• Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    Fun fact: sometimes the founding fathers didn’t agree on everything.

    The section of his editorial you quote doesn’t say that it’s the rationale behind the second amendment. It doesn’t mention it OR tyranny.

    The amendment, which specifically spells out the reason before the conclusion does NOT reference standing armies or tyranny.

    You’re just assuming connections that aren’t there and then accusing ME of pretending to be a mind reader 🤦

    • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      The section of his editorial you quote doesn’t say that it’s the rationale behind the second amendment. It doesn’t mention it OR tyranny.

      The entirety of federalist 29 is about the second amendment. I think it’s safe to assume the paragraph I quoted from federalist 29 also is.

      You’re just assuming connections that aren’t there and then accusing ME of pretending to be a mind reader 🤦

      Calling militias “the best possible defense” against a standing federal army seems pretty cut and dry. No mind reading necessary, just regular reading.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        The entirety of federalist 29 is about the second amendment. I think it’s safe to assume the paragraph I quoted from federalist 29 also is.

        Suuure it is 🙄

        Calling militias “the best possible defense” against a standing federal army seems pretty cut and dry.

        Except that’s not what the amendment itself says. That’s Alexander Hamilton’s opinion, NOT the rationale that was agreed on when drafting the text

        No mind reading necessary, just regular reading.

        And a bit of imagination to make the unconnected pieces fit together to mean what you want them to mean.

        You’re acting no better than the libertarian nutjobs who insist that taxation is theft and also unconstitutional.

        • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          If my choices are the opinion of one of the guys who wrote the amendment vs the opinion of some teenager on Lemmy, I’m gonna have to go with the former

          • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            the opinion of one of the guys who wrote the amendment ≠ the amendment OR the reason for the amendment, which explicitly mentions the ACTUAL reason.

            That shouldn’t be so difficult a concept to grasp.