you confuse what the founders intended with silly and irrelevant arguments on how rights exist the second amendment is one of the supreme laws of the land. the founders intended that amendment guarantee a right that was not dependent on government institutions to vest. That's why the contrarian silliness that you have to be in the militia or have the POTENTIAL of being in the militia for the right to vest is a bald faced lie
and yet some think that gun control only means harassing lawful gun owners while not doing anything about criminals
There are two ways to say the same thing. Prohibits government. Confirms the people.... Your arrogance prohibits you though...
There's been a disturbance in the kitchen. We've taken care of it, and your food will be out soon. "What kind of disturbance?" It was a minor disturbance. "Of what sort?" We've already taken care of it. "But what was it?" It was a disturbance.
It says that something shall not be done. When you say something shall not be done, that is known as a prohibition. So what does the 2nd amendment say shall not be done?
The "fail" is yours. Our nation was founded on the idea that rights are preexisting and unalienable. One of the most fundamental and natural rights that exists is the right of self-defense. You don't agree with that? Fine, then pursue an amendment to the Constitution or, what the hell, just scrap the Constitution altogether and let's start over; but you can't ignore the Constitution just because you find it inconvenient. I have a right of self-defense. I have a right to access the most effective means with which to conduct that defense. That IS a natural right. You disagree? Too damn bad.
It is about the claims and accusations about others not caring about lives. My reponse proves that if it does not involve guns and gun control, most gun control advocates simply do not care how many lives are lost, and do nothing about it. Tobacco claims more lives than guns, and second hand Tobacco smoke kills way more children than guns, and some parents will not stop smoking, even to save their own children, blowing smoke in the children's faces, how sad.
...And I say you're wrong. My rights are mine, and they are my natural rights. That's not semantics, it is how I see the issue.
And yet the basis behind the participation of yourself, according to your own words, is focusing on saving lives. But the focus of yourself is on a statistical minority, bordering on microscopic insignificance overall, that any reduction makes no measurable difference when compared to all other preventable deaths that occur in the united states.
Nonsense. You offer nothing but fallacy and try to pass your prejudiced unsupportable opinions as fact.
Natural Rights predate Written Law by many Centuries, the first time one man tried to steal another man's goods, and then attacked that innocent man, and the defender whacked his attacker with a club, this established a natural Right to self defense. Men with weapons are more able to defend themselves from attack as compared to an unarmed man. Man as a generic term, to include both male and female.
