Author Topic: 2nd Amendment Advocates  (Read 1010 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Beatrix

  • Cro-Magnon
  • ****
  • Posts: 786
2nd Amendment Advocates
« on: January 15, 2013, 02:47:58 PM »
Paying respect and discussions, that's what I wanted to talk about in this thread. 

Keith Ratliff and John Noveske: The Death of Two Second Amendment Advocates Is a Mystery
January 14, 2013 06:15 PM EST

Keith Ratliff and John Noveske have both died in mysterious ways within the last few weeks. Both prominent Second Amendment Advocates, their demise comes amid a raging gun control debate in America.

OriginalAs reported by the New York Times, Ratliff's "passion for firearms made him something of a celebrity on the Internet." He enjoyed a massive following for his YouTube channel, being the ninth largest on the wildly popular video sharing site. Ratliff was found on January 3rd "surrounded by several guns, but not the one that killed him" in his Kentucky business that "made and repaired firearms." It is unclear if the weapons were deliberately arranged around Ratliff, which could possibly be interpreted as a statement.

His brother, Kelly's statement "For him not to pull out that gun and try to defend himself, he had to feel comfortable around somebody. Either that or he was ambushed," which lends itself to speculation about a possible personal dispute. However, at this point, the murderer and the motive are still pure speculation. Adam's wife said, "You know, it just doesn't really add up," as reported by the Daily Mail.

He is survived by his wife, Amanda, and his 2-year-old son. One cannot imagine how his loved ones are suffering. There are no words. All one can hope is that the killer will be found and Ratliff's friends and family will someday be able to find peace.

John Noveske, a battle rifle manufacturer, on the other hand, was killed in a "single vehicle" car accident. While navigating a turn, his car "traveled across the oncoming lane onto the dirt highway shoulder until it struck two large boulders," flipped over, and Noveske was reportedly ejected from the vehicle. It is particularly strange, because the accident occurred by Noveske's residence. One would think he would be familiar enough with the roads to anticipate a tight curve. The fatal accident is still being investigated.

Some sites have made the observation that Noveske made a controversial connection..............

Offline mishca09

  • Q
  • *
  • Posts: 11386
Re: 2nd Amendment Advocates
« Reply #1 on: January 15, 2013, 03:56:12 PM »
Sounds suspicious.we never really know what people do in their personal life that could lead to them being murdered, I guess it's not far fetched if its government related.  I don't watch the news to much but while in the car today, the radio DJs were discussing possible laws that will be passed and that ny would be one of strictest gun law states.

I'm pretty sure it won't stop people from killing each other young or old. I honestly don't see how these new laws will stop the same things from happening. What I did hear though was that government will make more money, by implementing fines for those that lie on their background checks etc.

Offline tarascon

  • Cro-Magnon
  • ****
  • Posts: 698
  • Gender: Male
  • Try again. Fail again. Fail better.
Re: 2nd Amendment Advocates
« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2013, 07:43:18 AM »
 This is a complex issue. As a non-citizen, I do not have the right to bear arms. Would I own a gun if I were a citizen? No. Does the right to bear arms make it easier to kill someone? Absolutely yes. Will folks still murder each other if we couldn't own guns (or regulation was stricter)? Yes, as mishca09 points out. Do I believe that the "government" has the obligation or right to control the private lives of its citizens (provided that they didn't hurt anyone)? No. This goes for topics such as personal drug use, abortion, etc. Should there be some oversight on the subject of personal weapons? Yes. Please.
  The law itself was written during a period of US history when militia groups were sort of seen as policing the colonies and staying vigilant against the potential double threat of the Native Americans (ignoring for the moment that their, sometimes, aggressive stance found its own basis in the conquest of their lands) and/or the British Crown.* I think Jefferson's own view regarding this amendment was the idea that the state itself could constitute a threat against it own citizens (the logical mutation of this thought can be seen in the paranoia of some of the more extremist "survivalist" groups). And in this alone, I have to say that an unarmed citizenry is an endangered one. Of course, when the 2nd Amendment was written the gun is question was a musket type and not a semi-automatic.
  I am mindful of what Kurt Godel deduced when studying the Constitution for his own citizenship test. He had discovered a flaw in the U.S. Constitution -- a contradiction which would allow the U.S. to be turned into a dictatorship.**
  I'm not clear if this thread is meant to discuss the pros and cons of what the intention of the 2nd Amendment meant or whether it's the tragedy of the loss of these two lives but the loss of any life is a tragedy. And ill-conceived usage by a largely poorly educated population is a very dangerous state of things. Should there be regulation. Yes. Should guns be banned (and how would this be enacted and to what purpose)? I don't know.

* Colonial legislatures therefore strictly regulated the storage of firearms, with weapons kept in some central place, to be produced only in emergencies or on muster day, or loaned to individuals living in outlying areas. This is a quote from:
« Last Edit: January 21, 2013, 07:46:03 AM by tarascon »
Estragon: I can't go on like this.
Vladimir: That's what you think.