Joseph Ellis: Orchestrating the Second American Revolution

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 21 окт 2024

Комментарии • 12

  • @archangel1045
    @archangel1045 8 лет назад +11

    The intent of the 2nd amendment is for the American People to have the ability to defend their Liberty and Freedom from a tyranny. The ability of the people to depose a corrupt and criminal government by armed force.

  • @rustymarquis3879
    @rustymarquis3879 9 лет назад +4

    How could you possibly thumbs down this guy? Dude's brilliant...but I must say that his shtick on the 2nd Amendment is debatable, since all members of a "militia" are, by definition, voluntary; ergo, anyone of us can volunteer, and therefore earn the right to bear arms. Not a stretch, not even close.
    The Right to Bear Arms is NOT a Natural Right, correct, but it still is an American Right!

    • @stevenfrasier5718
      @stevenfrasier5718 3 года назад

      Wrong.

    • @CC-jl7jz
      @CC-jl7jz Год назад

      Joseph Ellis is a great author but hard to like. He just cant resist pushing his leftist agenda in some of his speeches. And the right to bear arms is a natural right. Why should the people be defenseless while the government amasses tanks, planes, missiles, nukes and guns? As long as the government is armed then We the People will be armed also. All governments teeter on the edge of despotism at any given time.

  • @markmadsen6828
    @markmadsen6828 4 года назад +1

    This is the problem in this country.. Most people don't think for themselves, they want to be told what to do and think.. Thus we have "Big Government" to direct the masses instead of "The People" directing the Government..

  • @KNemo1999
    @KNemo1999 Год назад +1

    Semi-paranoid? A $31.321 trillion national debt, which is 121% of GDP is a strong argument that semi-paranoid is not nearly paranoid enough.

  • @clarencekavanaugh7747
    @clarencekavanaugh7747 5 лет назад +1

    While the Framers might not wish to burden future generations with their decisions. They also provided a mechanism in which to modify or even delete their impact upon said generations through the amendment process. So it is this gentleman who is full of "crap" not Scalia who conveniently cannot respond to as charged.
    In addition, his response to the 2nd Amendment not being a individual right is can be blown out of the water when comparing other rights listed in the Bill of Rights which also state "Right of the People" which I'm sure the good professor would argue is individual rights.