👌

But my point was only that while we have slowly lost some of our freedom over the past couple centuries we’ve lost a lot less than other nations that should be compared to us like the UK and Canada

Not relative to what you had, no

Canada's constitution popped up in the 70s and was basically swiss cheese. UK never had a constitution

from the early 1900s onward there has been a steady erosion of rights that the average American *did* have

Exactly. Maybe they’d be able to own butter knives if they had a constitution that protected that

"The constitution merely enumerates rights. It’s not the source of rights" - You, minutes ago

The only point that actually matters in the whole constitution is the existence of an armed populace. That has been and continues to be the only check against government overreach, and only when actually utilized

I’m in agreement with myself. You have rights that are constantly under threat. Our constitution enumerates them and says “government hands off” whereas other countries have constitutions that don’t go as far. They end up being violated while we hold onto more rights

The government hasnt been hands off though lol

It’s been more hands off than it otherwise would have been

Without the constitution as a road block we would’ve been Canada in 1777

Look at it this way. Canada set the bar almost at the floor, and basically nudged it slightly lower
America has set the bar high, and has been dropping year by year, in incredibly significant ways

@amlam Why In The World Would Anyone Need An Assault Butter Knife! We need more conman sense knife control!

Again, the constition doesn't do that, the populace does

and you're heading into an era where the public, the average American, does not care to protect their rights

We need an actual rapist on the Supreme Court

Then all of this will be solved

This phony rapist, Kavanaugh isn’t cutting the non-consenting mustard

Alrighty bois. I’m going to bed. It’s been real and it’s been fun. But it ain’t been real fun.

Has it been feal run though?

@Beemann You might be confusing the ideal with what we have "allowed", and no its not just the 2A that matters in our constitution, it all matters. Most are not more important then the other (unless we decide to change something, its all important).
Humans have, and will always want to change things "for the better" without understanding the value of what that change will bring about. This means we always have to fight over and over what we hold to be truly beneficial for everyone, not just our own short sighted life. And yes we will lose things, yes we have lost some freedoms, but we have also allowed it to be peaceful. We still have are foundations in place that allows us to either rebuild or keep the ever looming risks of losing more at bay. All that matters is how far people are willing to risk the backlash of encroaching on even more freedoms.

None of the other rights listed in the constitution are worth anything without enforcement. Ultimately, any political power you can wield is force, whether by action or by threat. There is no real way around this. In the United States, the force the government can exert is counteracted by the force the people can exert against it. This counterbalance is enshrined in the core ideals of the nation. Without 2A, there is ultimately no constitution. Without threat of enforcement, the government is free to "reinterpret" your "rights" in whatever way they please. They can, and have, been able to play people's selfish desires against the integrity of the system they claim to serve and uphold. They have managed to do this at a rather alarming rate over the course of the 20th and, so far, the 21st centuries. Your citizen's militia has been undermined, your private conversations surveilled without warrant, and the power of your state has been drained in favour of an ever-growing federal mess. The ability to keep your rights is not being utilized. It likely will continue to not be utilized, given that people are actively supporting the erosion of their freedoms via your electoral process. Not even Trump, Mr Wildcard himself, has truly pushed back against the steady stifling of freedom

So, normal human behavior?

That "normal human behaviour" is the slow death of your rights, m8, but you havent addressed the main (and initial) point

If you were on an island with 5 other people, an administrator and 4 "citizens" and I gave you the option between a piece of paper with your "rights" written on it, and a firearm, which would you consider more important?

If you stack every other right in the constitution against 2A, 2A still wins. Nothing surpasses self defense, as an extension of self ownership. From this, all else is derived

Yes, things are bad, but they are also good. I don't overlook one because of the other. I don't fight for utopia, i fight for what are constitutions upholds even if Humans can fail to live up to them all the time. That doesn't mean i give up on the whole system.

What system am I giving up on?

I didn't say you were, just what i'm arguing.

against who? lol

Well, to be more clear, you were giving up on the constitution earlier, believing citizens shouldn't vote without service. And with your newer post, it seems you want to throw away the systems we have now, because we aren't keeping to it perfectly, but maybe i'm wrong about that.

So, i wonder what we should do instead.

No, my argument is that 2A needs to be upheld, people need to push back against it, but that voting is a privilege with attached responsibility being treated as a right (but only circumstantially, oddly)

The idea behind public service as a precursor to franchise is that ultimately you are weeding out the people who dont actually want it, or the people who dont actually value it might be a better way of explaining it

you're not basing it on IQ, any particular arbitrary set of characteristics, etc

Only on one's willingness to serve the public, and the nation, as should be the purpose of one in public office, and as should be the goal of any system of arbitration based around the nation's continuance

Ya, that goes against the constitution....
Tho i don't disagree with you about holding the 2A (like i uphold every other one).

Then I expect to see you taking steps to bring state powers back, pretty much demolish the NSA as it stands currently, and yeet just about all firearms legislation, because those also go against the constitution. At what point does the pushback happen?
And again, 2A is not like the other ones. It's the most important one

There is a time and place to push back, have we passed it yet? Are we still waiting for it? These are all good questions, we will wait to find out.

If you were determined to uphold the constitution, it's well past the time to push back lol