Walter Williams: Americans misunderstand point of the Second Amendment

Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by Revmitchell, Jan 14, 2013.

  1. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,332
    Likes Received:
    786
    Author and economist Walter Williams told The Daily Caller that the purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect Americans from their own government — not simply to ensure hunting rights.

    Williams, a syndicated columnist and the John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics at George Mason University, suggested that common misconceptions about the Second Amendment undermine the gun control debate.

    “[The Founding Fathers'] stated reason was to allow the American people to protect themselves from the United States Congress — that is, government. That’s why we have the Second Amendment,” he said.

    “A lot of people are saying we should somehow control or restrict arms,” he continued. “And I would ask the question: Are we under any less a threat of tyranny from Washington than we were in 1787? And I would say no.”

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/13/w...-point-of-the-second-amendment/#ixzz2HyGdir4W
     
  2. mont974x4

    mont974x4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2012
    Messages:
    2,565
    Likes Received:
    1
    If people remembered the historical and cultural context that our founding documents were written in there would be no real debate over the 2nd Amendment. Hunting and sport are side benefits. Indeed the real purpose is to allow citizens to protect themselves from a tyrannical government.

    It truly is the one right that defends all the others. Remove this right and the government has nothing to fear and therefore nothing to keep it in check.
     
  3. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,195
    Likes Received:
    1,315
    I suppose it is asking too much, but if Americans would do just a little reading they might be disabused of many of their errors.

    The second amendment debate is not new. I has been going on since 1790. When the two parties got together to debate whether we should ratify the Constitution or stay with the Articles of Confederation James Madison, who favored the Articles of Confederation but later changed his mind and wrote, for the most part, most of the Constitution, wrote a series of articles called "The Federalist Papers." The Federalist #46 is very enlightening. I suggest every US citizen read it, study it, and take it to heart. Madison understood the dangers inherent in the new Constitution. The Bill or Rights, again, compiled by Madison, was put in place to help minimize those dangers. Madison writes quite eloquently on the subject in "The Federalist #46" which can be found here: http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa46.htm
     
    #3 TCassidy, Jan 14, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 14, 2013
  4. Oldtimer

    Oldtimer
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2011
    Messages:
    1,934
    Likes Received:
    0
    In the cultural context of today, how many, today, have any interest in learning the history/content of those dusty old documents -- the Bible and the Constitution? Both of which, put limitations in their own way, on greed for power and endorsement of depraved activities of modern "enlightened" society.
     
  5. mont974x4

    mont974x4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2012
    Messages:
    2,565
    Likes Received:
    1
    Today's context does make this more difficult. Concerning those who hold a more liberal view of these two documents I see two main groups (although they are not all inclusive). On one hand we have people who see no reason to care, study, or really consider either the Bible or the Constitution. On the other you have those who will consider them, but see them as "living" and therefore open documents that allow them to twist, distort, and ignore according to their own will. They just believe what their liberal so-called scholars tell them to believe.
     
  6. Bob Alkire

    Bob Alkire
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2001
    Messages:
    3,134
    Likes Received:
    0
    So true my friend. To see where the ball was dropped or the fall began, all we have to do is look back in our life or our parents or grandparents lives.
    Do/did your children mind you as well as you did your parents and did your your parents mind their parents as well as they did with theirs. Did we learn to live for Christ as well as our parents or not, how about our children. I blame so much on my generation because some of us and our children and grandchildren seem to rather argue more than get along and we and ours know more about everything than anyone at anytime.
     
  7. mont974x4

    mont974x4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2012
    Messages:
    2,565
    Likes Received:
    1
    My boys are generally very respectful and obedient. That is not to say they are perfect. LOL My bride and I are just very big on proper behavior and hold them accountable. I admit, being imperfect myself, that I have a tendency to be too strict at times.

    I see too many parents not even willing to discipline their kids. It's no wonder we, as a culture, have such an immoral society. There is very few that seem to be willing to say that there is an objective standard of behavior. In large part this is due to our (culturally) redefined and subjective ideas of God. If you can explain away an objective God you can explain away an objective standard of right and wrong.
     
  8. Oldtimer

    Oldtimer
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2011
    Messages:
    1,934
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well said. You're right about there being two main groups with different viewpoints.

    Would you agree that the majority are in the first group and thus will accept, without question, the opinions voiced by the second as being truth?
     
  9. North Carolina Tentmaker

    North Carolina Tentmaker
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2003
    Messages:
    2,355
    Likes Received:
    0
    I can’t disagree with Walter at all, the 2nd amendment was intended to protect us from a government that became oppressive.

    The problem is that 70 years after it was ratified a group of Americans tried to do just that. They found the federal government oppressive and tried to separate from it. In many ways the 2nd amendment has been a moot point since 1865.
     
  10. mont974x4

    mont974x4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2012
    Messages:
    2,565
    Likes Received:
    1
    Yes, I would agree with that.
     

Share This Page

Loading...