Re: 2nd Amendment perspectives

More | Report Post

On 12/13/03, Ravage wrote:
> First of all, Shmuel Goldstein , Im not sure how you feel you
> have a place to post any statement concerning the laws and the
> Constitution of the United States. Especially ones stating you
> believe in a repeal of one of the most important laws we have
> to help guarantee our freedom. People of the U.S. fought and
> died for our freedom from an opressive English government. In
> order to insure that we keep our freedoms, we keep our arms so
> that we have a means to defend ourselves from those who pose a
> threat to our freedom. If your people didnt have a means to
> defend themselves, you would be killed and inslaved by the
> neighboring muslim nations. Quite frankly, the only reason
that
> hasnt happened is because the U.S. is standing behind the
> shoulder of Israel. Without the huge amounts of foriegn aid
the
> U.S. sends you and our super power shadow, Israel would be
just
> a memory. Our system of govenrnment,the Second Ammendment and
> the laws of the United States are not of any of your jewish
> concern and in no way effect you. Regardless of what you feel
> or believe , our government was founded and preserved with our
> RIGHT to have firearms. This is our right as citizens of the
> United States of America and it is every citizens duty and
> obligation to uphold this law for our forefathers, for the
> Constitution , for the people who gave their lives to create
> and defend the Constitution and for our future. "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"

Ravage, I was thoroughly offended by your comments. Your claim
that Shmuel shouldn’t express his opinions based on the fact he
is from another country is, to say the least, ridiculous. And if
your still around Shmuel, I would like to apologize and say that
not all Americans are narrow minded. Now, I would like to ask
some questions (I find that’s the best way to find answers).
First, Ravage, you gave the classic argument of the need to be
able to defend ourselves from a oppressive government, thus the
need to have weapons. However, I would like to ask two
questions. 1. Why is this right not subject to limitation? After
all, there must be some limitations, otherwise your advocating
everyone should have the right to have a nuclear missile in
their back yard. Do you believe the government has gone too far
in their limitations on weapons? If so, why? 2.What harm do you
believe would come of strict regulation of weapon distribution?
It seems to me, people would still be able to get weapons, just
not as easily. And there is reason to believe this would
decrease violence. People will still hunt, after all nobody is
advocating the elimination of weapons altogether. So, why all
the fuss about regulation? Well, there you go. I doubt anyone is
really reading these anymore, but hopefully someone will, and
then respond.

Re: 2nd Amendment perspectives, 2/10/05, by Shmuel Goldstein.

Second Amendment Chatboard

LATEST POSTS | BY TOPICS | SUBMIT A POST