Are you sure you want to delete this post?
The last "Being Democratic" raised issues on Freedom of Religion, which as anticipated, revealed true nature of responders exposing wolves in sheep clothing. It exhibited signs of people approving censorship and bullying people of faiths. So, here is Amendment 2, which I again anticipate the responses of several in this Hub. I just question how people profess to be Democrats, but choose to impose inhuman tactics on an otherwise a world character that desires freedom. Some of these people communicate a good game, but do not really sacrifice for the common good.
Amendment II: "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."
It is imperative America has a military capable to defend our borders and interests around the world. It is imperative, as an interest, our Nation has alliances with many countries seeking similar desires in freedoms, so we engage in protection and military strengths as a whole worldly force. The countries that seek to overthrow governments we have an alliance with or threaten the peace of citizens, we will enter into a conflict situation to mitigate the threats.
It is necessary to the security of a free State to maintain our military. It does take enormous funding and resources for todays armed forces. Funding is also extended to other Nations as allies, because their support embodies our missions around the world. America is in constant support with many countries to keep freedom and terror from exposing it's evil agenda on people living free.
Now, the hard part...........our right to keep and bear Arms. There has been many pages of responses on this right as it may be the most misused freedom. Many have expressed that it was never the intent of our authors of this Amendment to allow free possession of military-style weapons as Arms. I have no problem with that, but it does not say that. I can believe that none of those authors could conceive that one day kill ready weapons as deadly as point and shoot quickly would dominate our gun crazy Nation. The right to keep and bear Arms seems more clear to not including cannons, automated fire and large caliber machine guns (not Arm ready weapons), but non-authority people have them.
I believe it is necessary for America to rewrite this Amendment to update the message/regulation. This is sure to bring out the survivalist and gun crazy's in force against any rewrite to take away anybody's guns or weapons. I believe it is necessary to control the amount of bullets, which a gun may have to clock into a chamber and establish a standard gun design more people may approve of. I firmly believe that it is necessary to regulate "Who" may have a weapon and "Who" may not. I realize laws do pertain to this measure of gun ownership, but these laws are poorly enforced or have no support for authorities to enforce.
The strongest reasons for bringing up Amendment 2 is that several on this Hub have been unfairly critical of our military. Some of you have never served, so how would you ever know about the military? Some of you have had a possibly bad experience from the military, which that does happen. It happens walking in the park with your dog and you step in some dog doo, Sxxx happens. However, you want to look at the right to maintain a well regulated Militia, it is necessary and without it, your present day of life would not be free as it is today.