Posted on Oct 1, 2015
Since the governments (Federal, State, and Local) can't guarantee your security, should you be able to secure yourself?
3.89K
21
13
3
3
0
I think the Constitution guarantees this but a few in the country seem to dispute the idea.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-nn-oregon-community-college-shooting-20151001-story.html
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-nn-oregon-community-college-shooting-20151001-story.html
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 7
As long as we fail to secure, or regulate, our southern border, we have only an image of National Security. Potentially, any point in the United States, at any given time. It is absolutely necessary that the individual be capable of, and prepared to, defend themselves.
(2)
(0)
The Government isn't here to "Protect" us. The Constitution is actually pretty silent on that specific concept. At most, it's "implied" and at worst, we incorrectly "infer" it. It's here to Protect itself, and the Status Quo, not the Individual.
(2)
(0)
(1)
(0)
SGT Jerrold Pesz
The above is but one of several where the federal courts have held that the police have no obligation to protect any individual. Basically if you don't protect yourself probably no one else will. It is also true that in many cases the police have no authority to stop a crime before it is actually committed. Police investigate crimes after they have happened.
(1)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
PVT James Strait Remember the Oath. I do solemnly swear to support & defend the Constitution.... It doesn't say People. Everything is "implied" and goes back to the Preamble:
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
But even that doesn't say "Protect." It implies it with "Common Defense" but that is a Collective Protection, as compared to an Individual Protection.
If we go from Macro (Federal) to Micro (State or Local), all these rules & philosophies are also in place. Government is not in place to "protect" the individual. It has never been. It's there to "sustain" (support) society at most. The verbiage, as I said, implies a great deal, which leads us to incorrectly infer much more than it actually says. This allows those with Granted Power (Agents of the Government) to continually reach for more, while whittling away at the Rights & Protection of said Rights of the Citizenry.
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
But even that doesn't say "Protect." It implies it with "Common Defense" but that is a Collective Protection, as compared to an Individual Protection.
If we go from Macro (Federal) to Micro (State or Local), all these rules & philosophies are also in place. Government is not in place to "protect" the individual. It has never been. It's there to "sustain" (support) society at most. The verbiage, as I said, implies a great deal, which leads us to incorrectly infer much more than it actually says. This allows those with Granted Power (Agents of the Government) to continually reach for more, while whittling away at the Rights & Protection of said Rights of the Citizenry.
(0)
(0)
SGT Dana Williams
One of the primary manifest duties of the United States government, per the United States Constitution, is to "provide for the common defense of the Nation". This is a role that is currently abdicated per political policy.
(0)
(0)
That Amendment only applied to muskets, duh!
Of course one should be able to secure themselves! This is parallel to life, liberty, & pursuit of happiness.
Of course one should be able to secure themselves! This is parallel to life, liberty, & pursuit of happiness.
(2)
(0)
New ISIS manual shows US in crosshairs; FBI has 900 ongoing ISIS-related investigations | Pamela...
“You should make sure to not look particularly attached to religion. A man who works on a secret operation should meddle in the general population. If you can avoid having a beard, wearing qamis (Islamic clothes), using miswak (a sort of toothbrush recommended in the hadiths), and have a booklet of dhikr (Islamic devotional booklet) with you, it’s better. Also, you shouldn’t be going to often to places like mosques, Islamic institutes or...
(1)
(0)
Suspended Profile
From watching law and order, you are innocent until proven guilty. It is not the civilians job to be the judge and arbitrator when someone else murders or kills. That said, you'd have to pull out self defense statutes to justify killing someone to defend yourself such as in a campus shooting.
SFC (Join to see)
LTC (Join to see) To answer the question you asked. Absolutely YES. I will (and have) followed the law to where I can and will protect my family.
(1)
(0)
Gun free zones (in my opinion) are a way of amending the 2nd amendment. Gun free zones should only exist in sensitive areas, airports, and churches. I don't believe they do any good.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next