Loss of Second Amendment, a loss for human rights and individuality

[Elderberry]

Web News Order April 2, 2018  by danama

There is a lot of talk about the Second Amendment right now. The Bill of Rights is a document that has been enshrined in the annals of America. Ultimately, it is the fundamental rights that is provided to individuals to protect them from an overbearing government. While of the amendments on the Bill of Rights that are under attack, the amendment that takes the greatest beating is Amendment #2– the Right to Bear Arms. (I believe I could make valid arguments on all ten are under attack, yes even Amendment #3– No Quartering of Soldiers, but that is a different article.)

What the Second Amendment Says

In total, if it is not ingrained in your heart or tattooed on your arm, the Second Amendment reads, “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.” A plain reading and understanding of this text is that the people are the standing army and therefore should be armed as such. There are multiple documents, court opinions, and articles on this amendment that date from when it was written to now.

A Defense of the Second Amendment

The article you are reading is not about interpretation of the Second Amendment; it is about the defense thereof. This right is under greater threat now than at most likely any other time in history.

School Shootings and Protection of Children

We are all aware of the current shootings, especially in schools. It is well established that people are more protective towards their children than themselves. So, if they feel their children are threatened, they will act.

Media Banging Gun Control Gong

The media (regardless of party affiliation) is banging the Gun Control gong for politics and ratings. My disgust of the media hit an all-time high when a broadcaster on a conservative channel reported about a burglary where the shop attendant was pistol whipped by a semi-automatic handgun. While some may see that as simply descriptive reporting, it is clearly inflammatory by relating a non-relevant fact due to the current hysteria. It would be akin to replacing the words “shop attendant” with “illegal immigrant shop attendant.” It is pandering to the audience in the worst way. The attention has heightened greatly. In addition, the media is working strongly on the Republican base (the traditional stalwarts of the Second Amendment).

More: http://webnewsorder.com/2017/loss-of-second-amendment-a-loss-for-human-rights-and-individuality/

[Fishrrman]

It ain't "lost" yet.
It could become the core issue that launches a second civil war.

So, I'll pose two questions:
Would you prefer a "united" America that has lost the Second?
Or, would you prefer a "broken apart" America in which one of the surviving nations still has a "Second Amendment"...?

[Elderberry]

It ain't "lost" yet.
It could become the core issue that launches a second civil war.

So, I'll pose two questions:
Would you prefer a "united" America that has lost the Second?
Or, would you prefer a "broken apart" America in which one of the surviving nations still has a "Second Amendment"...?

Not much of a choice there. Which part of America will you end up in?

[Fishrrman]

Elderberry asks:
"Not much of a choice there. Which part of America will you end up in?"

If I stay where I am now, I'll be "in the wrong place".

Two recent novels I'd suggest, both by Kurt Schlichter:
"People's Republic"
"Indian Country"

They deal with a broken-apart America of the near-future (beginning with the defeat of Donald Trump by hillary clinton in 2020.

Both can be (cough, choke) "found online", if you're willing to do the lookin' ...