Well stated my Idaho Friend. The only thing I would change about what you said is that our goal is, “To carry weapons (openly) or in public without government INFRINGEMENT.” I couldn’t care less if Joe Politician “Approves” of my actions (and I’m guessing you don’t either), but I start to care a lot when he/she tries to tell me I’m some sort of menace to society just for wanting to protect myself and loved ones, and goes further by trying to pass legislation prohibiting me from doing that. Enjoy the Java!
I couldn’t agree more. Great perspective! I would also emphasize the need to proudly announce to politicians that we have the 2A right to bear arms to protect ourselves against government tyranny. If our 2A rights were to be taken away I would submit that we have the right to take up arms against a tyrannical government. I think it’s important that politicians know and actually believe that. The people shouldn’t fear the government, the government should fear the people. As far as your channel growth. Unfortunately your channel doesn’t fit TH-cams Marxist agenda and they limit your First Amendment right. They are big on community censorship if it hurts their fragile feelings. Google/TH-cam should fear the people also but they don’t. They know more about any of us than we know about ourselves because they also know everything about our friends, loved ones, acquaintances and enemies.
I'm beginning to feel insignificant. I haven't been unsubscribed from any channel yet. Not even Warrior Poet or Patriot Nurse. It hurts to think I'm not worthy.
The soft language I think is probably to soften the pearl clutching most people usually do when talking about death, shooting or seeming willingness to being a victim/martyr. No one knew how to take Chris Kyle and he knew it. This was a man who shot people who were threatening U.S, Military, not in the heat of battle, but measured, who were not an immediate threat to him. An Audi Murphy they loved him . He was in combat, got metals. Chris was on a roof top for hours waiting to see who was the bad guy about to kill U.S. Service people. Calculated, bullet drop etc. Sort of like a jury of your peers does not know how to take a self defense shooting. Especially if you shoot a person of different race and that person is robbing a store or the customers. There is thought the robber was forced to rob, society made him a criminal. So, the soft language is up against a prejudice, a fear, but I doubt if it is in anyway effective. Good vid, understand your point.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.>> 2A folks always ignore the first two parts of the sentence.
@@robitmcclain6107 We don’t ignore it, we live by it. A “free state” can mean a lot of things to a lot of people. To me it means the government isn’t entitled to HALF the money that I work for only to give it away to causes that I do not agree with. What does it mean to you if I may ask.
@@DKennett2013 I observe that you ignored the first part. Hamilton was pretty clear in Federalist 29 that the necessary right to keep and bear Arms is related to the importance of having state militias to guard against tyrrany. The fact that the populus had guns is a side issue: "Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year."
@@robitmcclain6107The Federalist Papers are interesting reading, but they do NOT or Constitution. The language is quite clear and reflects the FINAL intent of the Amendment . . . government shall make no law . . . There is nothing that suggests that armed citizens are required to do anything.
@@robitmcclain6107 Oh I’m sorry! I thought the US Constitution kinda replaced the Federalist Papers. Silly me and everyone else apparently… Sorry nobody ran it by you first! If firearms scare you then don’t buy one. Buy a dog or ask your wife to defend you. The rest of us will enjoy our Constitutional Right to not only own but Constitutionally CARRY wherever we go. You go ahead and advocate for your rights to be taken away. Great idea! 🙄
Well stated my Idaho Friend. The only thing I would change about what you said is that our goal is, “To carry weapons (openly) or in public without government INFRINGEMENT.” I couldn’t care less if Joe Politician “Approves” of my actions (and I’m guessing you don’t either), but I start to care a lot when he/she tries to tell me I’m some sort of menace to society just for wanting to protect myself and loved ones, and goes further by trying to pass legislation prohibiting me from doing that. Enjoy the Java!
Thanks for your comment!!
I couldn’t agree more. Great perspective! I would also emphasize the need to proudly announce to politicians that we have the 2A right to bear arms to protect ourselves against government tyranny. If our 2A rights were to be taken away I would submit that we have the right to take up arms against a tyrannical government. I think it’s important that politicians know and actually believe that. The people shouldn’t fear the government, the government should fear the people.
As far as your channel growth. Unfortunately your channel doesn’t fit TH-cams Marxist agenda and they limit your First Amendment right. They are big on community censorship if it hurts their fragile feelings. Google/TH-cam should fear the people also but they don’t. They know more about any of us than we know about ourselves because they also know everything about our friends, loved ones, acquaintances and enemies.
Thanks so much for your contributing to this discussion!
I'm beginning to feel insignificant. I haven't been unsubscribed from any channel yet. Not even Warrior Poet or Patriot Nurse. It hurts to think I'm not worthy.
I'm still subscribed to them as well!
The soft language I think is probably to soften the pearl clutching most people usually do when talking about death, shooting or seeming willingness to being a victim/martyr. No one knew how to take Chris Kyle and he knew it. This was a man who shot people who were threatening U.S, Military, not in the heat of battle, but measured, who were not an immediate threat to him. An Audi Murphy they loved him . He was in combat, got metals. Chris was on a roof top for hours waiting to see who was the bad guy about to kill U.S. Service people. Calculated, bullet drop etc.
Sort of like a jury of your peers does not know how to take a self defense shooting. Especially if you shoot a person of different race and that person is robbing a store or the customers. There is thought the robber was forced to rob, society made him a criminal. So, the soft language is up against a prejudice, a fear, but I doubt if it is in anyway effective. Good vid, understand your point.
Yes, you're spot on!
I assume you meant a brace not a bumpstock. But yes. Its clearly just to turn a pistol into an SBR. LOL
Oh, crap!! Good catch! Thanks!!
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.>> 2A folks always ignore the first two parts of the sentence.
@@robitmcclain6107 We don’t ignore it, we live by it. A “free state” can mean a lot of things to a lot of people. To me it means the government isn’t entitled to HALF the money that I work for only to give it away to causes that I do not agree with. What does it mean to you if I may ask.
You are 100% incorrect. Nothing is ignored.
@@DKennett2013 I observe that you ignored the first part. Hamilton was pretty clear in Federalist 29 that the necessary right to keep and bear Arms is related to the importance of having state militias to guard against tyrrany. The fact that the populus had guns is a side issue:
"Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year."
@@robitmcclain6107The Federalist Papers are interesting reading, but they do NOT or Constitution. The language is quite clear and reflects the FINAL intent of the Amendment . . . government shall make no law . . . There is nothing that suggests that armed citizens are required to do anything.
@@robitmcclain6107 Oh I’m sorry! I thought the US Constitution kinda replaced the Federalist Papers. Silly me and everyone else apparently… Sorry nobody ran it by you first! If firearms scare you then don’t buy one. Buy a dog or ask your wife to defend you. The rest of us will enjoy our Constitutional Right to not only own but Constitutionally CARRY wherever we go. You go ahead and advocate for your rights to be taken away. Great idea! 🙄