Without 2A, What Good Are the Other Amendments?

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

glennds
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1265
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:24 am

Re: Without 2A, What Good Are the Other Amendments?

Post by glennds » Sat Oct 03, 2020 3:38 am

Hal wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 1:15 am
Out of curiosity, a question for the US forum members....

If a law was enacted where you could be detained indefinitely without trial, what do you think would happen across various states ?
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/inte ... ll-rights/
Did you know that such a law (or legal authority to be exact) already exists, vested in the President?
It's called the Presidential Emergency Action Documents, created under Eisenhower, and highly classified such that the exact powers are not even publicly known. What is known is that as of 2018, 56 such documents existed. Among the powers are the ability to suspend writ of habeas corpus, detain "dangerous persons", impose martial law, authorize censorship of news reports and other powers. They were discussed in another thread. You can read a little more here: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/ ... -documents

There's a recent news report that Ted Koppel did that you can see here: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rewriting- ... al-powers/

These are tremendous powers that most people would be surprised even exist, but they do, ostensibly for the purpose of protection the nation from a foreign power. But they are totally at the discretion of one person, the President.

To your question though, if this type of legal authority were ever actually used, or commonly known, what if any reaction would there be?
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Without 2A, What Good Are the Other Amendments?

Post by Kriegsspiel » Sat Oct 03, 2020 6:13 am

tomfoolery wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 8:16 pm
vnatale wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 6:28 pm
Remember even the police are trained not to just shoot in the leg but to incapacitate the perceived perpetrator, no matter how much damage may occur to the perceived perpetrator.
The police aren't trained to shoot in the leg because it's a stupid idea that no one should ever do for any reason and is highly illegal throughout the United States. It's NEVER justified to shoot someone in the leg unless they are standing behind cover and the only part of their body exposed is their leg. Under what circumstances would shooting someone in the leg to punitively injure them be allowed?

It won't stop them from doing whatever bad action they were just doing. Even people shot in the chest can still fight for another 30 seconds in many cases. Only a very specific head shot will stop someone instantly, and that's assuming the bullet penetrates the skull properly and doesn't deflect the angle of penetration into the head.
Israeli snipers armed with a .22 rifle have been doing that very thing for years, to great effect. From the Israeli perspective, it denies the Palestinians a shaheed, and it takes leaders out of the fight:
Despite the large number of casualties, the grim protests and responses along the fence continued unabated for nearly two years, until it was decided to reduce the frequency to once a month. Yet even in real time, the violent Friday afternoon ritual provoked little public interest in Israel. Similarly, the international condemnations – from allegations of the use of disproportionate force to accusations that Israel was perpetrating massacres – faded like so much froth on the waves. link
You there, Ephialtes. May you live forever.
Libertarian666
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5994
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm

Re: Without 2A, What Good Are the Other Amendments?

Post by Libertarian666 » Sat Oct 03, 2020 6:55 am

Kriegsspiel wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 6:13 am
tomfoolery wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 8:16 pm
vnatale wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 6:28 pm
Remember even the police are trained not to just shoot in the leg but to incapacitate the perceived perpetrator, no matter how much damage may occur to the perceived perpetrator.
The police aren't trained to shoot in the leg because it's a stupid idea that no one should ever do for any reason and is highly illegal throughout the United States. It's NEVER justified to shoot someone in the leg unless they are standing behind cover and the only part of their body exposed is their leg. Under what circumstances would shooting someone in the leg to punitively injure them be allowed?

It won't stop them from doing whatever bad action they were just doing. Even people shot in the chest can still fight for another 30 seconds in many cases. Only a very specific head shot will stop someone instantly, and that's assuming the bullet penetrates the skull properly and doesn't deflect the angle of penetration into the head.
Israeli snipers armed with a .22 rifle have been doing that very thing for years, to great effect. From the Israeli perspective, it denies the Palestinians a shaheed, and it takes leaders out of the fight:
Despite the large number of casualties, the grim protests and responses along the fence continued unabated for nearly two years, until it was decided to reduce the frequency to once a month. Yet even in real time, the violent Friday afternoon ritual provoked little public interest in Israel. Similarly, the international condemnations – from allegations of the use of disproportionate force to accusations that Israel was perpetrating massacres – faded like so much froth on the waves. link
Yes, but of course that is a very special situation. Police aren't faced with jihadis that are supported by numerous organizations that refuse to accept the fact that they can end the violence simply by ceasing to commit terror and agreeing that Israel has a right to exist.
User avatar
Hal
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1349
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 1:50 am

Re: Without 2A, What Good Are the Other Amendments?

Post by Hal » Sat Oct 03, 2020 8:15 am

glennds wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 3:38 am
Hal wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 1:15 am
Out of curiosity, a question for the US forum members....

If a law was enacted where you could be detained indefinitely without trial, what do you think would happen across various states ?
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/inte ... ll-rights/
Did you know that such a law (or legal authority to be exact) already exists, vested in the President?
It's called the Presidential Emergency Action Documents, created under Eisenhower, and highly classified such that the exact powers are not even publicly known. What is known is that as of 2018, 56 such documents existed. Among the powers are the ability to suspend writ of habeas corpus, detain "dangerous persons", impose martial law, authorize censorship of news reports and other powers. They were discussed in another thread. You can read a little more here: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/ ... -documents

There's a recent news report that Ted Koppel did that you can see here: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rewriting- ... al-powers/

These are tremendous powers that most people would be surprised even exist, but they do, ostensibly for the purpose of protection the nation from a foreign power. But they are totally at the discretion of one person, the President.

To your question though, if this type of legal authority were ever actually used, or commonly known, what if any reaction would there be?
Thanks glennds, never knew that :o

With regards to Police shooting offenders
<snip>
It won't stop them from doing whatever bad action they were just doing. Even people shot in the chest can still fight for another 30 seconds in many cases. Only a very specific head shot will stop someone instantly, and that's assuming the bullet penetrates the skull properly and doesn't deflect the angle of penetration into the head.
<snip>

Why on earth would you issue Police sidearms that cannot instantly stop dangerous offenders??
I assume over in the US you can only shoot someone if there is an imminent threat to the officer or the public....

https://www.americanheritage.com/gun-army-cant-kill
Aussie GoldSmithPP - 25% PMGOLD, 75% VDCO
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Without 2A, What Good Are the Other Amendments?

Post by vnatale » Sat Oct 03, 2020 9:15 am

Libertarian666 wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:18 pm
glennds wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 9:34 pm
tomfoolery wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 8:16 pm

vnatale wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 6:28 pm
However, you have to be a fool to think anything you own will be able to protect you from the government if the government is out to get you. You are probably going to better off surrendering than trying to "defend" yourself. I predict almost certain death in the latter case.
The Vietnam War was fought by locals weilding nothing more than AK47s, which are equivalent to AR15s.
The dozens of different wars we fought in the middle east over the last 19 years have been fought by locals weilding nothing more than AK47s.

I don't think the locals fared too poorly in those conflicts.
Dude, if you characterize the Viet Cong and the PAVN as "locals weilding (sic) nothing more than AK47s", then you've got some reading to do. Specifically look up information about General Vo Nguyen Giap.
A quote about him from Wikipedia (for whatever that may be worth):
He oversaw the expansion of the PAVN from a small self-defense force into a large conventional army, equipped by its communist allies with considerable amounts of relatively sophisticated weaponry, although this did not usually match the weaponry of the Americans.
The determination, tactical training, intelligence and communication systems that the Vietnamese utilized were remarkable, and worth a read.

I have to agree with Vinny. It's an alluring idea to think that individuals could take up arms effectively against their government. But there is a big difference between simply owning guns, even lots of them, and being trained how to use them professionally in combat.

Most people who get into the fantasy of taking up arms against their tyrannical government see themselves as the righteous one(s) in the dream. However as far as the platoon of Marines, DHS police or whatever trained Federal or State force is concerned, you may as well be Timothy McVeigh and your guns will be about as useful as the leftover bones from last night's rotisserie chicken.

The 2nd Amendment is all well and good, and the right to bear arms is what it is, and I for one am not on a mission to take it away from you or anyone else. But to think it exists in this day and age as a practical defense against the US government is a hallucination.
How about the Afghan War vs. the Soviets? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2%80%93Afghan_War)
Seems like that comparison fails on several major, major levels.

1) It was country fighting against country rather than citizens of a country fighting its' soldier - citizens.

2) It was another geographic country fighting another geographic country which gives the defending country the advantage. Those in the Afghan war were entrenched in their positions. The Soviets had to maintain long supply lines.

3) The terrain in Afghanistan is tremendously different than the environment in which "war" would happen in our country.

4) Finally, we were supplying arms to the Afghanistan (which decades later were used against us). Who would be supplying arms to our people? Canada? Mexico?

Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
Lonestar
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 213
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 7:56 pm

Re: Without 2A, What Good Are the Other Amendments?

Post by Lonestar » Sat Oct 03, 2020 12:07 pm

Hal wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 8:15 am
[
Why on earth would you issue Police sidearms that cannot instantly stop dangerous offenders??
I assume over in the US you can only shoot someone if there is an imminent threat to the officer or the public....

https://www.americanheritage.com/gun-army-cant-kill
It's deeper than that. As seen by recent events, the police using deadly force can find themselves in extreme trouble even if there is an imminent threat to their lives.

I realize we are getting off topic here, but in regards to police issued weapons, inability to stop dangerous offenders demonstrates ballistics of certain calibers take on unpredictable results when drugs are involved in the scenario. Brings up the old argument of smaller calibers (more frequently carried by LE) equal more firearm capacity vs. larger caliber (better stopping power) equal smaller capacity.
Libertarian666
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5994
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm

Re: Without 2A, What Good Are the Other Amendments?

Post by Libertarian666 » Sat Oct 03, 2020 8:28 pm

Lonestar wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 12:07 pm
Hal wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 8:15 am
[
Why on earth would you issue Police sidearms that cannot instantly stop dangerous offenders??
I assume over in the US you can only shoot someone if there is an imminent threat to the officer or the public....

https://www.americanheritage.com/gun-army-cant-kill
It's deeper than that. As seen by recent events, the police using deadly force can find themselves in extreme trouble even if there is an imminent threat to their lives.

I realize we are getting off topic here, but in regards to police issued weapons, inability to stop dangerous offenders demonstrates ballistics of certain calibers take on unpredictable results when drugs are involved in the scenario. Brings up the old argument of smaller calibers (more frequently carried by LE) equal more firearm capacity vs. larger caliber (better stopping power) equal smaller capacity.
I defer to L. Neil Smith, who says you need a minimum of .357 or .45 to be sure of stopping an attacker.
User avatar
Hal
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1349
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 1:50 am

Re: Without 2A, What Good Are the Other Amendments?

Post by Hal » Sun Oct 04, 2020 8:40 am

Lucky you don't live in Australia!!! You would probably be arrested for a thought crime with that knowledge :o

Case in point, Farmer has rifle confiscated for defending family against an armed intruder The rifle is licensed for vermin control "not" self defence :P
https://au.news.yahoo.com/bungowannah-m ... 21845.html

So back to the 2A and the Police issue. From my experience with the military, I honestly doubt a civilian uprising could overthrow an unconstitutional Government that is backed by the Armed Forces. The skill and the armament of the Army is too great.

With regards to arming and training of the Police in the US. What would you consider best practice?
Not this -> https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/state/v ... k-victims/
I was there that day....

PS: In Australia I have been advised it is now illegal to acquire a 1887 lever action shotgun. Wonder if I can purchase a flintlock, or is that classed as a weapon of mass destruction too? *end rant :D *
Simonjester wrote: ] any one surprised at how short the time was between banning guns and the rise of authoritarianism in Australia?

almost feels like we should start a patron/go fund me account " send an Aussie a gun"....
Aussie GoldSmithPP - 25% PMGOLD, 75% VDCO
User avatar
drumminj
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 319
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2015 9:16 pm

Re: Without 2A, What Good Are the Other Amendments?

Post by drumminj » Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:53 am

tomfoolery wrote:
Sun Oct 04, 2020 12:37 am
Whereas the people who hate guns or are afraid of them are the ones in favor of gun control and make comments like a woman's breasts feel like a bag of sand
Nice, subtle movie reference!
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4959
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Without 2A, What Good Are the Other Amendments?

Post by Mountaineer » Sun Oct 04, 2020 6:32 pm

Well guys and dolls, this has been one of the more fun weeks I've had in the last hour or two. Have to go fuel up the Blackbird now with some JP-8 to get it ready for my morning soiree. Mach 3 and hair on fire out of here. Carry on. 8)
DNA has its own language (code), and language requires intelligence. There is no known mechanism by which matter can give birth to information, let alone language. It is unreasonable to believe the world could have happened by chance.
Post Reply