For the Second Amendment absolutists

[Kingpoleon]

So because a right was misused, the purpose behind that right must not exist. Brilliant logic.

Much in the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments claim to be for the purpose of protecting the innocent who have been wrongfully accused. Guess next time someone guilty gets off on a technicality that means due process is all a lie. Derp derp derp.

There is nothing in the 4th, 5th or 6th amendment that would allow someone nutty to simply walk into a public place and massacre 100 innocent people.

Rights are inherently potentially dangerous. "As government/authority expands, liberties/rights contract." The problem with authoritarianism is obvious - lack of rights. The problem with anarchism is similarly obvious - lack of government/authority.

The real question here is if the danger of the right to bear weapons outweighs that right.

[Kingpoleon]

Historically, the 2nd Amendment exists because of the deep distrust of standing armies in the early republic, yet something was needed to defend the country and the frontier. The militia system was intend to remove the need for a standing army. So if we really want to return to our Constitutional roots, we need to get rid of the U.S. Army, or at least reduce it down to a single brigade.

Sure, in theory. But I can almost guarantee you that if Madison were alive today, and had adapted to the modern world, he would not support repealing the Second Amendment.

[Kingpoleon]

Historically, the 2nd Amendment exists because of the deep distrust of standing armies in the early republic, yet something was needed to defend the country and the frontier. The militia system was intend to remove the need for a standing army. So if we really want to return to our Constitutional roots, we need to get rid of the U.S. Army, or at least reduce it down to a single brigade.

Sure, in theory. But I can almost guarantee you that if Madison were alive today, and had adapted to the modern world, he would not support repealing the Second Amendment.

Funny fact. At the time of the Second Amendment's ratification many local governments had laws requiring registration of firearms. Said laws weren't dispensed with upon the 2nd's passage either.

Mr. Duck-hunting "originalist" Scalia seemed to forget--or conveniently ignore--that fact throughout his seating.

I find the idea of a "Second Amendment absolutist" rather exclusionary. Please don't misrepresent my views; it's just that when people attack the Second Amendment, I tend to defend it.

[Kingpoleon]

    Pretty sure that the uprising envisioned against a tyrannical government isn't just one crazy dude. Indeed, if a political interest could not gather a much larger force to fight this tyranny then that would be considered overwhelming evidence that its grievances were not valid.

Right, so what constitutes a justifiable uprising?  Ten people?  One thousand people?  

There will never be an uprising of a thousand people. An uprising will only occur if it is certain of widespread support.