek to change. Anytime the liberals use the term “hiding behind the 2nd amendment” that really means they want to brainwash the public into believing we are better off without it. So that in and of itself means politicians in this country are scared of this amendment and IMHO believe that is good thing and holding back the surging tide of change to some of our greatest American ideals.

    The main reason I voted no is because TDL has expressed the fact that “I want to work with congress, but no matter what they say I will just issue an executive order to do what I want”. It’s hard to believe anything he says on the positive side, and easy to believe everything he says on the negative side.

  31. After reading all of the comments, I think that there are a lot of people
    that are ready to give up. What happened to the American spirit that could conquer any obstacle? Even California is starting (slowly) to
    change some of the gun laws due to court cases. I am a veteran and 83 years old but will still resist.

    • Rider of Rohan says:

      My thoughts exactly. Many are advising that we disconnect from the process and just let them win by default because there is no difference in the parties. I beg to differ. Colorado has gun control right now because many people were convinced by some to not vote. Liberal Democrats were elected, and here come the gun laws and relaxed voting standards. If Republicans had won, people in Colorado would still have the gun rights they had. So there is a difference. Sometimes not much, but preventing gun control is one of the big, important differences, one that might just save your life. At least in the South, West, and parts of the Midwest. The Northeast looks to be a lost cause, though I won’t give up on it, either.

  32. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights are alive as long as there are people that believe in them. Once these documents have been relegated to the status of being historical only (suitable for framing and no longer the basis for our nations law and order) we will have lost that which makes America a free nation.

    There are powerful people trying to destroy our nation from the inside …….. they must not be allowed to succeed! The enemies of America must not be allowed to forget that the most dangerous person is one that does not fear death ……… the second Amendment is their reminder.

    As long as citizens defend the second amendment, with their life if necessary, the second amendment will continue to defend America against all enemies foreign and domestic. This blog, and others, give us strength by letting us know we are not alone. For every contributor here there are millions of Americans that quietly echo our sentiments.

  33. I voted “yes”, because I believe that it still has the power to stop us from losing any more rights if we, as a people, stand together and make it mean something. It worked once, long ago, and it can again, if we act before it’s too late.

  34. I do think the 2nd Amendment has had at least a chilling effect on the power grab going on in Washington and, actually, with all the “progressives” backing this administration.
    For at least now, sheriffs and police officers still don’t want to arrest their fellow citizens for simply owning a gun. The gun owners aren’t demonstrating, agitating, doing anything but refusing to co-operate; in most cops’ minds that’s not enough to kill for. Without the police force the progs and president can’t enforce their agenda all at once.
    BTW: the agenda has absolutely NOTHING to do with valuing human life in any way, shape or form. Just so that’s clear.
    I, too, am very uneasy about the upcoming elections. This is a dangerous time both because of the power grab and the hot heads that injustice breeds.
    I think the 2nd Amendment is a lynch pin, and so do the communists.

  35. Stuart the Viking says:

    Every time an armed robber is surprised by a legally armed citizen, the rights of the people are being protected. Without the Second Amendment, we would be at the mercy of the violent thugs in society.

    I understand that isn’t exactly where MD was going here, however, I believe it is important. Without the 2A, honest, law abiding citizens would be at the mercy of those who would take. If you believe the government has restricted our rights now, just wait and see what would happen if that same government had the excuse of vast uncontrolled violent crime to fall back on when restricting rights.

    s

    • Stuart the Viking,

      Nope. That is individual self-defense against individual crime and assault and not what this poll is about. But I do appreciate you sharing your thoughts here.

  36. Encourager says:

    If we roll over and give up the 2nd Amendment, they will just keep on taking more and more away. We need to make a stand, the sooner the better. This Constitution belongs to each and every one of us – not just a few, but ALL of us. Now, if you want to give up YOUR rights, go ahead. But don’t think for a second I and mine will not fight with all our strength to preserve our rights.

    Whenever a senator, a representative, anyone who hold an office in the federal government including the president, vice president, attorney general and every single person in the military, is sworn in, they take a vow to uphold the Constitution of these United States and fight to protect it against enemies foreign and domestic. If they break that vow, it is up to us, the people United States, to correct that. And every single person who took that vow should be right at our side!!

  37. Tactical G-Ma says:

    Any One,
    Do I recall something recently about a change to the Oath of Office or the Oath of Enlistment? Maybe it was fiction I read but I think it was real. Does anyone recall?

  38. Here’s the official word:

    http://www.history.army.mil/html/faq/oaths.html

    I too, and not sure. My DW’s last assignment was at the MEPS station here in MT so I will see if we can get anything from them.

  39. Just waking up and peeling the blinders off my eyes and trying to catch up on all I don’t know.
    I am not sure if I am a yes or a no, but I do believe the 2A is holding them back from their next purge of our rights or they would not say things like “hiding behind the 2A” and constantly chip away at it validity. They may eventually get away with destroying it because, I believe, most of us will not even read it to see what it really says.
    In our laziness, I hope we remember to smile at the monitor as we sit comfortably on our sofa in front of our treasured TV’s as our country comes apart on the other side of our porch steps. (we wouldn’t want to miss our show, would we?) It’s okay, I wouldn’t want any “sheeple” on my team anyway.
    As I mentioned, I don’t know much yet (and learning is hard, you guys use a lot of acronyms) but I do know and feel that something wicked this way comes and I am determined to be informed and hopefully prepared.
    I am studying and readying, so keep talking, I will catch up!

  40. I don’t believe the 2nd amendment helps much. An army requires leadership. They need men or women who can motivate confused and scared soldiers, understand tactics and logistics and know how to delegate authority. Who are we citizens going to find who can do these things? Ted Nugent?

    If you really want to deal a blow to the powers that be reject materialism. They lead us around by the noses because of our own greed. The powers that be are much better at hurting people; it’s in their blood. They are better at the propaganda game and they are not deluded about who they are facing.

    Having said that I feel that having pistols and sporting rifles is okay and maybe preferential especially if you are a woman who is alone a lot of the time.

    • Tactical G-Ma says:

      Randy,
      The Great State of Alabama has a militia that reports only to the governor and cannot be drafted or ordered or used by the feds. They are only 1,000 strong. That is 1,000 field officers and trained soldiers that could lead irregulars. It is my belief that other states have this as well. And there are also teams of competitors who hone tactical skills. And do not forget there are tons of retired and discharged people trained by the military. Organization of American forces at home would take a matter of hours. If you saw the movie Red Dawn, it wouldn’t go down like that.

      • I very much doubt that the powers that be are scared of the citizenry. The powers that be are masters of divide and conquer. If it does come down to blood in the streets it won’t be us against them. Rather, it will be us against us. And after the dust clears the same people will still be on top.

        Personally, I think the powers that be like it that the american populace is armed to the teeth. Guns cause much misery in society. Not as much as a lot of other things like, say, booze, and they like things that cause us misery. Plus it gives them another weak point in the social structure to exploit in terms of their divide and conquer strategy.

        Red Dawn is only a movie not reality.

        Good luck to you.

    • Randy,
      My MAG alone has a former combat medic and a former SF Sgt. My youngest boy is a former marine sniper. We have tons of folks still around from the Vietnam era to the present. Just Oathkeeper salone has thousands in their ranks. I think you underestimate the resources available in this great country.

      • Medics and snipers are not what you need. What you need is Ghengis Khan.

        America has greatness. Sure. But so did the Roman Empire and look where they are now.

        I think you overestimate your firepower and underestimate your enemy. From where I sit you are playing checkers while he is playing chess. Plus you are sold on a tactic that never has worked. Thousands of years of war are what have brought us to this point. More war will not help. Your violent resistance will only bring about a ‘meet the new boss same as the old boss’ outcome.

        Men are not defined by their motives so much as they are defined by the tactics they choose. But, good luck to you. I hope you have a long, healthy and prosperous life.

  41. TexasScout says:

    No, nobody has the stones to use it like it was intended.

  42. For those who question (or have been questioned) as to what “the Militia” is in the US, here’s the section of US Code Title 10 that tells all of us what it is.

    (Since the 2nd Amendment isn’t specific in it’s referral to one or the other, and the code was written after it was adopted, with no reference made to a difference, I assume, it applies to both classes.)

    10 U.S. Code § 311 – Militia: composition and classes

    Current through Pub. L. 113-75, except 113-66. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)

    US Code
    Notes
    Updates

    prev | next
    (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
    (b) The classes of the militia are—
    (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
    (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

    FYI…

    • JP,
      Good information; however, with the discrimination lawsuits and changes over the years, I suspect that sex discrimination and age discrimination would allow all women and folks older than 45 to be included.

      Ohio has a similar definition in the Ohio Revised Code:

      ORC 5923.01 State militia membership – limitation of troops:
      (A) The Ohio organized militia consist of all citizens of the state who are not permanently handicapped, as handicapped is defined in section 4112.01 of the Revised Code, who are more than seventeen years, and not more than sixty-seven years, of age unless exempted as provided in section 5923.02 of the Revised Code, and who are members of one of the following:
      (1) The Ohio national guard;
      (2) The Ohio naval militia;
      (3) The Ohio military reserve.
      (B) The Ohio national guard, including both the Ohio air national guard and the Ohio army national guard, the Ohio naval militia, and the Ohio military reserve are known collectively as the Ohio organized militia.
      (C) The Ohio naval militia and the Ohio military reserve are known collectively as the state defense forces.
      (D) The unorganized militia consists of those citizens of the state as described in division (A) of this section who are not members of the Ohio organized militia.

      Or another definition from a founding father: “I ask sir, who is the militia? It is the whole people…To disarm the people, that is the best and most effective way to enslave them…” – George Mason

      • OP:

        I always said I didn’t care what sex (or sexual orientation) the other person in my fox hole is. If they can and will shoot they are welcome.

  43. OwlCreekObserver says:

    I think the 2nd amendment has had some effect, but not much. When there are potential threats to our freedoms of speech, assembly, the press and religion, it’s usually the courts who resolve the matter. It’s not always to my liking, but I doubt if my being a gun owner holds much sway over them.

    But what does tick me off is the view by some that all gun owners represent a threat to society. That’s what gun control boils down to; armed citizens cannot be trusted. But according to FBI statistics, nearly half of all violent crime in this country is committed by gangs. In cesspools like Chicago, Detroit or Newark, that figure is often closer to 90%. These are not preppers, nor are they NRA members, sportsmen or recreational shooters. They are gang members and criminals. And yet, many in congress want to punish you and me for the result of gang activity.

    The upside is that while gun ownership has skyrocketed in recent years, shooting deaths have declined. I believe it’s because the bad guys now cannot assume that the good guys are unarmed.

    So in that sense, I suppose I agree that the 2nd amendment has helped to defend our other rights.

    • Tactical G-Ma says:

      OCO,
      DH and I were just talking about how it seems so many kids have handguns. Well, GBI just busted a theft ring in Americus, Georgia and recovered hundreds of stolen weapons. Now, I do have a couple of guns not in my safes but not only do I have safes but they are anchored to the walls and floors and I have an alarm system with central station monitoring. My property is off the road, posted, and we fly both th US and the Gadsden flags. And construction of points of egress are reenforced. I tell you this because someone I know had someone break into his house and take over $8,000.00 in weapons and ammo.
      I believe gun owners have a responsibilty to safeguard their weapons. Children should not be able to get near them unsupervised and we should make it next to impossible to be stolen.

  44. I voted “yes”. I think that it is really telling in that throughout history that virtually every totalitarian regime has had some type of disarmament of the population. They also make sure that they are dumber. Historically, this has been accomplished by restriction of information (especially in the middle ages). Now, they use chemicals (i.e., sodium fluoride and antidepressants) and confusion (overload of disinformation via multiple channels) to turn the masses into zombies. In modern history Mao, Stalin, Hitler, plus many others all did some form of gun control. Stalin and Hitler also used sodium Fluoride to dumb them down.

    However, I also think that our leaders care less about fear (they are narcissistic and prideful who believe they are above the law and have a higher power behind them that will protect them [i.e., Nimrod, Molock, Horus, Angel of Light, Satan – all the same]). But what they do care about is to effectively control the population. Traditionally, they have had to train soldiers to view the target population as vermin that do not deserve to share this earth. IF they cannot convince the homeland security and UN soldiers of this, they will have trouble to control us. So I believe they fear their soldier’s fear. I also think that a lot of the military research into drones and robots has a lot to do with this. They have no conscience. They have no free will and will kill on command.

    Moreover, I can see also how they are slightly trying to change the game to funnel us into the end solution. Historically, the populations had access to food agricultural knowledge and arable land. The agricultural economy is a tiny fraction of what it was, the population’s skills are nonexistent + Agenda 21 implementation will ensure that we have no access to food production.

    So, I think that this is their view: All they have to do is convince us to separate into a couple of groups: 1) unprepared non-gun owners. 2) unprepared gun owners 3) prepared gun owners urban and 4) prepared gun owners rural. Only group 4 is the hard one to root out because their lack of dependence on the “system”. All they have to do create chaos and wait for 1) and 2) to give up any fight over food to enter FEMA camps willingly. 3) can be mopped up with martial law and assigned to special dissident FEMA camps, and group 4) will be easy but take more time. As long as they can never assemble a united resistance, group #4 will be a waiting game. If they introduce a pandemic with a horrible vaccine.

    Going back to the Ben Franklin quote and tweaking it: I am a well armed lamb contesting the vote. I hope that you are too.

    The way that I see it (and have researched it), the NWO has assembled a can’t loose strategy. WWIII with EMP/Nuke combo will accomplish all of this in the U.S. The faster they get to their stated goal of 500M population on earth, the better. All they have to do is set off the chain of events and wait while offering us a solution (that does not allow for dissent). The more we turn on ourselves and do the dirty work out of our own free will, the better. Whether or not we have our guns at that point is irrelevant if we are fragmented and unable to communicate. Even better, they can blame it on someone else to appear as the savior of mankind (patriots, Christians, Muslims, Chinese, Russians, etc.).

    However, It seems that they have contempt for or even forgot one, not so tiny variable…

    • Nebraska Woman says:

      I agree with what you said except for the part about antidepressants. The meds help so many people like me live normally (whatever that is).
      I do object, however, to the over medication of our children so they are calmer in school ie. for hyper activity. These kids can be so doped up they are literally zombies. As a teacher, I tried to work with them sensibly and worked with parents on diet, behavior modification, etc.

      • Sorry, Nebraska, I didn’t mean to offend. I was intending it in the context of what they do to kids with SSRI’s.

  45. Thomas The Tinker says:

    My Dear fellow ‘Packers’… I beg you to read this through… twice. It is writ in the English of the mid 1800s. It has to do with the rights of us all and those who find these inalienable freedoms a threat to their opinion.

    “Deny human rights, and however little you may wish to do so, you will find yourself abjectly kneeling at the feet of that old-world god, Force – that grimmest and ugliest of gods that men have ever created for themselves out of the lusts of their hearts.

    You will find yourself hating and dreading all other men who differ from you: you will find yourself day by day growing more unscrupulous and intolerant, more and more compelled by the fear of those opposed to you, to commit harsh and violent actions.

    You will finds your-selves clinging to and welcoming .. Force, as the .. one .. and only form of protection left to you…” your opinion, your party, your pride.

    Who would you think this fellow (Auberon Herbert) is referring to…..? I have the impression he is talking to Government / Authority .. as a whole….. just sayin

    • Rider of Rohan says:

      TTT, I like these words of Jefferson in our founding document:

      “Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security”.

      Pretty much self-explanatory, pertinent to the topic at hand, and so eloquently stated.

      • Thomas The Tinker says:

        RR: It would seem that you too collect the random thoughts out there…. here are a few more that can be interpreted … as you will …

        John Stewart Mill .. 1806 > 1873 “War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling that thinks nothing is worth more than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless .. made .. and .. kept so .. by the exertions of better men than .. Himself.”

        And then one of my favorites … A. Lincoln. “This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or … their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it.”

        Here is one relating to unsound money and our banking system. Takes some consideration but I know you’ll get it.

        “… but the whores chasing the buck, want you to wear the lipstick with them.”

        You could change a word there… “buck” and replace it with “Vote” or words… say… “the Party line”

        Ok…….. you got me thinking and now my head is again as tight as a ripe grape and it hurts………

        • Rider of Rohan says:

          Indeed, my friend, the substitutions you made are prescient, and contemporary. And worthy of further reflection, though it does tighten the hat at times.

    • Hunker-Down says:

      Sounds like he is talking to the current POTUS.

      • While it does apply to the current Pres admin, I see that statement as much broader & could apply to any govt/ authority that oversteps its limits to deny basic human rights. Seems to me it could apply to the Ukraine pres who just got literally pushed out of office. I don’t know enough about the situations in Venezuela or Russia, but maybe in those places. What about N Korea or Iran? Most muslim countries do not allow any religious freedom (not sure about economic freedoms), & in recent yrs, b/c of www & increased international travel, a number of muslim nations have had to deal w/ large uprisings (Egypt, Khaddi next to Egypt, etc). I think the above statement applies to all those situations, & suspect that govts like N Korea & Iran are concerned or fearful of their citizens rebelling.

    • Psalm 44:6-8 (NKGV)
      ” For I will not trust in my bow, Nor shall my sword save me either. But God has saved us from our enemies and has put to shame those who hated us. In God we will boast all day long and praise His name forever”.

  46. riverrider says:

    you wanna know if our rights are gone i’ll tell you how to know it….look for the mass graves, the incinerators, the rotting bodies in the street. because that’s what happens when there are no rights. yes, they have took a beating, but w/o the 2a they would be gone. i have seen the graves, smelled the stench of graves too shallow, seen the withered flesh of tiny limbs sticking out of the snow. let me tell you that’s something you never want to experience here, ever. there will be a line crossed and patriots will die as will tyrants. and i believe that line, like the first 2 revolts will be over 2a. lock and load.

  47. I voted no because it hasn’t yet. We’ve had creeping incrementalism that has eroded just about every single Amendment including the 2nd.

    We need a zero-tolerance policy for tyranny.

  48. I vote yes because:
    Every tyrant will take everything he can get until he sees the population push back. Then he backs off half a notch. At this point he will wait until he can come up with a new ploy and try it again. As long as he keeps making overall gains he will keep playing the game. If he can no longer make any progress he will bide his time until he thinks he is strong enough to FORCE his will on you. This most certainly will involve firearms. He is a coward until he thinks he can take you in a “Push Come To Shove” confrontation. The 2nd amendment is the only thing that has prevented this tyrant from rolling over us like a tank. If you recall, Japan did not think it wise to screw with us. “I would never invade the United States. There would be a gun behind every blade of grass.” – Isoroku Yamamoto

  49. True, the people have not exercised their second amendment right to stop erosion of our other rights . . . yet. On the other hand, the fear that the people MAY do that has most likely greatly slowed the erosion of other rights. So, yes, I think having the second amendment does provide a check to government power. This administration may be the first to push the people over that edge, though.

    • Chuck,
      Using force against the government is in effect, crossing the Rubicon, and should never be taken lightly, since going back is unlikely after it starts. You need to be ready to go all in, and be ensured that others will be at your side. Otherwise, you become voluntary cannon fodder. I hope it never comes to this, but when and if it foes, it will not be pretty, or over quickly.

      • recoveringidiot says:

        OP, you nailed it. Also the .gov has half the population under control with “bread and circus” meaning reality tv and food stamps etc. Maybe when they no longer are able to distract or own so many with the takings from the other half things will change. I fear for us all.

      • chuck l says:

        Ok, let’s all just sit back and watch it happen in Connecticut. Nobody lift a finger while your worst fears are happening to someone else. Is that your America?

  50. Hey, I hate to be off topic, but the Russians have moved 150,000 troops, plus aircraft to the border with the Ukraine. Meanwhile the new Government in Kiev has pledge itself to support the EU.

    Like Syria a few months back, the Ukraine is a place Russia can not afford to hand over without a fight, as they have their Black Sea fleet HQ’ed there.

    “Ain’t no time to wonder why?…whoopee we’re all going to die!”

  51. Once the 2nd. is abolished this country will be just like these other countries that we tried to help. Citizens will be fighting against the government with bullets and not votes. Maybe we could see a big change because voting doesn’t seem to work any longer.

  52. Tactical G-Ma says:

    I’m sitting here trying to remember the creed that is something about I am a serviceman. I will continue to fight. If taken prisoner I will never quit trying to escape.there were like 5 or 7 things to do and it’s not the Soldier’s Creed or The 11 General Orders of a Sentry. Come on … was it something to do with Geneva Convention? My brain has become like swiss cheese. Hoping one of you will remember what I am talking about.

    • Is this what you’re thinking of, G-Ma?
      Recognizing that I volunteered as a Ranger, fully knowing the hazards of my chosen profession, I will always endeavor to uphold the prestige, honor, and high esprit de corps of the Rangers.
      Acknowledging the fact that a Ranger is a more elite Soldier who arrives at the cutting edge of battle by land, sea, or air, I accept the fact that as a Ranger my country expects me to move further, faster, and fight harder than any other Soldier.
      Never shall I fail my comrades I will always keep myself mentally alert, physically strong, and morally straight and I will shoulder more than my share of the task whatever it may be, one hundred percent and then some.
      Gallantly will I show the world that I am a specially selected and well trained Soldier. My courtesy to superior officers, neatness of dress, and care of equipment shall set the example for others to follow.
      Energetically will I meet the enemies of my country. I shall defeat them on the field of battle for I am better trained and will fight with all my might. Surrender is not a Ranger word. I will never leave a fallen comrade to fall into the hands of the enemy and under no circumstances will I ever embarrass my country.
      Readily will I display the intestinal fortitude required to fight on to the Ranger objective and complete the mission, though I be the lone survivor.

      • Tactical G-Ma says:

        JSW,
        I love snake eaters! I had the privilege to work with Army Spec. Forces and Navy SEALS while on active duty. The Ranger’s oath is wonderful and does show that the best are held to a higher standard but recognizes Rangers can’t win fighting in a vacuum. What I was thinking of was the 5 articles in the Code of the U. S. Fighting Force.

  53. Do I think that the 2nd Amendment has protected us from losing the others? No, because I feel the original purpose of the 2nd Amendment has been lost.
    Contrary to what is expressed in so many internet comments on various blogs these days, our Constitution was never a “perfect” document. Benjamin Franklin summed it up when addressing the Convention, “There are several parts of this Constitution which I do not at present approve, but I am not sure I shall never approve them.” And Thomas Jefferson stated, “There are very good articles in it: & very bad. I do not know which preponderate.” And referred to the framers of the Constitution, “It really is an assembly of demigods.” Most felt the document readily embraced ambiguity to allow for compromise and cooperation about broad concepts rather than specific circumstances and left way too much open to debate – a conclusion that has proven true.
    The new states wanted the Bill of Rights because they feared this ambiguity gave too much power to a centralized government, especially one with a large standing army. Although the Constitution gave Congress the right to “raise and support Armies”, representatives made sure the clause, “but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years” was added in the hopes that army would never become a standing fixture in times when the country was at peace. They felt the Militia should be used instead and an army only raised when absolutely necessary, much the same as Switzerland today. “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.”
    To further strengthen this, the 2nd Amendment was written. As Elbridge Gerry stated during the Congressional debates over the Second Amendment, “What, sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty.”
    Today though, I read so much about the need for the US to maintain a powerful standing army – surprising coming mostly from those individuals claiming to be Constitutionalists. So where does that leave the Militia and the 2nd Amendment?
    I don’t feel that the 2nd Amendment has in any way protected us from losing the others – I feel only that the easy access to news has shown many people today what others have known all along – that these rights were never chiseled in granite. Does anyone really feel everyone in the US have always had the protections of the Bill of Rights? From slavery through the communist witch-hunts, American’s “rights” have been trampled under foot – but it was always “someone else” in the past so it was tolerated and even seen as being “good for the country.” The freedom of the media today has opened a lot of eyes and brought many people out of their complacency.
    No, the 2nd Amendment has never been a factor in demanding that the Bill of Rights be upheld, it has always been the will of the people who finally acknowledged the wrongdoing and demanded that our elected government stop the abuses. This is what has made us great and kept us head and shoulders above all those third world countries who felt armed revolution was their ticket to a better life.

    • Hi k.fields, ‘It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty.’

      I think the police and sheriff departments would have qualified as standing armies so far as the Founders were concerned.

      They rule us, they become ever more heavily armed, ever more obviously violent when unnecessary (thank you YouTube!), they chew up ever more of our money, and so far as I can see they do more damage to liberty than they protect it.

      It doesn’t matter if there are good cops. As an institution they are on the other side.

      • The police took a year to tell me that 2 of four guns stolen from us in a burglary had been recovered within a month, and then they demanded a DNA sample ‘for exclusionary purposes’ before giving them back.

        Since I had made the insurance claim and replaced them, they were by then the property of the insurance company, so I declined to provide DNA.

        It turns out that police departments all over the country are quietly building DNA data banks of criminals, suspects, and victims alike, with no public announcement, no public discussion, no legislative authority. They are just doing it.

        We have no idea how those data banks may someday be used or misused or put to purposes for which we have not given our permission.

        I am very glad I did not submit.

        We are not building a police state: It is already here. We are just enhancing the police state we already have.

        • Hunker-Down says:

          They don’t need to tattoo us like was done in the concentration camps, they have all those DNA databases.

          A million years ago my dad kiddingly told me to never get a SS number. Back then it was possible; today the newbies get one when they pop out of their moms.

  54. Tactical G-Ma says:

    Ok, found it…
    Code of the United States Fighting Force.
    #1 is: I am an American, fighting in the forces which guard my country and our way of life. I am prepare to give my life in their defense.
    Guess that says it all.

    • TGMa

      Been many years since I have heard those words, thanks for the memory and the refresher course. It did hold true then and it holds true today.

  55. Don Duncan says:

    Rights come from our nature as human, not from the Constitution. The Constitution recognizes rights, it does not create or protect them. We have to protect them, individually, by exercising them. For example, when we allow warrantless searches as in the so-called “border stops”, we encourage authorities to further violate rights they have sworn to uphold. They need to be reminded that rights do not disappear at the convenience of officials. They are not luxuries. They are necessary for a human existence. That makes them practical. America is the only country that was founded on this premise. This was the source of our prosperity and moral superiority. The world looked up to America. But our heritage was/is being surrendered, little by little, out of ignorance and cowardice. It is our responsibility to exercise our rights, or lose them. Words on a parchment do not protect us any more than official oaths. We cannot delegate the protection of rights and avoid self defense. That is the false hope government promises. We are the first, last, and only hope for our protection.

  56. The 2nd Amendment has protected our right to life but perhaps not too many other rights. It’s probably protected more than we realize, including our property to some degree. So the answer is Yes and No. It has protected some of our rights while other rights have unfortunately been trampled on, b/c we’ve fought for the other rights through the lawful process but our efforts are in the main being rejected. We MUST exercise our right and privilege of prayer, personal and corporate, for God to restore our rights UNDER GOD and UNDER His Law!!!

  57. This is the link for the traitors’ pictures and phone #s in Connecticut.
    Make it go viral–email to all your contacts.

    They came for the communists–you know the rest.

    http://www.cbia.com/ga/CT_State_Senators_List/-AZSENATE

    http://www.cbia.com/ga/CT_State_Representatives_List/-AZHOUSE

  58. I feel rather simple after reading other comments, but this tidbit changed my view of many things. This was from a public safety officer who was leading a self defense course for women. “Crime scene number 2 is always worse than crime scene number 1. Do not wait for a better opportunity to fight. Be prepared to fight for your life from the first instant. And expect it to hurt. Don’t wait for a pain free chance”. Don’t wait for a better chance to defend ourselves. However imperfectly it’s working or how it’s being abused, our right to bear arms – for the moment – is keeping us away from crime scene number 2. This girl isn’t going to be kidnapped and carried off to where it’s easier to take my freedom and life. I’m going to stand and fight right here, and I’m prepared for it to hurt.

  59. The 2nd amendment did not help Jeff Davis and Bobby Lee. Their attempt to break from Washington via arms hurt them and their neighbors.

    • riverrider says:

      at least they had the balls to try and were it not for a twist of fate we might be free now.

      • Rider of Rohan says:

        And had they been as ruthless as their counterparts, their side would have likely prevailed.

  60. I was born and bred an Englishman, but I like to keep a very close eye on what happens in the USA, because it reflects so strongly on what happens in the rest of the world, I have been visiting the states, for 45 years and I have quite a few friends and relations that live in America. I voted yes because THE GREATEST CONSTITUTION is being eroded and shredded faster each year.
    There was a Great Englishman that just happened to have an American mother and he spoke thus.
    “If You will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed,
    If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly,
    You may come to the moment when you have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival.
    There may even be a worse case, you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.
    >Winston Churchill<

    (I came into this world, fat, bald and toothless and I'm damn well going out the same way )

  61. “Anti-constitutionalist’s actions are being ratcheted up for the purpose that can only be described as political.” When you have a gov’t that ignores the Constitution, and circumvents legislative procedures, you’re losing more than just the 2nd amendment. We can’t just sit around and whine about it. We need to elect people who respect what our nation & all it stands for. We pay the salaries of our representatives and if they continue to disregard their constituents, we need a clean sweep in DC.

    • The outcome of Nov 2014 elections may be the deciding factor. If conservatives win, tptb on fed level could ratchet up all offense in panic (faster than if conservatives lose).

      The college age group is quickly getting fed up, and I notice that that tidbit is getting squelched.

  62. When I thought about it, I had to say no because the majority of Americans fail to understand the 2nd Amendment…all they see and hear from the classroom to the “Newsroom” is that guns are evil, people who own guns are evil, we need to just get rid of guns and you should be dependent on government. The 2nd Amendment is our guarantee to possess arms and pseudo deterrent to tyrannical ambitions. However most folks today fail to understand that our founders expected those who came after them to safeguard our liberty by force if needed, hence the 2nd Amendment.

  63. I voted “Yes” because if this wasn’t the case, any vestige of our rights would not now exist.

    The “long train of abuses and usurpations” has not, apparently, reached the tripwire yet.

    Unless we can retake our country by peaceful means, it will.

    But anyone who believes that 80+ million gun owners keeping and bearing over 100 million guns hasn’t had anything to do with the fact that this comments section is still open isn’t thinking it through.

  64. There can be no”life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” if you aren’t alive. That is where the 2nd Amendment comes in.

  65. Anyone else notice the sudden stop to comment section on most of msnbc.com’s articles? Just prior, I noticed that the conservatives really came out of the woodwork particularly on Constitutional rights, especially 2nd Amendment.

  66. “OUR FREEDOM OF LIGHT IS WHY WE HAVE CONSTITUTION WITH CIVIL RIGHTS AND WITH THE SECOND AMENDMENT WRITTEN INTO THE CONSTITUTION TO PROTECT THOSE CIVIL RIGHTS AND OUR WAY OF LIFE”

    People are often surprised and upset with me when I tell them that the National Rifle Association is a civil rights organization just like the ACLU. It’s true. The Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is a civil right. And what’s more, it’s the “one civil right” that protects all the Civil Rights contained in the Bill of Rights and Our U.S. Constitution as declared by our Declaration of Independence from oppressive governments and all enemies, foreign and domestic….!

    We’ve let the liberal left hijack the term “civil rights,” and it’s time we the people fixed that. Yours, Mine and Ours civil rights are our Constitutional Rights. That’s what the term “civil rights” means. They are your rights as a citizen. All the rights you enjoy as an American, whether the express rights mentioned in the Bill of Rights, or the implied rights of the Ninth and 14th Amendments, they are your civil rights. It’s a term that belongs to each and every one of us, regardless of race, color, creed or religion…!

    The NRA, GOA and other Pro Gun Groups that support the Second Amendment, they regularly brings lawsuits to protect Free Speech, Choice and other Constitutional Rights. But it is the NRA’s defense of the Second Amendment that does the most to protect all of your liberties of enumerated rights…!

    The Second Amendment guarantees the individual right of every peaceable, law-abiding American to keep and bear arms. You have the right to have firearms for any lawful purpose, whether self protection, recreation, competition, hunting, collecting, invading armies or oppressive government tyranny. And this right extends to all handguns as well as to all long guns such as shotguns and rifles.

    Most all people do understand this because current polls show that over 90 percent of Americans believe that the Second Amendment secures an individual right. See Heller Decision…!

    But many people don’t know why the United States Constitution includes the right to bear arms. The reasons are not considered politically correct, and those on the liberal left who dominate public education and the big media conglomerates { such as Mayor Nanny Bloomberg of New York City and his New York Times} don’t want to talk about them.

    There are so many reasons why the Founding Fathers wrote the Second Amendment, but the three most important ones are of vital concern to you, regardless of where you live, what you do or what your interests are. Let’s start with the third reason and work up to the first and most important.

    1.) The third most important reason the framers of the Constitution wrote the Second Amendment is for safety against criminal elements. I respect and admire all law enforcement officers. They have a tough job to do, and most of the time they do it well. As a retired career police officer, I know the sacrifice our good police officers make to protect all of us. But the reality is there are usually only two people present when a crime is committed: the criminal and the victim. You are almost never sitting next to a police officer when you’re attacked, right? Criminals prey on people under circumstances that benefit the criminal, and they prefer a victim who is Alone, Weaken by Unjust Laws, Gun Free Zones { Sandy Hook Elementary School, Aurora Movie Theater, Tucson Az., Washington DC Naval Station etc } and Unarmed by Unjust Laws or Unjust Legislation….!

    The Second Amendment allows you as an American Citizen to level the playing field against your would-be attacker. No matter your age or size or gender, or even your disability status, with a firearm at the ready-
    you are a match for the biggest, meanest robber or rapist who might try to break in through your door or window. You need not fear for your safety, or the safety of your spouse or children, if you are proficient in the use of a firearm in the comfort of your home. And as for protection outside the home – well, I’ll discuss that in a future writing of circumstances that I witness as a LEO…!

    This is all the more true for people who live in the suburbs or rural areas, where it might take the police a long time to respond. Even in the city where response times tend to be quicker, a few minutes is an eternity when a thug is trying to break down a mothers door late one night with babies at home. That was my experience as a young boy years ago that led to my purchasing my first firearm, a rifle when I was 18….!

    2) The second most important reason for the Second Amendment is National Security. The Founding Fathers did not trust standing armies, meaning armies that are kept equipped during peacetime. In their experience, standing armies were often used by dictatorial rulers to keep the common people subjugated { example- The Syrian
    Government and its use of Chemical Weapons on its own Citizens, year 2013 }. The Founding Fathers were fearful as to what a future national government might do domestically with a powerful military, and therefore wanted our standing military to be small.

    So their idea was that the people, All Americans, should all be armed. That way, if America was attacked by foreigners, the people of America would be able to defend themselves { as did the French Underground in WW2 } and our country while the government equipped and marshaled a professional army to fight the invaders. And if our armies should be defeated on the battlefield, every American citizen or patriot { The American Insurgents } could defend his family and his freedom against the invaders. If the invaders had to fight for every inch of ground against an armed citizenry, and people were desperately fighting for their lives and homes, the invaders would eventually lose the will to fight and retreat, and America would still be free.

    3) And, finally, the single most important reason for the Second Amendment was as an insurance policy against our own government. I don’t mean to sound alarmist, but that’s the historical truth. I will write a column explaining more of these details. For now, suffice it to say that the Founding Fathers considered the greatest threat to liberty to be a national government that has acquired too much power. Look at our present day White House and its Scandals! While America for more than two centuries has been the freest nation on earth, the Founding Fathers did not know what the future would hold. So, in keeping with the teachings of political philosophers such as John Locke and others, they decided that the people should all be armed. That, they claimed, was the ultimate insurance policy to keep the government in check and keep the people free.

    These reasons are why the Second Amendment protects all of our rights, yours and mine…! Whether it is freedom of religion, free speech, free press, free association, vote, excessive bail, the right to protest the government, right to a speedy trial and all other enumerated rights combined…! The Second Amendment allows those freedoms to exist today and as Americans, to protect those freedoms most cherish by us…! Our rights were framed by our Founding Fathers “In The Freedom Of Light” for all Americans to enjoy….!

    The NRA, GOA, along with Other Pro Gun Groups and Second Amendment Supporters like myself, we are all dedicated to protecting all of our rights under the Constitution. And by focusing on securing and advancing the Second Amendment, our mission is to make sure that your children and grandchildren enjoy the blessings of liberty, just as you and I do today….!

    “FREEDOM IS A LIGHT FOR WHICH MANY OF MEN, AMERICAN MEN, DIED IN DARKNESS”

    Sincerely,

    Mike Zawoiski, Pennsylavania

    USAF Security Police and Civilian LEO Retired…

    PS- Remember this Mr. Editor that– “The Second Amendment is NOT NEGOTIABLE”……not to anyone, not to your Mayor Bloomberg’s Oppressive City Government ….. not to any one…..!

    • Mike,

      I think you might have missed the point – we are strong supporters of the Second Amendment here and the question was not if we support the Second Amendment or not but if The Second Amendment had kept us from losing the other rights that we are given under the Constitution and when you look around and realize that our homes can now be entered and searched without a warrant, that we have no freedom privacy with everything we do being listened to, read, and watched, that we can be arrested and held indefinitely without a trial, states have no rights etc… It kind of makes you think. The Second Amendment is important and we will protect it the best that we can but the others ones are just as important and we are losing ground on those with every stroke of the legislative pen…

  67. NWGhostRider says:

    The only rights you have are the ones that you are willing to stand up for. Those of you that fly commercially you consent to being strip searched and groped to get on a plane, the NSA recently said that they do collect data from your cell phone and e-mail, do you submit to sobriety check points, no knock warrants, that is unreasonable search, so much for your 4th amendment. Do you live in an open carry state, do you have to submit to a back round check to buy a gun, can you carry a gun in a federal building, can you carry in school zones, so much for your second amendment. What about all of the “free speech zones” that cities and collages create when you want to protest against the government, what about all of the people that have been detained for voicing their opinions on social media sites, what about all the people that are being harassed by the IRS for opposing Odumbo’s policies. Why is anyone who supports constitutional rights considered a terrorist by our government. So much for the first amendment. what about people that carry “too much” money with them and it is confiscated by authorities, how about the people that have had their vehicles taken or their homes taken by the government. So much for the fifth amendment. What about Odumbo care, voter Id laws, abortion laws, drug laws. so much for the tenth amendment. The next time that you think that the government hasn’t invaded your rights… THINK AGAIN.

  68. Bruce Bailey says:

    The only thing it has done is cause those with an agenda to pause before totally taking all of our freedoms out of fear and concern. The real problem has been we have neglected the first amendment in its 2 stage points: It was first because they were the most important. Freedom of Religion and speech for without faith and hope, truth and a moral strength is even more important than the firepower just look at the Ukraine right now. We and Nato promised if the Ukrainians would give the nukes a few years back we would stand up for them.Not!