Do you defend the Second Amendment?

2018-04-11T10:08:59-04:00

Recently a young lady posted a pic in support of Trump and the 2A. As such at least one person tried to have her arrested. I'm biased on the matter so I'll refrain for making any comments until others post their thoughts on the topic. Should American's defend it or repeal it. While I feel - this is an easy yes or no - more detailed reasoning would be appreciated.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/04/10/tennessee-college-senior-defends-posing-for-graduation-picture-with-gun-in-her-waistband.html

Tennessee college senior defends posing for graduation picture with gun in her waistband

A Tennessee college senior is sticking to her guns after posting a graduation photo in which she stares wistfully off-camera while lifting her Women for Trump T-shirt to expose a firearm in her waistband.

Response by SFC Pete Kain made Apr 11 at 2018 10:14 AM

2018-04-11T10:14:01-04:00

America has lost its mind, That this is even a question today just makes me sad.

Response by SPC David Willis made Apr 11 at 2018 10:17 AM

2018-04-11T10:17:41-04:00

First of all Id just like to say thank you for posting this picture.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2018 10:28 AM

2018-04-11T10:28:35-04:00

Beautiful picture. Nothing wrong with it. Period. Merica'

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2018 10:28 AM

2018-04-11T10:28:50-04:00

I'll quote an old bumper sticker: When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

From what I have read, the DNC is pushing hard to disarm US citizens. Many have commented on this being the first necessary step to instituting a control of the population.

As for defending the 2d amendment... definitely.

Response by Anthony Murawski made Apr 11 at 2018 10:32 AM

2018-04-11T10:32:44-04:00

I support the 2A amd President Trump.
I would want to have a firearm and not need it than need one and not have it.
God bless America and our President

Response by MSG Steve Wiersgalla made Apr 11 at 2018 10:34 AM

2018-04-11T10:34:08-04:00

I support the second amendment and that will never change. I will not go into a long dissertation of why I support it, I will watch this unfold. I would however encourage people to read and actually understand the second amendment.

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Apr 11 at 2018 10:43 AM

2018-04-11T10:43:02-04:00

Message - Don’t mess with our womenfolk, they may bite.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2018 10:46 AM

2018-04-11T10:46:00-04:00

"I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.."

Response by PO3 Steven Sherrill made Apr 11 at 2018 10:48 AM

2018-04-11T10:48:00-04:00

SPC David S. Graduation from college is no place to show individuality! You must conform! You will assimilate! Those who will willingly give up their rights, even if they choose not to exercise that right should be prepared to have all of their rights taken. Once the government starts taking rights away, they will not stop. After the second goes, what's to stop any other rights from being taken. Gradually freedom erodes until one day you wake up in Stalin's Russia or Hitler's Germany. The first step to tyranny is to disarm the people that they cannot rise against you. That is not me, that is history speaking.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2018 10:56 AM

2018-04-11T10:56:05-04:00

First off, that young lady needs to put her weapon in a holster. Second, I support the Second Amendment and believe that an attempt at disarming American citizens may very well push us over the brink.

Response by MSG Stan Hutchison made Apr 11 at 2018 10:57 AM

2018-04-11T10:57:27-04:00

I never cared for posed pictures,, another person looking for her 15 minutes of fame.

Response by SPC Matthew Tinder made Apr 11 at 2018 11:06 AM

2018-04-11T11:06:35-04:00

Smart and beautiful!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2018 11:18 AM

2018-04-11T11:18:53-04:00

If she wasn't breaking any laws, why should anyone care? Also, almost everyone here has defended our rights (including the 2nd Amendment) by serving this great country, the attractive young lady pictured above is simply exercising those rights. Millions of Americans exercise those rights every day.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2018 11:52 AM

2018-04-11T11:52:37-04:00

While I'm not a Trump supporter, I definitely support her right to to bear arms, and pose with them.

Response by LTC Stephen C. made Apr 11 at 2018 11:53 AM

2018-04-11T11:53:27-04:00

I just hope that she hasn't brought needless attention to herself that might put her at risk, SPC David S.. Otherwise, good for her!

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2018 11:54 AM

2018-04-11T11:54:59-04:00

Well, you asked for “more detailed reasoning” so this might be a bit longer than usual. Let’s see…
There are a couple of points in your note that require comments.
The first is the one concerning the person that tried to have the young lady arrested for expressing political sympathy for a particular candidate and for supporting one of the components of the Bill of Rights. Let’s just think about that a bit.
Someone expresses their support for a particular candidate or a current administration.
Someone expresses their support for a component of the Bill of Rights.
And SOMEONE decides that this is intolerable and attempts to get the person arrested.
Now… you can insert any name of any candidate or any administration in the first point. And you can insert any component of the Bill of Rights in the second. But it seems to me that anyone deciding that this is intolerable is a totalitarian… plain and simple. They can be communist, or fascist (which are both variations of socialism) or anything else, but they definitely are totalitarian (in other words, they are firm believers in dictatorship – which implies the absence of rights for individuals). They clearly condemn free speech (especially in a society where even the burning of the national flag has been determined to be "free speech"). And this young lady is clearly exercising her right to free speech by expressing her support for the right to bear arms. So anyone wanting to truncate her right to free speech has to be a totalitarian who abhors the expression of any sympathies whatsoever for anything that is NOT whatever the dictatorship sanctions.
It is clear that the person (or entity or organization) trying to get her arrested DOES NOT ACCEPT the fact that we live in a Constitutional Republic. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. And in the particular Constitution that we (the US) have, there are certain rights which have been defined as belonging to the PEOPLE. Not the STATE… as in every other constitutional document before it, but to the PEOPLE. Because the US Constitution was the FIRST constituting document in known history to establish rights as belonging to PEOPLE and not the state (whether in the form of a monarchy, dictatorship, or whatever).
Since that person (or entity or organization) does not understand that, they feel they can use FORCE to shut down ANY opposition to their specific beliefs, opinions or world views, regardless of how stupid, backward, idiotic or asinine their views, beliefs or opinions may be. The resort to the use of force is common among the stupid, the insecure, the fearful, the spiteful… all characteristics which are abundant in totalitarians (and socialists, since socialism is the economic theory that justifies totalitarianism).
The second point pertains to whether one should support the defense of the Second Amendment (of the Bill of Rights) or support its repeal. Let’s look at the Forefather’s reasoning for the Second Amendment and determine whether it makes sense or not.
The fundamental premise of the Founding Fathers was that the most fundamental RIGHT that a man (generic meaning here, folks, as in “human race”) MUST have is a RIGHT TO LIFE. The logic is fairly simple. If you have no right to life, then anyone, at any time, can kill you (or you can kill them) and that’s the end of it. This is obviously a recipe for chaos. So the ultimate moral criteria that the Founding Fathers used was LIFE. That is your most fundamental right. If something supports the continuation of life, that’s good. If it doesn’t, that’s bad.
From there, they went on to establish that “man” (generic again) has a RIGHT to the fruit of his labors (which sustain and improve his life). This was rather clear also. A man that does not have a right to the fruit of his labors is a slave, and can not live as a man.
As a side note, although the Founding Fathers were forced to compromise in the short term in exchange for establishing the first nation in the history of the world that had a constituting document that established rights as the property of man, they left in the Constitution the essential ingredients for the eventual destruction of the institution of slavery.
The right to the fruit of one’s labor obviously has a logical consequence: the RIGHT to PROPERTY, and this also was enshrined in the Constitution.
Now, to be clear, the concept was that you have a right to life and a right to property… but so does everybody else. You can’t go around taking people’s property claiming you have a ”right” to it. So another logical consequence of the right to life and right to property (knowing that among the human race, sufficient “unsavory” types come along who don’t want to work and prefer to steal), was the right to DEFEND your life and your property. And to insure that you could defend your life and property with whatever the current “state of the art” was, they chose to use the general term “arms” to describe what you could defend yourself with.
As another side note, you’ll sometimes hear some ignorant fools state that “the 2nd Amendment is no longer relevant, because they approved that when flintlocks were the reigning technology. Now, with the advances in “arms” technology, we need to “prohibit and control”. That argument is as stupid as saying that “the 1st Amendment is no longer relevant, because they approved that when most people couldn’t read and publishing was a limited dissemination exercise. Now that we have the internet… and twitter… and blogs… and cameras, we have to “prohibit and control” things like pictures of healthy, beautiful young ladies who have a message or idea they want to communicate to others.” Advances in technology do not alter FUNDAMENTAL principles of freedom and rights.
Now, the Founding Fathers ALSO knew that the GREATEST threat to freedom and rights came from… … … GOVERNMENT. They had seen this throughout history, and they knew that America would not be an exception. This is why the created a CONSTITUTION providing rights to the PEOPLE and LIMITING the “rights” of government. To the extent that you LIMIT the rights of people and INCREASE the “rights” of government, you create the environment for dictatorship and totalitarianism.
If you believe that this “can not happen here”, then wake up and start looking around. We’ve ALREADY had “totalitarian mission creep” happening in practically every agency. The parasitocracy will use every available opportunity to increase its reach and power. We have people who would have a hard time holding a job as grocery baggers in uniform imposing their will on travelers at airports (even though their own tests reveal THEY MISS 96% of weapons and explosives infiltrated onto airplanes by testers). We have EPA goons who will haul you off to jail if you get “caught” in the “crime” of catching rain water in a barrel. And the list can go on and on… but this narrative is already too long as it is.
If the Founding Fathers were to wake up and see what we have today, not only would they NOT recognize the Constitutional Republic they created, they would probably arrive at the conclusion that this kind of oppression of the citizenry merited an out and out insurrection. These were people who objected to “taxation without representation”… when the tax was 3%!! The different government structures today take over 50% of the fruits of your labor… for your own “benefit” of course.
But let me not get off subject. If we want to be a “free country”, the road to follow is NOT limiting citizens rights or expanding the power of government. We need to respect life, we need to respect property and we need to respect our right to defend BOTH against the predators that invariably appear to take and steal what they didn’t work for. And the biggest monolithic predator is government. The Founding Fathers understood this. This is why they wrote what they wrote. It’s called the Constitution. And if there is any doubt as to the intent behind it, take a look at the Declaration of Independence and the Federalist Papers.
If our educational system had not been subverted and degraded by Fabianism advocates/socialists, more people would know about the Constitution and the related documents, and a lot of this nonsense from leftist ignoramuses would be laughed off. But we are where we are.

Response by CSM Richard StCyr made Apr 11 at 2018 12:00 PM

2018-04-11T12:00:15-04:00

I swore an oath to support and defend the whole constitution many moons ago and to the best of my knowledge have never been relieved of it. I've no prob with the lady having a gun or posing with one, just wonder about safety if she had to draw it as she's got it tucked pretty deep.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2018 12:11 PM

2018-04-11T12:11:24-04:00

What law did she violate if someone wanted to have her arrested? The butt hurt anti-gunner law?

Response by SGT Aaron Atwood made Apr 11 at 2018 12:12 PM

2018-04-11T12:12:24-04:00

Since I was 18, raised my right hand, and took the oath for the first time. Short of my own grave no one's given me a timeline to stop defending what I swore to uphold and defend. Not looking for a timeline either for what it's worth. As others have posted this shouldn't have been needed to be raised as a question. However... this is not the America the Founding Fathers knew, nor created. The America our great grandchildren learn to know by the time they're our age could be far different, in a very bad way, from the one we know right now.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2018 12:15 PM

2018-04-11T12:15:16-04:00

One final note. You say you are “biased” on the matter. Let me suggest that you are not. Perhaps you merely hold an opinion on the matter. “Biased” (in general conversation, as opposed to the discussion of statistical results) implies an UNFAIR prejudice for or against something. If you dislike someone because of that person’s ethnic roots or skin color, THAT’S “bias”. If you dislike someone because someone told you disagreeable things about him/her, but you’ve never met or interacted with the person, THAT’S “bias”. But if you hold an opinion based on experience or philosophy or sense of life or facts that you’ve observed, then you just have a pre-established opinion. You are not “biased”. You are not UNFAIRLY prejudiced for or against anything.

Response by SGT Jim Arnold made Apr 11 at 2018 12:16 PM

2018-04-11T12:16:45-04:00

I would much rather see her than this young lady. Her daddy must be proud SMFH

Response by 1SG Dennis Hicks made Apr 11 at 2018 12:18 PM

2018-04-11T12:18:29-04:00

I fully support her and others right to carry, the waste of organs that called the cops on her needs mental help with her hoplophobia.

Response by SFC Jim Ruether made Apr 11 at 2018 12:31 PM

2018-04-11T12:31:48-04:00

Yes with every fiber of my being! If I don't who will? Can I count on you?

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2018 12:52 PM

2018-04-11T12:52:21-04:00

Yes-unequivocally.

If I were this young lady's father however, I'd probably caution her against putting herself in the limelight this way...for many reasons.

Response by Cpl Tom Surdi made Apr 11 at 2018 2:11 PM

2018-04-11T14:11:04-04:00

I say she has the right to support whoever the hell she wants to and to wear a gun in her waistband if she wants. Although, it's kind of friggen stupid to put your gun there, she could have at least used a holster.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2018 2:51 PM

2018-04-11T14:51:10-04:00

I don't care if people own guns - but what did she expect posting this online in the current political climate? She wanted to go viral. She was looking for attention. That's what gets me - is people who seek out the attention and then cry when they get it.

Should she get death threats or threats of arrest? No. But don't be surprised at responses when you make something public on FB.

Response by LTC Jeff Shearer made Apr 11 at 2018 2:59 PM

2018-04-11T14:59:49-04:00

David good for her, good parents!

Response by TSgt David L. made Apr 11 at 2018 3:27 PM

2018-04-11T15:27:01-04:00

Every day to every LIBTARD that makes a stupid comment.

Response by CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2018 3:39 PM

2018-04-11T15:39:08-04:00

I'm with her...

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Apr 11 at 2018 3:40 PM

2018-04-11T15:40:51-04:00

I would argue this is more of a 1A than 2A problem regarding her. Personally I like what she did. She didn't flash anyone, she's peacefully stating her views, and she's telling folks who she supports. Not a DAMN thing wrong with that. Don't see a in control issue here.

If someone is buthurt because she did this, tried to have her arrested (takes more than a photo with a weapon), or is triggered by this, then get off the internet and crawl into your "safe zone". If she decided to use said weapon in a manner inconsistent with the law, then lock her ass up.

She almost makes me wish I was back in my 20's. That is until I remember all the hell I was getting myself into, and it's just not worth it. Need to meet the almost 45 going on 30yr old version of her.

Response by Capt Tom Brown made Apr 11 at 2018 5:16 PM

2018-04-11T17:16:56-04:00

Give her an A+

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2018 5:38 PM

2018-04-11T17:38:26-04:00

Gun grabbers are a bunch of little marxist wanna-be's who just need to go away.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 11 at 2018 5:54 PM

2018-04-11T17:54:45-04:00

"Very", I'll stop there, Yes

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2018 4:49 PM

2018-04-12T16:49:33-04:00

Dear Abby -
I have to take my firearms in as they are defective. After 22 years, 6 months and as of this post 7 days, they have not shot up a school, mall, or other gatherings. My guns have not held up a bank, store or other entrepreneurial enterprises. I even tried to get them to scream racial epithets but they just won't do a damn thing. What does it take to get them to do all the hateful things I hear everyone else's guns do?
Sincerely - Killess in San Jose

Response by SFC Jim Ruether made Apr 18 at 2019 8:31 PM

2019-04-18T20:31:46-04:00

I support her right to carry concealed as I do. In fact I may start open carry then I don't have to lift my shirt before I draw. If people don't like it consider this I am one hell of a good shot, and won't hesitate one second to protect not only my family and friends but those around me. So if someone sees my gun or not and wants to start something he had better consider his option because dying there in that restaurant is definitely one of them!