My post was largely in jest, of course (sheesh, some Republicans seem mighty touchy on the subject, huh?), but I did come across this:
which provides a run-down of conservative desires to repeal (or revise, or amend, or alter, or undo, or shit on) a number of other post-10th amendments. So maybe there was a little truth to my jest -
He was about that, among other things. Many other things.
OK, how about:
“THE SECOND AMENDMENT MAKES THE OTHER NINE AMENDMENTS MAKING UP THE BILL OF RIGHTS POSSIBLE”
Of course, this more wordy (not to mention awkward and cumbersome) version might not easily fit on a bumper sticker. How about:
“THE SECOND AMENDMENT MAKES THE REST OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS POSSIBLE”
The has the advantages of accuracy and brevity, but loses the juxtaposition of "THE SECOND AMENDMENT " and “THE OTHER NINE AMENDMENTS.” Oh, well.
Feel better now? 
Or do you actually disagree with the sentiment more than the semantics?
I think the sentiment is retarded, but a more succinct statement would be: “The Second Amendment makes the others possible” or “…all the others” or “… the other amendments possible.”
I doubt that the writer of the bumper sticker really intended to specify the first 10 relative to the remainder. Gun nuts usually aren’t that nuanced in their thinking.
Gun Nuts™ in my experience are pretty focused on the BORs, however, so I think this thread is much ado about nothing. Not that I agree with the sentiment that the Second Amendment makes all the others possible or any dippy shit like that, but I doubt it was the huge gaff (or even a mistake at all) as written.
-XT
The sentiment reflects a very 18th century frame of mind. Maybe even early 19th century. It was certainly true that the colonists and early citizens had a well founded fear of governments not allowing the citizenry to be armed. And, that such an armed citizenry had a reasonable chance to resists a tyranical government. But the truth is, times have changed, and what was a valid concern 200 years ago simply isn’t the same concern we have today.
I’ve never been a huge gun supporter, and while I respect the 2nd amendment for what it is, I wouldn’t be bothered if it was re-written to allow much tighter regulations at the federal level. We don’t need it to defend our freedom.
I’m not sure about the hierarchy of animal shit. I was willing to give a rat’s crap about the OP, but not a monkey turd.
But as I read Rand Rover’s post, he was denying Hentor’s post, which claimed that Republicans wanted to repeal the Fourteenth. You countered that by showing someone wished to repeal a portion of the thirteenth; he responded by saying that a portion is not the whole.
In the case, he’s right and you’re wrong, at least as far as your counterexample. He simply denied the accuracy of the Hentor claim, and your counterexample doesn’t save Hentor’s claim.
He was not vague, nor were you.
I hope that the claim that “The Lord loves a workin’ man” also falls under similar scrutiny. I’d suggest we also look at distinguishing shit and shinola, but I’m afraid that if there’s a hair in either the shit or the shinola, we’ll end up with a page of tedious efforts to split it.
Agree. I think the most likely explanation is that the writer of the bumper sticker was confused, and either thinks there are only 10 amendments, or was mixing up the 10 commandments (as others have pointed out).
Nuance is not a strong suit with black and white thinkers of any stripe.
I seriously doubt it, since most of the Mountain Man nutters who would put such a sticker on their car usually have personal copies of the Constitution in their back pockets and can usually recite the various Amendments from memory…at least in my experience (I have several friends who would fall into this category). Granted, we can’t know what was going through the mind of the folks who printed this up (or ordered the printing), but it seems a bit far fetched that they would just happen to hit on the exact number for the Bill of Rights, if they totally screwed up.
Still, if you want to bust on them for their supposed ignorance I say…More power to ya! Personally, the statement itself is silly enough to just leave it there, but if you also want to think of the folks requested the printing to be snaggle toothed ignorant conservative dumbshits, well…it’s no skin off my nose…
-XT
I find this claim dubious. First, it seems to me that an actual intimate knowledge of the Constitution makes a statement like that on this bumper sticker less likely rather than more. Secondly, it generally seems that people who claim to carry the Constitution around with them are usually bluffing and actually demonstrate a marked ignorance of it. I’d point to Christine O’Donnell as an example of a conservative pretending to expertise on the Constitution who actually had an embarrassing ignorance of it.
shrug You can find it dubious if you like. My sample size is 3, so granted I may be overstating how wide spread knowledge of this is in those circles. They all SEEM to know a hell of a lot more than I do, at least wrt the actual verbiage of the Amendments (I generally Google them when I want to bring back to mind what they are saying, and then only if I happen to be discussing them on this board…hell, I don’t even have the 2nd memorized verbatim).
I sent an email to a friend of mine who is definitely one who would have such a sticker on his car and asked him simply to clarify what he thought the message was. He basically said it was about the Bill of Rights (and that he agreed, of course).
Not the most scientific poll and open to a wide range of error, but what the hell. As I said, it’s not skin off my nose if you want to continue to think the way you do about this Hentor.
-XT
There’s a third reason the sticker is retarded (in addition to the implication that there are only 10 amendments, and the one that an armed citizenry guarantees anything other than shootings).
The sticker is obviously factually incorrect because the Second Amendment did not exist until after the War of Independence.
You obviously never lived the alternate timeline with the 9-amendment Bill of Rights.
This does suggest to me that I would love being in the business of making ironic tea-party slogans. I’d love to sell t-shirts and bumper stickers with self-imploding rhetoric to people.
I live in an alternative time line where 9+1 (the one that supposedly ensures all the others) equals 10. That time line is strange enough…
-XT
Dumbshit incorrectness about the Constitution aside, the sentiment itself has plenty of dumbshit to it. Glurge is always dumbshit. I’d put the one on the bumper sticker about a half-step above this one, but only because it has the virtue of succinctness.
Jeesus. We can’t even agree that stupid bumper sticker is stupid?
Let’s fight ignorance here. If I said I wanted to sing about the four days of Christmas, I’d get laughed at. None of this, “well, it’s only everything under five golden rings that make the original heart of the days of Christmas.” I made a wrong statement. There are more than 10 amendments. THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS!
Eh. Not quite the same, since the Bill of Rights are commonly discussed separately from the other amendments.
I have a bumper sticker. It says, “The first amendment makes your bumper sticker possible”
Yes, but there’s no real distinction between the days of Christmas in the song, but the Bill of Rights being the first ten amendments is a well-known distinction.