I believe that the language we use to discuss gun rights has been orchestrated to help in the process of disarming us.
“Gun Control” sounds friendly and reasonable when compared to “unconstitutionally infringing on our inalienable rights”
As well as this false idea that the second amendment is what gives us that right, it doesn’t and that was never the intention, it may seem like a trivial difference but it absolutely is not, and our law makers, Republicans, always, included, know that.
We need to stand up for ourselves, I can’t name a single politician in Washington that I could in good conscience tell you to trust.
To do that we must first recognize the enemies within our gates, the RINOs aren’t limp dicked Republicans who are too pussy to fight, they know what they’re doing they’re willing participants in this authoritarian takeover.
You are right, "control" sounds as if you are corralling wild dogs, instead of rendering a normal upstanding man helpless.
If you wouldn't de-claw a cat, why would you de-gun a man. Everything in nature has a way to defend itself.
And it's culture, not machines. People hurt each other very well with rocks, before the invention of guns, or even metal blades.
We are in an era of advancing technology and deteriorating culture.
But culture is more important.
If there were two societies, one with excellent culture and bad science, and another one with excellent science and bad culture, which one would you want to live in?
The word "infringed" is interesting. They could have said "shall not be removed." Or destroyed. Or abridged. It would have been simpler language. But they used this odd word. A fringe means an edge, as opposed to a middle. They meant it must not even be nibbled away at the edges.
This is directly caused by Republicans being controlled opposition. We adopt their language, and their language is conditioned to put us on the losing political side.
Yes, it was produced by the enemies of reason. Basically pilpul.
This kind of thinking is the same reason John Money chose the word "gender" aka "gene-der" for the allegedly mutable characteristic of biological sex, because it's the least appropriate word.
When you pile up lies into the meaning of words, it's even more of a struggle to extricate yourself from the brainwashing.
I was unfamiliar with the term "pilpul". It fits this discussion, I think.
They have legions of "scholars" who get paid to sit around and come up with this garbage.
That's why I keep pushing back. To win this culture war, we also need to reclaim the language.
One side-effect is that this is a very good red-pill vector in some company. When you can show how the language has been intentionally distorted, always in the same direction, and then ask "why".....you can sometimes strike a chord.
Wow, thank you for that insight. It just occurred to me from your post that the 2A specifically points out that individuals are inherently born with that right, and the 2A only means to protect that already inherant right from being trampled on.
Lest anyone forget, Gun rights are women's rights. I really have a problem with the left claiming feminism and women's rights, and follow it up with speaking on the other side of their mouths and denounce the ability for a woman, who biologically is at a disadvantage to a male, to have a force multiplier and great equalizer available to defend against a physically superior attacker.
You want equity, so that there is equality in outcomes, right? THat means allowing those that through some societal or biological disadvantage in starting points should be given extra help to achieve equal outcomes.
I got in a big argument about this with some moron online.
I said that the Bill of Rights was designed to state that we are endowed with these rights by our Creator.
This language is not in the Bill of Rights, but it was in the Declaration of Independence and in many letters Thomas Jefferson wrote to James Madison. Thomas Jefferson wrote often about Natural Law.
When Jefferson wrote that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, he was referring to the natural law. The natural law teaches that right and wrong can be discerned and truth discovered by the exercise of human reason, independent of any commands from the government. The natural law also teaches that our rights come from our humanity — not from the government — and our humanity is a gift from our Creator.
Even those who question or reject the existence of the Creator can embrace natural rights; they can accept that our exercise of human reason leads us all to make similar claims. Rights are essentially claims made against others, including the government. These claims — free speech, free association, free exercise or nonexercise of religion, self-defense, privacy, property ownership and fair treatment from the government, to name a few — are rights that we all exercise without giving a second thought to the fact that they are natural and come from within us.
DemoKKKrats are dangerous because they reject natural law and believe the government is who grants us our rights. This is not true. The Constitution was designed to grant government only a limited, enumerated number of powers. All other powers are supposed to be inherent in the people.
This is why demoKKKrats must either be overthrown or executed.
They also don't follow the law of natural selection.
The vast majority are so pathetically weak in the body, the mind and the spirit.
Were they not propped up by their technology and other cohorts, they had a long ago been eaten by the predators of man.
If the shit ever hits the fan and times get tough. They're going to fold like a house of cards. Man was meant to be a creature of strife. When the world gets soft, we make nothing but a worthless group of Omega followers.
Natural selection does not allow same-sex mating, goes completely against the laws of biology.
All the "preppers" and "survivalists" are skilled and ready to survive hard times. Heck, many of them won't even make it because it's difficult to really "prep" for such a scenario. I myself haven't tried to go a month without buying food from a grocery store. Procuring all my necessary sustenance on my own absent of a marketplace? Not easy.
We don't have survival of the fittest in 2021 in USA. We have survival of the bitchiest. The person who bitches the loudest gets section 8 ghetto passes and food stamps.
As many have stated. Things will have to get a lot worse before they get better. We need a breakdown of society so severe that having millions of fiat federal reserve notes will be of no use.
I think we need to destroy the monetary system. Make it so that a federal reserve note is less useful than soft ply double stitched toilet paper.
Then we'll see who is really tough. Make Natural Selection Great Again!
Important thing to note for people thinking about things like "going a month without groceries."
There are seasons to consider. You stockpile during times of abundance, you take from your stock when times are lacking.
You don't have to be a "#DoomsdayPrepper" to stock, from a grocery store even, 3-6 months worth of nonperishables.
If shit ever hits the fan and trucks stop rolling, they'll roll again in the future. But what are the odds shit will hit the fan when your local wildlife are active and easily hunted? You've got low odds it will be during harvest time.
Have food and water on hand, if you ever have to transition back to hunting/gathering, have the sustenance to carry you through to that point in time.
You don't have to build up a pantry all in one trip. Say you need mustard, well, buy two on your next trip. From then on, whenever you need mustard, buy it, but use the one in the pantry and shelve the new one.
Also, Spices and condiments go a loooong way to making shitty situations feel better when you're hungry and you've had the same food 6 days in a row.
Correct. Though the only thing that protects God Given Rights is the government. They merely acknowledge them. When the government stops acknowledging them, you still have them, but no one is protecting them anymore.
2A only ostensibly prevents the government from infringing on that right. If the government can and does infringe on that right (as well as others) without consequence, which it does, then those rights are de facto in the gift of the government.
Ultimately it is only fear of consequences which truly prevents a government infringing on God given rights, and the US government currently doesn’t fear any consequences. If the government is not held to the limits placed upon it in the Constitution, either by the courts or by We The People directly, then it really is just a piece of paper.
Also: free speech is a human right, not a government policy. Social media companies are violently attacking free speech even without government policy - that said, section 230 is still unconstitutional, as is the FCC. The manufacturer of a printing press should have NO influence over what gets printed with it, and Facebook is just a high-tech printing press. All power to restrict the content viewed belongs in the hands of the users.
Freedom to speak and freedom to publish are independent of the first amendment created to protect them.
This is where everyone comes to the table wrong. The left see the Bill of Rights as a gift given to you by your government. The right see it as a check on the government's ability to infringe your immutable rights.
When arguing this, make sure you understand which side of the table your opponent is coming from.
After hundreds of thousands of years of watching mammals suffer, it really loses its punch. Humanity is permanently young and naive, and just like children we make a big stink about pain.
Because our true essence is eternal, because we can live as many lives as we need to develop our souls properly, suffering and death is little more than a pin prick. Ouch.
It's not God's fault that Christians are getting slaughtered, and it's not His responsibility. It just means that Christianity has sinned and fallen short of the glory of God's true law, natural law. A healthy religion is going to be far more xenophobic and hostile to outsiders, as Christianity has been practiced in the past.
I get why you think that's what this means but I encourage you to read what this is really about. Start with John Locke and the phrase "an appeal to heaven". It's not about religion, it's about natural law and when revolution is neccessary.
Excellent point.
I believe that the language we use to discuss gun rights has been orchestrated to help in the process of disarming us.
“Gun Control” sounds friendly and reasonable when compared to “unconstitutionally infringing on our inalienable rights”
As well as this false idea that the second amendment is what gives us that right, it doesn’t and that was never the intention, it may seem like a trivial difference but it absolutely is not, and our law makers, Republicans, always, included, know that.
We need to stand up for ourselves, I can’t name a single politician in Washington that I could in good conscience tell you to trust.
To do that we must first recognize the enemies within our gates, the RINOs aren’t limp dicked Republicans who are too pussy to fight, they know what they’re doing they’re willing participants in this authoritarian takeover.
Agree.
You are right, "control" sounds as if you are corralling wild dogs, instead of rendering a normal upstanding man helpless.
If you wouldn't de-claw a cat, why would you de-gun a man. Everything in nature has a way to defend itself.
And it's culture, not machines. People hurt each other very well with rocks, before the invention of guns, or even metal blades.
We are in an era of advancing technology and deteriorating culture.
But culture is more important.
If there were two societies, one with excellent culture and bad science, and another one with excellent science and bad culture, which one would you want to live in?
The question answer itself.
Fairly certain the word “control” isn’t in the second amendment. They can get bent.
The word "infringed" is interesting. They could have said "shall not be removed." Or destroyed. Or abridged. It would have been simpler language. But they used this odd word. A fringe means an edge, as opposed to a middle. They meant it must not even be nibbled away at the edges.
"must not even be nibbled away at the edges" I've told a lot of people that this is exactly what "shall not be infringed" means.
Correct. Which is why the 1930 firearms act is unconstitutional.
If some of our citizens can't have firearms without killing each other on the daily, don't remove their firearms. Remove their citizenship.
We've been laboring under a hostile foreign government for over a century, but it's getting extremely obvious now.
We are in an era of advancing technology and deteriorating culture.
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
This is directly caused by Republicans being controlled opposition. We adopt their language, and their language is conditioned to put us on the losing political side.
Yep, my point exactly, they know what they are doing, liberals think they understand conservatives because they’ve watched Fox News before...
Ever ask yourself why there’s only one “mainstream” (might as well say state-controlled) conservative media channel?
They do this with much of these discussions.
"Protect our Democracy" is my favorite example.
Calling themselves "liberals" is another.
The whole confusion between negative and positive "rights" is intentional.
Yes, it was produced by the enemies of reason. Basically pilpul.
This kind of thinking is the same reason John Money chose the word "gender" aka "gene-der" for the allegedly mutable characteristic of biological sex, because it's the least appropriate word.
When you pile up lies into the meaning of words, it's even more of a struggle to extricate yourself from the brainwashing.
I was unfamiliar with the term "pilpul". It fits this discussion, I think.
They have legions of "scholars" who get paid to sit around and come up with this garbage.
That's why I keep pushing back. To win this culture war, we also need to reclaim the language.
One side-effect is that this is a very good red-pill vector in some company. When you can show how the language has been intentionally distorted, always in the same direction, and then ask "why".....you can sometimes strike a chord.
We need to get more organized, we can crowd source an immense power to spread this information rather than always preaching to the choir.
Agreed.
People are working on that. I'm involved enough to say with a bit of confidence that I think you'll like at least some of what you see coming soon.
Wow, thank you for that insight. It just occurred to me from your post that the 2A specifically points out that individuals are inherently born with that right, and the 2A only means to protect that already inherant right from being trampled on.
Lest anyone forget, Gun rights are women's rights. I really have a problem with the left claiming feminism and women's rights, and follow it up with speaking on the other side of their mouths and denounce the ability for a woman, who biologically is at a disadvantage to a male, to have a force multiplier and great equalizer available to defend against a physically superior attacker.
You want equity, so that there is equality in outcomes, right? THat means allowing those that through some societal or biological disadvantage in starting points should be given extra help to achieve equal outcomes.
Give all women guns!
If god didn't want us to have guns, why did he invent the AR15? Checkmate.
constitution is a big list of what the government cannot do. wish people would understand that, its so sad.
If the understood we would still have one
I got in a big argument about this with some moron online.
I said that the Bill of Rights was designed to state that we are endowed with these rights by our Creator.
This language is not in the Bill of Rights, but it was in the Declaration of Independence and in many letters Thomas Jefferson wrote to James Madison. Thomas Jefferson wrote often about Natural Law.
DemoKKKrats are dangerous because they reject natural law and believe the government is who grants us our rights. This is not true. The Constitution was designed to grant government only a limited, enumerated number of powers. All other powers are supposed to be inherent in the people.
This is why demoKKKrats must either be overthrown or executed.
They also don't follow the law of natural selection.
The vast majority are so pathetically weak in the body, the mind and the spirit.
Were they not propped up by their technology and other cohorts, they had a long ago been eaten by the predators of man.
If the shit ever hits the fan and times get tough. They're going to fold like a house of cards. Man was meant to be a creature of strife. When the world gets soft, we make nothing but a worthless group of Omega followers.
Natural selection does not allow same-sex mating, goes completely against the laws of biology.
I agree.
All the "preppers" and "survivalists" are skilled and ready to survive hard times. Heck, many of them won't even make it because it's difficult to really "prep" for such a scenario. I myself haven't tried to go a month without buying food from a grocery store. Procuring all my necessary sustenance on my own absent of a marketplace? Not easy.
We don't have survival of the fittest in 2021 in USA. We have survival of the bitchiest. The person who bitches the loudest gets section 8 ghetto passes and food stamps.
As many have stated. Things will have to get a lot worse before they get better. We need a breakdown of society so severe that having millions of fiat federal reserve notes will be of no use.
I think we need to destroy the monetary system. Make it so that a federal reserve note is less useful than soft ply double stitched toilet paper.
Then we'll see who is really tough. Make Natural Selection Great Again!
Important thing to note for people thinking about things like "going a month without groceries."
There are seasons to consider. You stockpile during times of abundance, you take from your stock when times are lacking.
You don't have to be a "#DoomsdayPrepper" to stock, from a grocery store even, 3-6 months worth of nonperishables.
If shit ever hits the fan and trucks stop rolling, they'll roll again in the future. But what are the odds shit will hit the fan when your local wildlife are active and easily hunted? You've got low odds it will be during harvest time.
Have food and water on hand, if you ever have to transition back to hunting/gathering, have the sustenance to carry you through to that point in time.
You don't have to build up a pantry all in one trip. Say you need mustard, well, buy two on your next trip. From then on, whenever you need mustard, buy it, but use the one in the pantry and shelve the new one.
Also, Spices and condiments go a loooong way to making shitty situations feel better when you're hungry and you've had the same food 6 days in a row.
It is & always has been Good & Godly people vs Ungodly, unruly people. The sooner THAT narrative spreads the better.
I think there are ways to force leftists into openly admitting to religious persecution.
Agreed.
She should probably read it then...
Why would you argue with a woman?
Correct. Though the only thing that protects God Given Rights is the government. They merely acknowledge them. When the government stops acknowledging them, you still have them, but no one is protecting them anymore.
That’s when the consent of the governed is lost and that needs to be quickly addressed or we need an entirely new government.
The tyranny we are facing now makes King George look like Santa Claus.
SCOTUS is to blame here. The circuits have been pissing on Heller for a decade
This is true for the entirety of the Bill of Rights.
Very important distinction. I even need to be reminded of that sometimes.
2A only ostensibly prevents the government from infringing on that right. If the government can and does infringe on that right (as well as others) without consequence, which it does, then those rights are de facto in the gift of the government.
Ultimately it is only fear of consequences which truly prevents a government infringing on God given rights, and the US government currently doesn’t fear any consequences. If the government is not held to the limits placed upon it in the Constitution, either by the courts or by We The People directly, then it really is just a piece of paper.
That's the thing about rights. They don't come from government. The government is forbidden to fuck with them.
This is why there is a razorwire fence around the Capitol. Tomorrow they cross a red line.
Fact.
And the fact that they're trying to take it away should scare you to the point of eliminating them.
Also: free speech is a human right, not a government policy. Social media companies are violently attacking free speech even without government policy - that said, section 230 is still unconstitutional, as is the FCC. The manufacturer of a printing press should have NO influence over what gets printed with it, and Facebook is just a high-tech printing press. All power to restrict the content viewed belongs in the hands of the users.
Freedom to speak and freedom to publish are independent of the first amendment created to protect them.
Exactly! The Bill of Rights limits the actions of government, not citizens...
I am so smart. S-M-R-T
Seriously though, excellent message.
Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Chink flu providers, etc. They love to murder unarmed civilians that are not good slaves of the proper race and age.
It’s true! Folks forget it’s a list of things government cannot do as opposed to permissions the government gives.
Technically, 2A is a formality. 75 grain hollow points and blind fury prevent the government from infringing on that right.
In other words, self defense is a "natural" right. Something which exists for all living beings. Ants, pigs, crows, bacteria, humans...
your creator*
I mean, God, obviously, but not one where your have to go through a bunch of pedophiles to get permission to take a shit.
As Indiana refuse to vote on constitutional carry
This.
This is where everyone comes to the table wrong. The left see the Bill of Rights as a gift given to you by your government. The right see it as a check on the government's ability to infringe your immutable rights.
When arguing this, make sure you understand which side of the table your opponent is coming from.
Thank you !
Perfectlly straight and to the point explanation, but unfortunately, it's above the cortical processing power of a liberal/democrates brain.
The Right is already ours; we where born/ endowed with it. The rule of law prevents the government from taking it from us.
Period.
No, shooting tyrants who try to infringe is what stops them.
they'll simply ask you where in the bible does it say you have the right to have a gun
god certainly stepped in for all the disarmed people
A god that lets it's worshipers get slaughtered on a daily basis, nah fam I say what are my rights to defend myself.
I think your view on religion is misguided but the point is that your right to defend yourself has not been gifted to you by the government.
I respect your freedom to push your dogma on others, just not with me.
Found the militant atheist who saw the word "God" and as a result totally failed to get the point.
The word the Founding Fathers used though was "Creator" which invokes natural law more so than any deity.
The good Lord didn’t bring sin into this world but he will take it out of this world in the end
After hundreds of thousands of years of watching mammals suffer, it really loses its punch. Humanity is permanently young and naive, and just like children we make a big stink about pain.
Because our true essence is eternal, because we can live as many lives as we need to develop our souls properly, suffering and death is little more than a pin prick. Ouch.
It's not God's fault that Christians are getting slaughtered, and it's not His responsibility. It just means that Christianity has sinned and fallen short of the glory of God's true law, natural law. A healthy religion is going to be far more xenophobic and hostile to outsiders, as Christianity has been practiced in the past.
So is god gonna come and smite Joe when he tries to take our guns or what?
If God solved our problems for us what is the point of living. Even Jesus when tempted by Satan refused to call on God to save him.
If not now then in the hereafter.
That's not much leverage when he's already sold his soul to demons.
I get why you think that's what this means but I encourage you to read what this is really about. Start with John Locke and the phrase "an appeal to heaven". It's not about religion, it's about natural law and when revolution is neccessary.