POLITICS AND DEATH TO AMERICANS ...

TO KILL THE SECOND AMENDMENT AND OUR DEMOCRATIC IDEALS AND WAY OF LIFE?


So Sunday I was out campaigning when a car pulled up beside me. It was the Democratic candidate I am running against as a Republican. We blocked traffic as we briefly exchanged pleasantries, had a laugh, and wished each other good luck. That is the way politics must remain in America. If they get to the level of some Third World politics, where heads, nuts, hands, and other body parts are hacked off, as it appears to be trending here with politically motivated shootings/slaughters, America will be in a sad state of affair.

 

Schools are the institutions charged with acculturating children to our values and Democratic Ideals. But what is the AMERICAN value? Where is the regulations and controls that once prevented the graphic killings currently shown to young children on television? Is there a significant relation with such killings and the wanton disregard for life? What is the impact of our prolonged wars? Has the church failed us? Has laws let the genie out of the box, wherein parents' power has been co-opted by the state? Thus, good parents, fearful of disciplining their children least they call 911 or file divorce proceeding, have the children running the house.   

 

Of course things appear cyclic.  And the disregard that past generations had for Black lives appears to be revisiting a new generation of non-Black Americans as well, as though chickens are coming home to roost.  What of our immigration policy? Is it a sieve that allows murderous individuals to enter and chop up/dismember good American? How can immigration reform helps when the terror is brewed by Americans for the destruction of Americans in America? 

 

Could the killings generate enough fear in America to have something done to our Second Amendment, as the fear of the Russians being first in space propelled Americans to action--making us the leading space explorers? Surely, we know that we have concocted events/killings to justify undermining other countries.  Are there individuals devious enough to murder and maim innocent Americans just to concoct fear to mobilize bias against gun ownership?  Perhaps the prize is so great, a defenseless America ripe for a south bound government, that they will do anything. However, there are two inherent fears possessed by Americans that will not allow them to give up their guns without an "uncivil war." One is the distrust of their government and the other, which you can guess, has long had them stockpiling in the woods.

Comments

Flying Junior Added Nov 6, 2017 - 2:30am
I would say that now that Hillary is pretty much sidelined, your guns are probably safe.
opher goodwin Added Nov 6, 2017 - 4:26am
DrRG - I am sure the madness will continue. It is ingrained in the soul of Americans. While they hold to this fantasy that they can miraculously rise up, take on a professional army, and depose an elected government the insanity will continue.
Things have moved on over the last two hundred and fifty years. It is no longer a frontiers nation. Not that you'd know it from some attitudes.
So while America continues to provide assault rifles and machine guns to any criminal and mentally unsound nutcase the innocent will continue to be mown down. It's like living in a battlefield.
Glad to hear that there are pleasantries between parties. I wish there was at all levels. The hatred grows.
Prof Claudewell Thomas Added Nov 6, 2017 - 11:47am
The question remains' why is the intolerance of " the other" so great? " While " the other" occasionally changes,the intolerance goes on.The fantasy of individually owned firearms or even a militia offering effective resistance to an organized military or police force is linked to the intolerance which probably had survival value (evolutionary) but which now clouds judgment and denies regulation.(Probably too late anyway) 
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 6, 2017 - 3:43pm
Is it really intolerance or a fear of reprisal?
 
Prof Claudewell Thomas Added Nov 6, 2017 - 4:21pm
Enter your comment here...Probably a deadly combination of the two , but for starters bands competed for the same ecological niche.The role of the leader was to ensure survival of his or her(infrequently) kind.This is not a stage set for globalism,relatively open borders,minimizing human contribution to global warming and unstockpiling of nuclear arms.Protectionism,us first and chest or breast ( infrequently) beating are old tried and,because of technology ,AI, etc,untrue responses. It seems to me that the survival odds for homo sapiens are not good.
Dino Manalis Added Nov 6, 2017 - 4:35pm
We should set aside politics and do what's right.  Save America and save Americans!    It begins with good morals and values!
Prof Claudewell Thomas Added Nov 6, 2017 - 5:16pm
American leadership which the ' free world' counted upon,despite it's flaws has been withdrawn after decades of pursuit of a domino theory of opposition to communism( missing the nationalism that was its natural enemy) then following Netanyahu through pursuit of unobtainable middle eastern objectives,then a forlorn "leading from  behind" and now a Barnum & Bailey 'let's make a deal' show.Russia is not a natural ally as was England and France and China will never be a tool of POTUS grandiose delusions notwithstanding.
Jeff Michka Added Nov 6, 2017 - 9:38pm
End the 2nd Amendment, send out the squads of "gun collection agents" in their black helicopters to land on front lawns and collect weapons from the idiots that will sit for nothing to control the flow of weapons into moronic hands, and just get it over with, saving a few lives in the process.  Mass shootings are being normalized as if the mass shootings should be normalized like Nazis.
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 6, 2017 - 9:57pm
@Junior "I would say that now that Hillary is pretty much sidelined, your guns are probably safe."
 
True, Trump is down with gun rights. I gave up my gun 20 years ago. It was a target permitted gun. Paid $400 for it them. Was a member of the NRA.  Hard to get a carry permit in NY. Criminals walk with their guns. Sadly, if the delusional killers are killing to help take away the Second as men killed doctors to prevent women from getting abortion, they will be taking a lot of lives in a futile exercise.
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 6, 2017 - 10:10pm
@ Opher. "While they hold to this fantasy that they can miraculously rise up, take on a professional army, and depose an elected government the insanity will continue."
 
In preceding is the problem of an uncivil war. When the soldiers come in to take away Americans guns, it will play into the distrust Americans have of their government and it will be at the point where the government is about to go south. It will be brothers and sisters as soldiers fighting their kins who are patriots. Perhaps they will not be able to defeat the professional military, but they can form the Resistance until Russia comes to help.
 
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 7, 2017 - 2:34am
@ Opher. "So while America continues to provide assault rifles and machine guns to any criminal and mentally unsound nutcase the innocent will continue to be mown down. It's like living in a battlefield.
Glad to hear that there are pleasantries between parties. I wish there was at all levels. The hatred grows."
 
The sales to criminals expose the shortcoming of gov. agencies and a problem of living in a free society. In NY, there is a saying: "If you see something, say something." We also have camera watching our moves and generating traffic tickets automatically, and hell for decent and unconnected citizen to obtain a gun permit.  Criminals need no permit. There are people living in battlefields everyday and perhaps our need to prevent such conditions in America will generate sound policies, have a Citizen Watching Citizen Bureau, tolerance of cameras in bathrooms, and the injection of transponders in Americans that automatically sent a signal if a gun is on or in the home of a person not authorized to have one.  We could also have our cell phones able to detect the presence of concealed weapons on persons who are not licencees. Cellphones would automatically send the authorities the information.
 
Heck. I would rather embrace and advance civilities than to get to that world.
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 7, 2017 - 3:01am
@Prof. "It seems to me that the survival odds for homo sapiens are not good."
 
True to the leader taking action to advance survival of his tribe. In the past there were some acts that are frowned upon by current society.  In the future (given one), the society will frown on some acts we embrace to advance our tribe.  Perhaps France, needing to have more children, importing immigrants for the purpose and treating them like crap in the process, can inform us regarding the survival of homo-sapiens. Homo sapient is encompassing of the races of all people of the world.
 
So, paying women of one race who are going infertile to have children and letting the children of a race of prolific breeders starve  show the extreme  of dealing with a problem that can be solved with good immigration policy as opposed to isolationism.  Then, tribalism is so deeply ingrained that the lion who defeated the former leader would rather kill the cubs he did not spawn to ensure the survival of his cubs.  Seems actions of wild animals have gotten presidential. 
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 7, 2017 - 3:04am
@Dino. "We should set aside politics and do what's right.  Save America and save Americans!    It begins with good morals and values!"
 
What are the American values and whose values do we advance? Of late, have you tried to sit with a young child and watch TV?
 
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 7, 2017 - 3:08am
@ Jeff. "End the 2nd Amendment, send out the squads of "gun collection agents" in their black helicopters to land on front lawns and collect weapons from the idiots that will sit for nothing to control the flow of weapons into moronic hands, and just get it over with, saving a few lives in the process.  Mass shootings are being normalized as if the mass shootings should be normalized like Nazis."
 
Timothy McVeigh informs us of the preparation select Americans have been making for what you propose. What is the impact of TV and our prolong wars on the normalizing of mass murder?
 
 
Lynn Johnson Added Nov 7, 2017 - 11:16am
Dr. RG >> However, there are two inherent fears possessed by Americans that will not allow them to give up their guns without an "uncivil war." One is the distrust of their government
 
Amen.  Except for the specificity.  Remove "their" and then you've got it.
 
Dr. RG >> ... and the other, which you can guess, has long had them stockpiling in the woods.
 
Don't get the reference... tried to guess, still don't get it... ???
 
Side Note:
Maybe we can modify the background checks to flag atheists... especially the rabid ones. That seems to be a common factor (besides the Islam thing). Now bracing for the (figurative) hell just unleashed... in 3...2...1... :)
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 7, 2017 - 11:37am
The fear of the people enslaved and mistreated assuming majority status.
Bill Kamps Added Nov 7, 2017 - 4:12pm
opher, Im not sure it is as bad as all that.  Not counting suicides, a person is about three times more likely to die in a car accident, as from a gun.  Two thirds of the gun deaths in the US are suicides. 
 
Of the 11K gun homicides in a year, one has to ask, how many of them would there be if guns were as rare here as in the UK?  There would still be some, so how many fewer would there be ?  We are talking about 11K deaths out of population of 325 million, or less than four in 100,000. 
 
You are correct, gun laws are not perfectly enforced.  Even in police states, the laws are not perfectly enforced, though they get closer to perfect enforcement than in democracies.  As DRG points out, I dont think we want to live in a society that goes to extreme measures to perfectly enforce the gun laws.
 
We have chosen to allow people to own guns, and with that come a certain number of deaths from guns.  We have chosen to not live in a police state, which means personal freedom is valued more than perfectly enforcing the law.  This means people that shouldnt have guns, will sometimes get guns. 
Jeff Michka Added Nov 7, 2017 - 7:27pm
Dr. Green asks: What is the impact of TV and our prolong wars on the normalizing of mass murder?-Prolly neither has helped, but if you want to place these subjects in place, then be more specific.  If you read replies from folks like Lynn Johnson, they'll claim, they'll romantically fight of those coming to get their guns.  Perhaps they'll try and get their bumper stickerish wish: "pry my gun from my cold, dead fingers."  End the 2nd Amendment!  I CAN'T SEE A BUNCH OF ARMED WB white noise sources, standing toe to toe, fighting the US Army and an army of cops to a standstill to keep their toys.
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 7, 2017 - 8:10pm
@Jeff. The reason why America is not using metric is most Americans will not understand it.  Will it worth the trouble to educate them.  On the matter of the Second, it may appear as Romanticism, but will it worth the lives lost to try to take away Americans' guns?
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 7, 2017 - 11:56pm
@Lyn. "Now bracing for the (figurative) hell just unleashed... in 3...2...1... :)"
 
From whom were you expecting preceding?
Lynn Johnson Added Nov 8, 2017 - 12:01am
The anti-christian element of WB... Dr. Green.
It seems I stand refreshingly corrected...
PaganTeaPartier Added Nov 8, 2017 - 12:54am
Anyone else find the argument that we should just surrender the means of self-defense and resistance, because we'd be hopelessly out matched against the US military, to be pretty ridiculous, since that exact same military is right now most of the way through their second decade, of playing whack-a-mole in the deserts of the Middle East?
 
We stood toe to toe with the Red Coats at Lexington on the way to Concord. We did NOT stand toe to toe with them on their way back. And the most ironic part, they were on a mission to disarm us too.
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 8, 2017 - 5:02am
@Lynn. "The anti-christian element of WB... Dr. Green.
It seems I stand refreshingly corrected..."
 
I see the dissonance your trolling piece caused. I am not sure of your ability to assess WB contributors when you think an anti-Christian backlash would emerge from me or those who comment on my posts.  Anyway, I am glad that you are capable of accepting correction.
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 8, 2017 - 5:10am
@Pagan. "Anyone else find the argument that we should just surrender the means of self-defense and resistance, because we'd be hopelessly out matched against the US military, to be pretty ridiculous, since that exact same military is right now most of the way through their second decade, of playing whack-a-mole in the deserts of the Middle East?
 
We stood toe to toe with the Red Coats at Lexington on the way to Concord. We did NOT stand toe to toe with them on their way back. And the most ironic part, they were on a mission to disarm us too."
 
Thanks for above. I lacked such thought to repel the defeatism argument advanced by those who would not hold a gun to defend their family. Indeed, some rag-tagged "miscreants" took on the Redcoats, the most experienced and powerful army in the world and defeated them, thus gave birth to the United States of America and their hard held values: GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH, DEATH BEFORE DISHONOR; LIVE FREE OR DIE.
PaganTeaPartier Added Nov 8, 2017 - 5:35am
Though, I think you might have made bold the wrong part of that second section.
 
The British walked over us at Lexington, but we didn't fight on open field when they came back.
 
We hid behind walls, which just about every cultivated field had, trees, in forests far more dense than Europe had seen in centuries, rock outcroppings; we'd lay in wait, fire once, take cover while they fired, and move on to the next spot while they reloaded.
 
By the time they made it back, the Redcoats had been decimated many times over. It was a horrifying causality rate for such a straightforward mission as burning some colonialist's powder stores.
 
That absurd argument, which the presenters assume to be a rather absurd premise to begin with, rests upon the insulting presumption that the American Public would be too stupid to assume irregular tactics.
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 8, 2017 - 6:17am
@Pagan. True on your observation. My intent was to convey we did not roll over at the presence of the most powerful army then. Along with their adaptability you outlined, they had the knowledge of geopolitics to secure arms from Germany to aid their quest. I am not sure if the Russians were helpful at the early stages of the battle, as they were at later stages of our struggle. Key take away here are: Our current president needs to abandon any isolationist philosophy. The current attempt to feminize American men and take away their Second will have us rife for a dictator job, as our castratas will run pass their muskets to secure their potty in defense of our nation.
Bill Kamps Added Nov 8, 2017 - 9:10am
DRG,  I generally agree with you.  The point is not whether we would win against the Army, if it came to fighting the citizens.  We dont have tanks and they do.  The point is that we would force the Army to fire on US citizens, and it is not a given that they would do it. Might factions of the Army break away? never know.
 
Really the bigger point is that there there is the threat of a fight, and one never knows what might trigger that, and so that is always a consideration.
 
This is unlike many other places in the world, where armed citizens are not even a consideration.  Venezuela for example, where very few have weapons and the government can do what it pleases.
Thomas Sutrina Added Nov 8, 2017 - 10:07am
"Has the church failed us?" and "The question remains' why is the intolerance of " the other" so great? " We have stopped talking through those doors maybe because they stopped preaching christianity.  More then a thousand babies are murdered and the largest group are black babies, but the churches say very little.  They have a commandment, thou shall not kill.  That they ignore.   Ganges in our big city kill each other daily with illegal guns.  Mass murder is becoming a weekly event.  None of these murders see themselves in the fires of hell.  What progressivism has done is to tear down the moral foundation of the nation in the last century,  The chickens have come home to roost. 
 
These two comments seem to fit like a glove, but miss the whole point.  "However, there are two inherent fears possessed by Americans that will not allow them to give up their guns without an "uncivil war." One is the distrust of their government and the other, which you can guess, has long had them stockpiling in the woods."  And "End the 2nd Amendment, send out the squads of "gun collection agents" in their black helicopters to land on front lawns and collect weapons from the idiots that will sit for nothing to control the flow of weapons into moronic hands." 
 
The Texas shooter should not have been allowed to purchase a gun.   The GOVERNMENT DID NOT PUT HIM ON THE LIST CHECKED BEFORE SELLING A GUN TO A PERSON.   I do not trust the government to administer the law to a high degree of proficiency.  The stores did the background check.   Why did he have body armor? 
 
The private gun owner ended the massacre after 5 minutes by shooting back and taking fire.  He hit the shooter twice.   And with another citizen chased the shooter for ten miles before he crashed his vehicle, another 10 to 15 minutes.  The police are responsible for enforcing the law not protecting citizens.  They arrived afterward, clean up duty.   The Second Amendment give citizens the authorization, permission, and even the responsible for protecting ourselves and other citizens from criminals.   Today these incidents can not be hid from the public.  The statistics show a significant change from the 50's where the media controlled the news.  Today there is an increase acceptance of gun ownership.  Citizens are not stupid they understand the responsibilities of police and themselves.
 
 
Lynn Johnson Added Nov 8, 2017 - 10:15am
Dr. G >> I see the dissonance your trolling piece caused.
 
Thank you.  A little dissonance can be good for the community.
 
Dr. G >> I am not sure of your ability to assess WB contributors when you think an anti-Christian backlash would emerge from me or those who comment on my posts.
 
There's that lack of tenure thing again.  See?  I did not know there were cliques of commenters for specific authors.  I certainly did not expect it from you.
 
The expectation was from WB in general and came from my personal (though limited) experience.
 
Dr. G >> Anyway, I am glad that you are capable of accepting correction.
 
I am... Some guys learn from watching and listening to others... I've got to piss on that electrical fence myself.
 
PTP >> Anyone else find the argument that we should just surrender the means of self-defense and resistance, because we'd be hopelessly out matched against the US military, to be pretty ridiculous, since that exact same military is right now most of the way through their second decade, of playing whack-a-mole in the deserts of the Middle East?
 
It would be the same scenario if the U.S. military committed itself to killing and disarming a segment of its own population.  Overwhelming power against little pockets of resistance; dragging on forever.
 
"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." is a quote misattributed to Japanese WWII Fleet Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto; but the sentiment is dead on.  That would be the problem for an invading force (foreign or domestic).
 
The real issue is exactly what Bill Kamps hit on... would the Army follow to fight and kill American citizens?  And throw into that question the oath...
 
"I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic..."
 
The order would in fact be an affront to the Constitution they swear to defend (minus nothing less than a Constitutional Amendment).
 
To succeed, the left would have to boil that frog as slow as possible; some understand that, some don't, some would just as soon kill them all as long as they are the ones giving the orders and not actually doing the fighting.
 
BK >> This is unlike many other places in the world, where armed citizens are not even a consideration.
 
Exactly.  Tyranny Step 1... disarm the citizenry
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 8, 2017 - 12:38pm
Step 2..Get in bed with the press or shut them down.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Nov 8, 2017 - 1:40pm
Dr Green: I'm very happy that you stand in defence of the 2nd Amendment. I can imagine that it is not easy in New York. You earned my respect, sir!
 
I have no doubt that the American people could fight successfully against government forces. The US military is designed for and good at ousting foreign governments. After the Korea War there was not one country in which it could guide the direction of a country under its occupation. It can't controll the masses. It never could.
 
If the American people remain armed and stand up for freedom, democracy will remain. The culture will only come down when passion for freedom goes. I'm afraid that danger is still present.
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 8, 2017 - 3:46pm
@Bill. If Kent State is an example, some of our military would fire. The Philippines' pink uprising informs of a peaceful way to concur an army. Still, it was tried in China and they ran tanks over their citizens. 
 
"Might factions of the Army break away? never know" (Bill). The recipe for an uncivil war.
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 8, 2017 - 4:22pm
@Thomas. You said a lot intertwining your perceived lack of personal responsibility in Blacks (as you usually do), the moral bankruptcy of society, and your disdain for abortion. I did assert America distrust for their government as a factor for not relinquishing their Second. The other I will now state is the fear of Black reprisal.
 
One could consider that these lunatics are allowed to acquire guns to commit mayhem in order to mobilize bias against gun  ownership. The Gov ineptitude does not allay such conspiracy thinking. That is a sad commentary, but as soon as we have a massacre, there is a call for gun control. Trump did not call control.
 
The Black helicopter referenced McVeigh's fear that caused him to kill all those innocent Americans.  The helicopter reference was made by someone with disdain for the spineless Democrats who allow citizens to have their Second. Your point to support the Second is well illustrated. Indeed, the massacre could have been worse if there was no gun in the hand of a good American. 
 
I am not sure if there is an increased desire for gun ownership, as the feminization of men creates individuals more likely to play with dolls than to learn safe gun usage to protect their live an property. 
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 8, 2017 - 4:28pm
@Lyn. Nothing more need said. We are in agreement. Just be aware that a limited sample cannot properly inform research findings. As for helicopter and tanks, many things are controlled by specific frequencies of specific wave forms that are found in the air.
Jeff Michka Added Nov 8, 2017 - 5:01pm
Dr. Green sez: The Philippines' pink uprising informs of a peaceful way to concur an army. Still, it was tried in China and they ran tanks over their citizens.-The EDSA "revolution" that overthrew the Marcos regime was peaceful, and could only happen in the PI.  I was working there in 1986, and although there were not a lot of people killed, many did die at the hands of Marcos' goon squads out in the provinces. 
Thomas Sutrina Added Nov 8, 2017 - 6:37pm
Dr Green, this nation is founded on law of nature and of natures God. Please inform me of one major society except socialist that would consider abortion moral? I stated a fact that Blacks lead the statistic for the rate of abortions. And this is not just stated by me but also by blacks.
 
I agree that Americans distrust their government. I do not fear Black reprisals, however; we can identify black political groups that promote anarchy. We also know blacks are not unique and history will show a steady stream of such groups. Government is not free of such groups within its ranks. The power associated with these government groups make them threatening. History of countries and civilizations shows that such groups have overthrown by force or deception the will of the majority. Gun confiscation is a prerequisite for deception method.
 
All ten of the Bill of Rights Amendments are their because the colonest have experience government force applied against their will. I believe all the the Bill of Rights are identified in the charges against the British government in the Declaration of Independence.
 
You tell us there is a call for gun control, the underlying action is to confiscate all guns. I suggest that groups that would dismiss the Constitution as out of date make this call for gun control. They do not actively work for Amending the Constitution. Even FDR's 1944 'Second Bill of Rights' was not a call to Amend the Constitution.
 
Many countries have done this but the guns that have been confiscated are legally owned guns. The criminal and revolutionary/terrorist retain their guns and even obtain more. USSR and now Russia has not eliminated guns. This is but one method of murders. Harvard study I have presented in the past tells us that Russia has 4 times the homicide rate of America with the confiscation of guns. All the countries that have confiscated gun have not seen the elimination of homicide or even a significant drop. Gun confiscation is a failure.
 
Gun ownership is up. Today I heard that the number of guns owners is not increasing as fast and an owner with multiple guns. But clearly gun ownership is not decreasing so the desire is increasing. One of the fox evening programs this week pointed out that about 264 if I remember correctly citizens used their personal guns to reduce the harm done by terrorist or criminals in a year. The national media that is bias for gun control only report citizen use of personal guns for events like the Texas church mass murder where it impossible to ignore.
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 8, 2017 - 7:06pm
Thomas you are one to state your points regarding Blacks' irresponsibility over and over.  Your posts are a source of reference for me, whether to prove good or bad approach to research. W have no disagreement here. Yes, President Obama did send gun sales through the roof. You are right about the bias reporting. Its purpose is to have men scared of guns and wanting to play with dolls.
Jeff Michka Added Nov 9, 2017 - 7:15pm
LJ sez: The anti-christian element of WB... Dr. Green. It seems I stand refreshingly corrected...-Oh, the lifelong, experienced WBer made a mistake? End the 2nd Amendment.  Bring in the black helicopters and confiscation squads and get it over with.  The "patriot Romantics," of which the quoted commentor is a member of can either go along or die resisting.  Gun control is not allowing guns to control our every political gesture.  Right now, and as evidenced here. it does.
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 10, 2017 - 5:47am
@ Jeff. 'Gun control is not allowing guns to control our every political gesture.  Right now, and as evidenced here. it does." 
 
Indeed there seems to be a preoccupation with discussion on the Second. 
 
Seems the Second is what advances and facilitates the First we express here.
Lynn Johnson Added Nov 10, 2017 - 8:02am
Without the 2nd Amendment all the others in the Bill of Rights (including those in the 1st) are at the discretion of those in power.  As we have seen throughout history; that discretion is not something we can trust.  The order of the amendments in the Bill of Rights is not random.  The founding fathers put the most important first.  They knew.
Jeff Michka Added Nov 10, 2017 - 4:10pm
Dr. Green sez: Indeed there seems to be a preoccupation with discussion on the Second.-There's never any "discussion", just a call for solving gun violence by simply getting more guns in people's hands.  And now we all get told that amendments in the bill of rights were in "order of importance."  Would sure like a cite on that since the commenters is, at best, unreliable.  "They knew", so you tell us, Lynn.
Jeff Michka Added Nov 16, 2017 - 4:54pm
Dr. Green sez: Seems the Second is what advances and facilitates the First we express here. -Really?  I realize you've laid down with rightist dawgs you need in your political quest.  Fine, but I totally fail to see how the 2nd Amendment weenies on WB want to take my first amendment rights away as a matter of "principle" facilitates more than taking away someone else's rights to "keep theirs."
Dr. Rupert Green Added Nov 17, 2017 - 11:44am
Jeff, you may have misunderstood. I stated the Second is what guarantees our First.
Jeff Michka Added Nov 17, 2017 - 2:28pm
Dr. Green sez: I stated the Second is what guarantees our First.-My answer remains the same.  These people want to take my rights to free speech away.  What, I'm suppose to shoot them so I CAN POST ON WB?  Waste of time, money and ammo.
Jeff Michka Added Nov 19, 2017 - 3:11pm
BK sez: The point is not whether we would win against the Army, if it came to fighting the citizens.  We dont have tanks and they do.  The point is that we would force the Army to fire on US citizens, and it is not a given that they would do it.-As Dr, Green mentioned, if Kent State is an indicator, some would w/o question.  You wanna be the one that finds out?
Thomas Sutrina Added Nov 19, 2017 - 4:14pm
"Most gun control arguments miss the point. If all control boils fundamentally to force, how can one resist aggression without equal force? How can a truly “free” state exist if the individual citizen is enslaved to the forceful will of individual or organized aggressors? It cannot. "  -- Tiffany Madison
 
We all understand that Washington serves special interest, the swamp, first.  At some point in time the swamp to retain its influence will point guns at all of us not part of the Government Class.  Why does the department of education have armed reaction force?
 
"Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity and happiness of the people; and not for the profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men."-- John Adams
 
"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." -- Ayn Rand
 
This is for you Dr. Green,
"Puritans and Quakers were able to migrate to the New World because they could accumulate the funds to do so in the market despite disabilities impose on them in other aspects of their life.  The Southern states after the Civil War took many measures to impose legal restrictions on Negroes. One measure which was never taken on any scale was the establishment of barriers to the ownership of either real or personal property. . . . [still true today and was true for the puritans & Quakers] It reflected rather, a basic belief in private property which was so strong that it overrode the desire to discriminate against Negroes.  The maintenance of the general rules of private property and of capitalism have been a major source of opportunity for Negroes and have permitted them to make greater progress than they otherwise could have made." 
 
"Paradoxes of experience is that, in spite of this historical evidence, it is precisely the minority groups that have frequently furnished the most vocal and most numerous advocates of fundamental alteration in a capitalist society.  They have tended to attribute to capitalism the residual restrictions they experience rather than to recognize that the free market has been the major factor enabling these restrictions to be as mall as they are."    "Capitalism & Freedom" Milton Friedman Univ. of Chicago Press 1962 p 108, 109
 
You see Dr. Green when I purchase anything I do not know the color of the skin of the people involve nor do I care and that is the case throughout the nation and actually the world.  
 
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.  [true historically only in free market Capitalist economic system]

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that." -- Martin Luther King, Jr.
 
How about we all work on draining the swamp.
Thomas Sutrina Added Nov 19, 2017 - 4:16pm
major factor enabling these restrictions to be as small as they are."
Jeff Michka Added Nov 20, 2017 - 4:58pm
The Sutrino asks: Why does the department of education have armed reaction force?-In case they get another Sandy hook situation where hostages are taken, and small town cop shops don't have the near-military capabilities often needed these days.  Go check "The Sandy Hook SCHOOL SHOOTING CONSPIRACY PAGE ON INFOWARS. THAT WILL REALLY GET YOU GOING, DECAYED PARTICLE.
Jeff Michka Added Nov 20, 2017 - 5:01pm
The Sutrino asks: Why does the department of education have armed reaction force?-Maybe because Betsy Devos is fearful she'll be taken prisoner while visiting an inner city school, so anyone living near the school will need to be shot, and the local cops can't be bribed enough to do it for her.