imported post
SouthernBoy wrote:
Tomahawk wrote:
SouthernBoy wrote:
marshaul wrote:
I don't have a favorite amendment. I also value our unenumerated rights equally. The fact that Barr does have a favorite suggests a limited understanding of the concept of rights, and a less-than-Libertarian viewpoint. Then again, as the Libertarian candidate, one could say he defines the term "Libertarian," as least as it applies to the formerly-Libertarian party.
With that said, I might vote for the guy. Definitely a better choice than McCain or Obama.
Think of it this way.
Without the Second Amendment, all the rest are just words on parchment. The Second Amendment puts teeth in the Bill of Rights and Protects ALL of our rights and our founding documents.
IN more recent times, it has been the 1st Ammendment that protects the 2nd. Unless I missed an armed revolt somewhere during Lobby Day or something...
If you're referring to the Heller decision, no you didn't miss anything. My thrust was simply that the implied use of force protects our rights and begets peace and harmony between the government and its owners (yes, us). Without the ultimate option of the use of civilian armed force, there are no guarantees.
Wasn't it Mao who said, "power flows from the barrel of a gun"? No, I am certainly no admirer of that murdering bastard. But he did utter a true statement, nevertheless.
I can go to a country where tribalism is the prevailing mindset and distribute guns, the result being a bunch of people killing each other until one emerges as the strongman and, if he is strong enough, maintains a peaceful tyranny by getting lots of gunmen to side with him. He doesn't even have to disarm the whole public. Lots of Iraqis had guns in the home during the Saddam years.
On the other hand, I can go a to a nation where people are mostly unarmed and start teaching them, over time so it sinks in, the concept of individual liberty and rights, as well as how to build and handle weapons, something good might come of it someday.
Without the right of free speech, free thought, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, there will be no understanding of the concept of rights, no comprehension of the right to bear arms, not protection for property rights from the would-be strongmen of the world.
Nobody involved in Heller was worried about an armed revolt, considering the case was in a place where guns were banned for 30 years. But all involved, even the antis, were raised in an environment where we are allowed to discuss challenging laws in a courtroom and showing respect for the fragile civilization we have built since the Magna Carta.
It takes a lot more than just a 2nd Amendment to secure liberty in our daily lives, it takes respect for all rights, centuries of civilization, and the ability to communicate these ideas to each other and to future citizens and children.
All that aside, I understand what you and Barr are saying about the 2A. It's perhaps the most hated ammendment, or maybe the least understood (although I would have to say 9th and 10th have it beat there), and needs to get more emphasis and respect.
Plus, Barr is trying to run an election campaign and it's natural to appeal to your base...