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
In reply to the discussion: Second Amendment Scoreboard [View all]FBaggins
(28,706 posts)62. Sure there is.
A) There are PLENTY of countries that have managed to avoid tyranny
So? It's the cartoon that's trying to pretend that the only argument made for 2A is overthrowing tyrants. But you seem to be confusing a correlation with some type of unity (that is... all non-tyrant governments have a 2A parallel). We can certainly respond to the silly cartoon pretending that 2A supporters do so just for avoiding tyranical regimes... by pointing out that if that WERE the only purpose, it would be successful not by overthrowing a tyrant, but by avoing them.
B) Somehow all those legions of losers in camo fatigues, shooting at beer cans with Barrack Obama's picture taped to them with their Bushmasters didn't manage to prevent...
As if the 300 million + firearms in the country are exclusively (or even predominantly) owned by far-right militia nuts.
Anybody who thinks the PURPOSE of the 2nd Amendment was to give American citizens the power to overthrow their own government hasn't read their history.
Tell it to James Madison. It wasn't THE pupose... but it was certainly A purpose.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
114 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I don't think Uncle Joe, or the cartoonist, sees the US Presidency as a seat of tyranny.
Aristus
May 2014
#3
Gun ownership rates have been dropping since the 70s with more guns concentrated in to fewer hands.
Uncle Joe
May 2014
#61
If 80,000,000 gun supporters object to this behavior, then all of you write to your
Aristus
May 2014
#112
Must not have gotten the memo that the 2nd amendment was only needed for protection from Tyrants.
dilby
May 2014
#4
Yes the South would've had personal weapons regardless because it was largely rural, agrarian
Uncle Joe
May 2014
#47
Glad to hear the right person in the right place, at the right time with a gun saved your life.
Fla Dem
May 2014
#12
Guns can save lives, just like not wearing a seat-belt can save lives...
devils chaplain
May 2014
#54
You would supplant a secular constitution with a document that appeals to a deistic god
AtheistCrusader
May 2014
#8
Preamble references " Laws of Nature and of Nature's God " and 'Creator' is capitalized for a reason
AtheistCrusader
May 2014
#14
You are attempting to interpret the historical writing of a deist in deistic language to mean
AtheistCrusader
May 2014
#20
I had been in the US for not more than an hour before some paranoid idiot
dickthegrouch
May 2014
#43
Of course I have the right, morally and legally, to take a life, in defense of my own or another's.
X_Digger
May 2014
#55
Using the NRA's logic more guns = more self-defense capability = a safer nation but that doesn't
Uncle Joe
May 2014
#44
Not just demographics but the actual rate of gun ownership has been dropping as well.
Uncle Joe
May 2014
#59
No doubt some people will and are lying or witholding the truth, but that's nothing new
Uncle Joe
May 2014
#67
From your own post, apparently the Pew Research Center confirms the General Social Survey.
Uncle Joe
May 2014
#71
Very true, however the Gallup poll shows gun ownership at the same level it was ...
spin
May 2014
#84
About 50% use a method other then firearms but we don't blame the bridges or razors.
EX500rider
May 2014
#87
I understand the right to keep and bear arms and the government not being allowed to infringe but
Uncle Joe
May 2014
#83
That's a good answer establishing the basis of the Founders' reasoning but it seems to me
Uncle Joe
May 2014
#89