Title: The History of the Second Amendment Source:
[None] URL Source:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhBwHiLcTG8 Published:Dec 18, 2018 Author:Political Juice Post Date:2019-08-29 06:58:42 by BTP Holdings Keywords:None Views:55
"Get your hands off my God damn guns!"
In this episode of Political Juice, Juice Boi gives a historical rundown on the writing and reasoning behind the second amendment as written in our Constitution.
We also unravel some contemporary myths about the second amendment and get to the truth of it all.
Philosophy, history, textual analysis, and terrible art, what more could you want?
Grab that juice and let's get this going!
Some corrections:
-Nunn v Georgia was not a Supreme Court case, it was a Georgia Supreme Court case.
-At 10:05 I meant to say 1691, not 1791
-My using of the phrase "assault rifle" at 42:10 was sarcastic (though it didn't seem to resonate as well in the video). As the informed gun enthusiast should know, there is no such thing as an "assault" rifle. It is a term of phrase used by politicians, members of the media, and those in academia who are either ignorant on gun terminology or are deliberately trying to make guns seem especially more menacing for purposes of rhetorical showmanship and possibly fearmongering. Generally, I take the former position, and that people are just ignorant, or misinformed.
Hence my saying "semiautomatic rifle conflict" just seconds beforehand, because that's what this actually is about, at least when it pertains to the supposed "assault rifle.”
That doesn't discount the actual danger presented by firearms, however, the purpose of which is to kill, maim, bloody, etc. But it is a falsity to call a rifle anything other than a rifle, or a semi-automatic rifle anything other than a semi-automatic rifle. There is no such thing as an "assault" rifle. If I attack you with an axe, that's now an "assault axe", if I attack you with a spoon, that spoon can now be called an "assault spoon". It's a nonsense phrase. Sorry for the confusion.