Posted on Feb 15, 2016
Self-defense: Vet puts gun in mouth of store robber and other awesome heroes
497
16
11
2
2
0
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 6
4
4
0
The Second Amendment says nothing about "hunting". It says the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon. I served to defend the Constitution in entirety, not the parts that are "politically correct".
(4)
(0)
CDR Michael Goldschmidt
Amen, SGT Dana Williams. The 2nd Amendment is precisely about states being able to defend themselves against tyranny by having militias, which are not possible without the people keeping and bearing arms. Big Thumbs Up!!!
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
Thanks to the late Justice Scalia for this interpretation in his DC vs Heller opinion which decided the right to self defense is included in the second amendment. The 4-5 dissent basically stated the 2nd amendment only applies to militias and individuals don't have a right to bear arms. One supreme court justice away from loosing our second amendment altogether.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
Pistols can be used for hunting, but usually hunting is better served by long guns. I don't hunt, but if I did, and I was hunting something like bear or boar, I'd be sure to have my Ruger Super Redhawk chambered in .454 Casull with me as a secondary weapon.
The 2nd Amendment does not expressly have anything to do with hunting. The only reason given in the 2nd Amendment for the 2nd Amendment is for the security of a free state. And because the security of free state is a good thing, well regulated (meaning efficient, not highly regulated) militia is needed. But all of that is only presented as A reason, not THE ONLY reason, for the right of the people to keep and bear arms to not be infringed.
State constitutions obviously vary from state to state, but I know of at least one (Washington) that specifically mentions self defense.
The 2nd Amendment does not expressly have anything to do with hunting. The only reason given in the 2nd Amendment for the 2nd Amendment is for the security of a free state. And because the security of free state is a good thing, well regulated (meaning efficient, not highly regulated) militia is needed. But all of that is only presented as A reason, not THE ONLY reason, for the right of the people to keep and bear arms to not be infringed.
State constitutions obviously vary from state to state, but I know of at least one (Washington) that specifically mentions self defense.
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
SSgt Christopher Brose
I often hear the question, "Why do you need so many guns?" or "Why does anyone need an 'assault weapon'?" or something of that nature. My response is always the same -- constitutionally, that's an illegitimate question, and you have no right to ask it because it's none of your damned business.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google