4 ms·

> If you apply this rule strictly, then the mobs could first hit the police. In many countries, police officers are violent and have a de facto impunity when th

> If you apply this rule strictly, then the mobs could first hit the police. In many countries, police officers are violent and have a de facto impunity when they break the law. Advocates of our Second Amendment - the right to keep and bear arms - understand this. This idea was the primary reason for the Second Amendment's inclusion in the Bill of Rights. In the words of Tench Coxe: > Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American… The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people. In my opinion, minorities in particular have reason to arm themselves and to be prepared to defend themselves if necessary. Armed protest against civil government by blacks and others has a long history in the United States: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/black-panthers-california-1967_n_568accfce4b014efe0db2f40 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/black-panthers-california-196... If you're interested in this sort of history, I'll recommend a couple of books: "Negroes with Guns", by Robert F. Williams; and "This Nonviolent Stuff'll Get You Killed", by Charles Cobb, Jr. Robert F. Williams is a very interesting personality in and of himself. Among other things, he founded the Black Armed Guard - an NRA-sponsored rifle club dedicated to the defense the black community from racial violence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_F._Williams#Black_Armed_Guard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_F._Williams#Black_Armed...

wtdata 7y ago
> In my opinion, minorities in particular have reason to arm themselves and to be prepared to defend themselves if necessary. That's an interesting take, since minorities commit - by very, very far - the greatest amount of violent crimes per capita in the USA. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/topic-pages/tables/table-21 https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-...
- LyndsySimon 7y ago
  Yes, and if anything that supports my position. Minorities are statistically more likely to be both perpetrators and victims of violent crime. Members of those communities therefore are more likely than non-members to have a legitimate need to defend themselves.
  - wtdata 7y ago
    But, gun ownership clearly correlates with gun related violence (i.e. violent crime). Less guns, less violent crime.
    - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
      I'm not sure that's true. Less gun related violent crime, certainly. But that can lead to higher rates of other kinds of violence, as those who are good with knives or their fists are now the top of the food chain. It is not clear that the total amount of violence would go down significantly. (The total number of deaths might, though.) For example, there is very little gun violence in the UK. But the amount of knife and fist violence might surprise you.
    - myrandomcomment 7y ago
      A number of stories on the front page of the BBC (UK) in the last week have been about the issues of the rise Knife violence. The band guns, and now there is an increase of murders via a knife. Bad people do not follow the law.
      - skinnymuch 7y ago
        How much is the increase? If it’s not close to the increase guns would see, then it’s not that big of a deal. Guns would still be far worse. And I’m assuming that’s the case.
      - wtdata 7y ago
        You do realize that personal gun ownership was always banned in the UK, like, since ever, right? That "statistic" you just tried to pass about how knife attacks increased when the UK banned guns, was completely made up.
hanniabu 7y ago
> This idea was the primary reason for the Second Amendment's inclusion in the Bill of Rights. Thank you eit bringing this up. While recent events with shootings are unfortunate, what's more unfortunate is the media taking advantage of these events to push an agenda by claiming the 2nd amendment is only for hunting and they only interview people that dat the same, then go down the road of saying these guns aren't needed for hunting and should be made illegal. Call me crazy, but I'd wager this is all done out of initiative and agenda and not out of ignorance. Reasons being to disarm the population of any meaningful ways to defend against government suppression. For those thinking that our own army would never attack their own people, a good amount of our military is now contractors from other countries that are paid mercenaries.

wtdata 7y ago

> In my opinion, minorities in particular have reason to arm themselves and to be prepared to defend themselves if necessary. That's an interesting take, since minorities commit - by very, very far - the greatest amount of violent crimes per capita in the USA. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/topic-pages/tables/table-21 https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-...

LyndsySimon 7y ago
Yes, and if anything that supports my position. Minorities are statistically more likely to be both perpetrators and victims of violent crime. Members of those communities therefore are more likely than non-members to have a legitimate need to defend themselves.
- wtdata 7y ago
  But, gun ownership clearly correlates with gun related violence (i.e. violent crime). Less guns, less violent crime.
  - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
    I'm not sure that's true. Less gun related violent crime, certainly. But that can lead to higher rates of other kinds of violence, as those who are good with knives or their fists are now the top of the food chain. It is not clear that the total amount of violence would go down significantly. (The total number of deaths might, though.) For example, there is very little gun violence in the UK. But the amount of knife and fist violence might surprise you.
  - myrandomcomment 7y ago
    A number of stories on the front page of the BBC (UK) in the last week have been about the issues of the rise Knife violence. The band guns, and now there is an increase of murders via a knife. Bad people do not follow the law.
    - skinnymuch 7y ago
      How much is the increase? If it’s not close to the increase guns would see, then it’s not that big of a deal. Guns would still be far worse. And I’m assuming that’s the case.
    - wtdata 7y ago
      You do realize that personal gun ownership was always banned in the UK, like, since ever, right? That "statistic" you just tried to pass about how knife attacks increased when the UK banned guns, was completely made up.

hanniabu 7y ago

> This idea was the primary reason for the Second Amendment's inclusion in the Bill of Rights. Thank you eit bringing this up. While recent events with shootings are unfortunate, what's more unfortunate is the media taking advantage of these events to push an agenda by claiming the 2nd amendment is only for hunting and they only interview people that dat the same, then go down the road of saying these guns aren't needed for hunting and should be made illegal. Call me crazy, but I'd wager this is all done out of initiative and agenda and not out of ignorance. Reasons being to disarm the population of any meaningful ways to defend against government suppression. For those thinking that our own army would never attack their own people, a good amount of our military is now contractors from other countries that are paid mercenaries.