2nd amendment
-
"sigh" Come on, Doug, some of us also live in NE Oh, and the heat hasn't gotten to us....
*************************************
Doug -
Militia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaFor other uses, see Militia (disambiguation).A militia /mแตปหlษชสษ/[1]generally is an army or other fighting unit that is composed of non-professional fighters, citizens of a nation or subjects of a state or government who can be called upon to enter a combat situation, as opposed to a professional force of regular, full-time military personnel, or historically, members of the warrior nobility class (e.g., knights or samurai). Unable to hold their own against properly trained and equipped professional forces, it is common for militias to engage in guerrilla warfare or defense instead of being used in open attacks and offensive actions.
-
and it isn't that the "What I find interesting in this is that the NRA does not acknowledge the first sentence at it's headquarters."
nothin.
"SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" is the main point of the entire 2nd Amendment.
-
The definition of militia is correct now. But wait, congress has changed that definition more t6han once. Interesting reading if you look up the meaning of the word in 1776. Also read Federalist paper 29. Thats not interpretation of what the founding fathers said. It's their own words. And for the record, why bash people for honest dialog? Seems like an argument of weakness to me. The far left and right are both whacko.
-
And by the by. The term is "well regulated militia"....
-
It's not the same as the Army at all Doug. We had an army in 1771. They wore red coats and funny hats.
WSS
This. The citizens were meant to be a check against a tyrannical govermment if a new one were to arise after ousting the Brits.
Well regulated militia. I'm curious if you include those 2 words. And in histrical court documents this was regarded as a States Rights issue. But now we have the US armed forces. They're also quite well regulated as well as State National Guard units.This. The citizens were meant to be a check against a tyrannical govermment if a new one were to arise after ousting the Brits.
Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against sporting or home defense weapons. I sit on my back deck and plink a lot. I'm old skool tho and go back to a time before the NRA with the huge money and propaganda changed definitions and shout down rational discussion. You should not have access to weapons that are more military than sporting. If you really need 30-40 rounds to drop a deer, I would deny your hunting license too. If you can't shoot straight, you shouldn't be playing with it and if you don't know you can't shoot straight, you're too friggin stupid to be trusted. And this is honest to gawd truth here.... There is no such thing as a gun accident. That is always gun stupidity!
-
gun ownership is not all about hunting.
Your home gets attacked by a gang of hoods,
you want a single shot shotgun?
I think you plink with a beer can, and aren't a gun owner. You
aren't making any sense.
The resistance in France was "well-regulated" without being an army.
the colonists were "well-regulated", without being army.
There can't be any serious discussion when you invent your own definitions and nuances
of words to try to make your point.
If it walks like a hard core liberal, posts like a hard core liberal, and flaps it's jaws like a hard core liberal...
it's a hard core liberal.
-
Your perverted definition of militia doesn't matter. It says they right to KEEP and BEAR arms shall not be infringed.
-
-
I had that question as well:
How are our gun owners a "well regulated militia"? Shouldn't we require some kind of training? Some kind of regulation, to make them a functioning militia?
Also, how can Billy bob with his rifle defend us from a developed nation attacking? What do they do against jets and tanks? Shouldn't we allow more heavy duty arms for proper defense?
-
The Bill of Rights uses the term person for an individual. It also uses the term people which was recognized to mean the state. At least that was how the Supreme court saw it. But then it got changed and I am becoming of the opinion that it was done for money and nothing else. Sorta the same as what is making Trump popular. Congress never seems to ask if something is good for America or Americans. A person or the people? A militia would be the Freemen group out west. A well regulated militia would be the YARS base or Camp Ravenna....unless you're a lobbyist
-
gun ownership is not all about hunting.
Your home gets attacked by a gang of hoods,
you want a single shot shotgun?
I think you plink with a beer can, and aren't a gun owner. You
aren't making any sense.
The resistance in France was "well-regulated" without being an army.
the colonists were "well-regulated", without being army.
There can't be any serious discussion when you invent your own definitions and nuances
of words to try to make your point.
If it walks like a hard core liberal, posts like a hard core liberal, and flaps it's jaws like a hard core liberal...
it's a hard core liberal.
Your wrong, I'm an independant that happens to read up on American history. I pretty much dislike both parties or anyone else that tells me how to think. It's your right to feel that way and have that opinion and I would fight to the death for your right to it no matter how ignorant I may find it. The braiwashing does emanate from both sides of the aislegun ownership is not all about hunting.
Your home gets attacked by a gang of hoods,
you want a single shot shotgun?
I think you plink with a beer can, and aren't a gun owner. You
aren't making any sense.
The resistance in France was "well-regulated" without being an army.
the colonists were "well-regulated", without being army.
There can't be any serious discussion when you invent your own definitions and nuances
of words to try to make your point.
If it walks like a hard core liberal, posts like a hard core liberal, and flaps it's jaws like a hard core liberal...
it's a hard core liberal.
-
gun ownership is not all about hunting.
Your home gets attacked by a gang of hoods,
you want a single shot shotgun?
I think you plink with a beer can, and aren't a gun owner. You
aren't making any sense.
The resistance in France was "well-regulated" without being an army.
the colonists were "well-regulated", without being army.
There can't be any serious discussion when you invent your own definitions and nuances
of words to try to make your point.
If it walks like a hard core liberal, posts like a hard core liberal, and flaps it's jaws like a hard core liberal...
it's a hard core liberal.
Your wrong, I'm an independant that happens to read up on American history. I pretty much dislike both parties or anyone else that tells me how to think. It's your right to feel that way and have that opinion and I would fight to the death for your right to it no matter how ignorant I may find it. The braiwashing does emanate from both sides of the aislegun ownership is not all about hunting.
Your home gets attacked by a gang of hoods,
you want a single shot shotgun?
I think you plink with a beer can, and aren't a gun owner. You
aren't making any sense.
The resistance in France was "well-regulated" without being an army.
the colonists were "well-regulated", without being army.
There can't be any serious discussion when you invent your own definitions and nuances
of words to try to make your point.
If it walks like a hard core liberal, posts like a hard core liberal, and flaps it's jaws like a hard core liberal...
it's a hard core liberal.
-
Your wrong, I'm an independant that happens to read up on American history. I pretty much dislike both parties or anyone else that tells me how to think. It's your right to feel that way and have that opinion and I would fight to the death for your right to it no matter how ignorant I may find it. The braiwashing does emanate from both sides of the aislegun ownership is not all about hunting.
Your home gets attacked by a gang of hoods,
you want a single shot shotgun?
I think you plink with a beer can, and aren't a gun owner. You
aren't making any sense.
The resistance in France was "well-regulated" without being an army.
the colonists were "well-regulated", without being army.
There can't be any serious discussion when you invent your own definitions and nuances
of words to try to make your point.
If it walks like a hard core liberal, posts like a hard core liberal, and flaps it's jaws like a hard core liberal...
it's a hard core liberal.
Your wrong, I'm an independant that happens to read up on American history. I pretty much dislike both parties or anyone else that tells me how to think. It's your right to feel that way and have that opinion and I would fight to the death for your right to it no matter how ignorant I may find it. The braiwashing does emanate from both sides of the aisle
Fuck you and your opinion.
"You planning on having a long relationship with that glass or are you going to drink it? Drink up, man. Maybe we can get another.โ - Janis Joplin, 1970. -
The Bill of Rights uses the term person for an individual. It also uses the term people which was recognized to mean the state. At least that was how the Supreme court saw it. But then it got changed and I am becoming of the opinion that it was done for money and nothing else. Sorta the same as what is making Trump popular. Congress never seems to ask if something is good for America or Americans. A person or the people? A militia would be the Freemen group out west. A well regulated militia would be the YARS base or Camp Ravenna....unless you're a lobbyist
The Bill of Rights uses the term person for an individual. It also uses the term people which was recognized to mean the state. At least that was how the Supreme court saw it. But then it got changed and I am becoming of the opinion that it was done for money and nothing else. Sorta the same as what is making Trump popular. Congress never seems to ask if something is good for America or Americans. A person or the people? A militia would be the Freemen group out west. A well regulated militia would be the YARS base or Camp Ravenna....unless you're a lobbyist
The us isn't a full blown democracy, we're a republic so we elect a few people to make decisions based on what we the people want.
However many tend to believe we're an oligarchy, where only a few make decisions for the masses. I agree with that belief.
-
Your wrong, I'm an independant that happens to read up on American history. I pretty much dislike both parties or anyone else that tells me how to think. It's your right to feel that way and have that opinion and I would fight to the death for your right to it no matter how ignorant I may find it. The braiwashing does emanate from both sides of the aisle
Fuck you and your opinion.
Fuck you and your opinion.
Brilliant! well said. Did you know that Congress has the authority to quell any and all insurections? I could tell you to eat shit but I won't. It's a lousy point. And I'm not gay so keep it in your pants soldier boy
-
I had that question as well:
How are our gun owners a "well regulated militia"? Shouldn't we require some kind of training? Some kind of regulation, to make them a functioning militia?
Also, how can Billy bob with his rifle defend us from a developed nation attacking? What do they do against jets and tanks? Shouldn't we allow more heavy duty arms for proper defense?
A militia is only formed in times of need. Do you think they required farmers to be trained? They only required them to pick up a gun and fight when it was necessary. So far the only other time a militia has formed wad early in the civil war.I had that question as well:
How are our gun owners a "well regulated militia"? Shouldn't we require some kind of training? Some kind of regulation, to make them a functioning militia?
Also, how can Billy bob with his rifle defend us from a developed nation attacking? What do they do against jets and tanks? Shouldn't we allow more heavy duty arms for proper defense?
Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds weren't all the same and to conquer was their goal. So He built his great empires and he slaughtered his own kind, and he died a confused man and killed himself in his own mind... -
If the right of the people to keep and bear arms were infringed there would be no one to form a militia if some undetermined future leader decided to seize private assets or sone other such power play. It's all too easy to imagine since history is full of incidents of it.
Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds weren't all the same and to conquer was their goal. So He built his great empires and he slaughtered his own kind, and he died a confused man and killed himself in his own mind... -
Fuck you and your opinion.
Brilliant! well said. Did you know that Congress has the authority to quell any and all insurections? I could tell you to eat shit but I won't. It's a lousy point. And I'm not gay so keep it in your pants soldier boy
Brilliant! well said. Did you know that Congress has the authority to quell any and all insurections? I could tell you to eat shit but I won't. It's a lousy point. And I'm not gay so keep it in your pants soldier boy
You sure as hell sound gay fag.
-
If the right of the people to keep and bear arms were infringed there would be no one to form a militia if some undetermined future leader decided to seize private assets or sone other such power play. It's all too easy to imagine since history is full of incidents of it.
If the right of the people to keep and bear arms were infringed there would be no one to form a militia if some undetermined future leader decided to seize private assets or sone other such power play. It's all too easy to imagine since history is full of incidents of it.
Ok, but my questions arise from reading the early Supreme Court rulings which say that "A well regulated militia" refers to the individual states to form their own armies. And they did. And they used the original authors of the Bill of Rights to justify their decisions. So back then what the Founding Fathers meant is different than what is told today. Changing a story is a very good sign of a lie, and if you tell a lie enough it becomes a dishonest truth. Maybe I'm reading the wrong stuff but it seems that legal transcripts, original documents and original authors is the way to go. Maybe Heston and the Nuge would be more insightful? lol
-
A militia is only formed in times of need. Do you think they required farmers to be trained? They only required them to pick up a gun and fight when it was necessary. So far the only other time a militia has formed wad early in the civil war.I had that question as well:
How are our gun owners a "well regulated militia"? Shouldn't we require some kind of training? Some kind of regulation, to make them a functioning militia?
Also, how can Billy bob with his rifle defend us from a developed nation attacking? What do they do against jets and tanks? Shouldn't we allow more heavy duty arms for proper defense?
A militia is only formed in times of need. Do you think they required farmers to be trained? They only required them to pick up a gun and fight when it was necessary. So far the only other time a militia has formed wad early in the civil war.
So is time of need invasion, or just at war? And what about the second point in my post?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better ๐
Register Login