Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Robb

(39,665 posts)

5. Probably by design.

Reply to 1-Old-Man (Reply #2)

Fri Sep 20, 2013, 08:47 AM

Sep 2013

As soon as you can nail down the reasons for ancient rules, you can start to chip away at their relevance to the currently living.

Such as biblical cautions against eating pork, ever. We now know when it's safe(r) to eat, when it's not. If anyone could show the 2nd was written for a similarly outdated threat, well, it would weaken the absolutists' arguments.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

29 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

How Fake 2nd Amendment History Kills [View all] WilliamPitt Sep 2013 OP

The amendment was never intended as a blank check for some unstable person to massacre... NYC_SKP Sep 2013 #1

About a year ago I spend a good bit of time researching the history of the 2nd Amendment 1-Old-Man Sep 2013 #2

Probably by design. Robb Sep 2013 #5

K & R !!! WillyT Sep 2013 #3

The 2A amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms hack89 Sep 2013 #4

A Solid Piece, Sir The Magistrate Sep 2013 #6

You realize you have caused massive headaches amongst certain DUers don't you? CTyankee Sep 2013 #7

I'm sorry, but if he wants to make a real case, he needs to state historical facts and cite sources, Zorra Sep 2013 #8

Worth Reading The Whole 'Tree Of Liberty' Letter, Ma'am The Magistrate Sep 2013 #13

If the framers were not concerned with domestic tyranny explain the 3rd Amendment. Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #9

A nicely-written version... Lizzie Poppet Sep 2013 #10

"failed"? "discredited"? Only by the extreme RW members of the Supreme Court CTyankee Sep 2013 #12

Or by anyone with even a basic grounding in linguistics. Lizzie Poppet Sep 2013 #14

try some history, first Lizzie. CTyankee Sep 2013 #15

I side with our President and his party. Lizzie Poppet Sep 2013 #16

"happening" to be! CTyankee Sep 2013 #20

Take up your complaint with the President Obama. former9thward Sep 2013 #17

Of course he believes that, since it is the law. CTyankee Sep 2013 #21

President Obama believes any Supreme court decision "since it is the law?" former9thward Sep 2013 #22

well, if he were making your argument I would agree, but we don't know do we? CTyankee Sep 2013 #23

Hey, Will! Did you know that "well regulated" was interpreted differently, back then? Paladin Sep 2013 #11

So, Robert Parry, why didthe founding fathers avoid creating a standing army... aikoaiko Sep 2013 #18

Probably because the young nation didn't have two nickels to rub together jmowreader Sep 2013 #26

Whoa! No love for Jefferson AT ALL. KamaAina Sep 2013 #19

Yeah, I wonder if that's a bit much. The guy couldn't have been *all* bad. nomorenomore08 Sep 2013 #25

K&R nomorenomore08 Sep 2013 #24

What is scary is we have these wackos walking around with huge guns davidpdx Sep 2013 #27

Excellent essay. k&r for exposure. n/t Laelth Sep 2013 #28

Who, was it supposed, would be doing the infringing if not the federal government? Loudly Sep 2013 #29