Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

no 2nd amendment

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • no 2nd amendment

    This may seem in bad taste what with the spate of shootings that are going around, I am not starting this thread to make any kind of political point and as the OP would like to create an opening rule that talk of gun rights as they stand today be banned from this thread.

    I have no right or power to create or enforce such a rule but I think it would be productive and less derailing if followed.

    I am just wondering who in Americas history it guarded against.

    So here goes....

    The Constitution gets created but the part about right to bear arms/well regulated militia to prevent tyranny (2nd amendment) is NOT included.

    Between then an now, (assuming same run of presidents) can you postulate who/when were the greatest threats of tyranny to descend on the USA,

    Maybe not the whole country, perhaps you can think of a historical state governor or general who might have been apt to just carve out a chunk as his own fiefdom.

    I will state for the record I have no idea if this will be a long or short list, I can only name about 10 presidents and 8 state governors from present and history off the top of my head (and Arnie and Clint should not count!)
    Sealion would have failed..............runs,

  • #2
    The history of the USA would be forever changed.

    That would eliminate not just private ownership of firearms but also the system of irregular state militia whose legacy is still felt today in the US military.

    The war of 1812 and the early Indian wars saw heavy use of local militias comprised of private citizens with personally-owned weapons. All later conflicts until Vietnam saw heavy use of reservists who are the natural outgrowth of the militia system.

    It is doubtful the USA would have made any meaningful contribution to WW1; certainly not in 1917-18, without the militia system.

    Expansion would have been glacially slow, or else the USA would have had to embrace a large regular Army, something it did not do until the Cold War.

    The culture would be vastly different. The USA has no concept of nobility or privilege, a concept that at its roots is based upon the fact that every citizen may be as heavily armed as anyone else.
    Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

    Comment


    • #3
      The US likely would have had a larger army earlier on than it did. One major reason the US Army was kept small was the Constitution was deliberately designed to prevent large standing armies, at least in theory...

      Let's assume that's not the case. So, the US uses their large standing army to take territory and crush neighboring nations. You might very well have a larger US that is more aggressive militarily.

      If settlers and such moving West couldn't procure weapons of their own they'd have demanded military / government protection and that would have come in the form of a large (and expensive... read more taxes) military.

      Comment


      • #4
        One additional thing, we wouldn't have the excellent shooters that we have. It takes time to get high proficiency with any tool. The tradition of giving your child a rifle allows them to get proficient from a early age...
        Credo quia absurdum.


        Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

        Comment


        • #5
          When Canada started its' expansion onto the western plains, the nation formed The Northwest Mounted Police to go with them and enforce the law. This force is now The Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

          The USA may have had a larger standing army as discussed, or formed a federal police force like the RCMP instead.
          Amateurs study tactics, Professionals study logistics.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
            One additional thing, we wouldn't have the excellent shooters that we have. It takes time to get high proficiency with any tool. The tradition of giving your child a rifle allows them to get proficient from a early age...
            Get real!!!

            Other country's also have excellent shooter but not the gun violence. We are not necessarily the top nation when it comes to sport shooting.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ng#Rifle_prone

            In pistol we are mia.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...id_fire_pistol

            In straight pistol we haven't had a gold since back in the 20s

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...hooting#Pistol

            That seems to blow you pov of a country of excellent shooters out of the water, wouldn't you say.
            "Ask not what your country can do for you"

            Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

            you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

            Comment


            • #7
              Let's assume that's not the case. So, the US uses their large standing army to take territory and crush neighboring nations. You might very well have a larger US that is more aggressive militarily.
              I think we did that or did one of miss something in American history and the wars with Mexico and Spain?
              "Ask not what your country can do for you"

              Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

              you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Roadkiller View Post
                When Canada started its' expansion onto the western plains, the nation formed The Northwest Mounted Police to go with them and enforce the law. This force is now The Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

                The USA may have had a larger standing army as discussed, or formed a federal police force like the RCMP instead.
                The absence of a significant Federal police force was the same reason the USA avoided a large standing army for nearly two hundred years, and still has a volunteer army made up of one-term enlistees and a cadre of career soldiers of dubious capability: the Founding Fathers did not want any force capable of mounting a coup.
                Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
                  One additional thing, we wouldn't have the excellent shooters that we have. It takes time to get high proficiency with any tool. The tradition of giving your child a rifle allows them to get proficient from a early age...
                  That hasn't been the case for at least a few generations.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by johns624 View Post
                    That hasn't been the case for at least a few generations.
                    Idk, I gave my kid one, I received one. Seems to me that it continues to this very day. Rural folk... Aka rednecks.
                    Credo quia absurdum.


                    Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
                      The absence of a significant Federal police force was the same reason the USA avoided a large standing army for nearly two hundred years, and still has a volunteer army made up of one-term enlistees and a cadre of career soldiers of dubious capability: the Founding Fathers did not want any force capable of mounting a coup.
                      Britain did exactly the same without such constitutional arrangements. Apart from WW1 and WW2 effectively we've always had a volunteer army and still do.
                      Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
                      Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
                        I think we did that or did one of miss something in American history and the wars with Mexico and Spain?
                        For such wars the US temporarily expanded massively. The standing US Army for most of US history consisted of 14 regiments of infantry and 2 of dragoons along with a number of separate batteries of artillery. The biggest portion of the US Army was usually coast defenses from about 1820 on.

                        The US relied heavily on "militia" units formed by the various states mostly using volunteers to fight wars. Many of these units provided their own arms and equipment, particularly ones that were mounted.

                        In this scenario, this would have been difficult to do because of the lack of personal firearms and lack of volunteers having knowledge of firearms.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
                          Get real!!!

                          Other country's also have excellent shooter but not the gun violence. We are not necessarily the top nation when it comes to sport shooting.

                          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ng#Rifle_prone

                          In pistol we are mia.

                          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...id_fire_pistol

                          In straight pistol we haven't had a gold since back in the 20s

                          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...hooting#Pistol

                          That seems to blow you pov of a country of excellent shooters out of the water, wouldn't you say.
                          Your lack of knowledge is really appalling. Try the DCM, the National Matches, the NRA sanctioned matches around the country, no one else does it like us.

                          As far as the Olympics goes, the difference is that our (US) competitors are financed out of pocket for the most part, while other countries pay their competitors. Big difference and actually illegal by the Olympic rule book, we just play by the rules.
                          My worst jump story:
                          My 13th jump was on the 13th day of the month, aircraft number 013.
                          As recorded on my DA Form 1307 Individual Jump Log.
                          No lie.

                          ~
                          "Everything looks all right. Have a good jump, eh."
                          -2 Commando Jumpmaster

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by UGLYGUTS View Post
                            This may seem in bad taste what with the spate of shootings that are going around, I am not starting this thread to make any kind of political point and as the OP would like to create an opening rule that talk of gun rights as they stand today be banned from this thread.

                            I have no right or power to create or enforce such a rule but I think it would be productive and less derailing if followed.

                            I am just wondering who in Americas history it guarded against.

                            So here goes....

                            The Constitution gets created but the part about right to bear arms/well regulated militia to prevent tyranny (2nd amendment) is NOT included.

                            Between then an now, (assuming same run of presidents) can you postulate who/when were the greatest threats of tyranny to descend on the USA,

                            Maybe not the whole country, perhaps you can think of a historical state governor or general who might have been apt to just carve out a chunk as his own fiefdom.

                            I will state for the record I have no idea if this will be a long or short list, I can only name about 10 presidents and 8 state governors from present and history off the top of my head (and Arnie and Clint should not count!)
                            You'll need to read the Hamilton Papers to understand this.
                            My worst jump story:
                            My 13th jump was on the 13th day of the month, aircraft number 013.
                            As recorded on my DA Form 1307 Individual Jump Log.
                            No lie.

                            ~
                            "Everything looks all right. Have a good jump, eh."
                            -2 Commando Jumpmaster

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              IIRC, when our guys showed up in France in 1917, both our allies and the Germans were impressed with the marksmanship of our troops, particularly the US Marines.
                              Flag: USA / Location: West Coast

                              Prayers.

                              BoRG

                              http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8757/snap1ws8.jpg

                              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PtsX_Z3CMU

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X