One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
As a gun owner, are you part of "a well regulated militia"?
Page 1 of 20 next> last>>
Jun 16, 2016 01:51:19   #
Meister
 
Why is this part of the Second Amendment scrupulously overlooked? The 2nd Amendment clearly does not say that all citizens have the right to bear arms. Maintaining a well regulated militia should not be infringed--and there is just cause for that. But nearly no gun owner is part of a well regulated militia. But "well regulated" and "shall not be infringed" seem to butt-heads. Yet not really. Allowing for a group of authorized citizens under an individual state to maintain a standing army following strict military protocol in the practice and use of its weapons "shall not be infringed." YOU CANNOT OVERLOOK "a well regulated militia."

Reply
Jun 16, 2016 02:29:57   #
Wolf counselor Loc: Heart of Texas
 
WussMeister wrote:
Why is this part of the Second Amendment scrupulously overlooked? The 2nd Amendment clearly does not say that all citizens have the right to bear arms. Maintaining a well regulated militia should not be infringed--and there is just cause for that. But nearly no gun owner is part of a well regulated militia. But "well regulated" and "shall not be infringed" seem to butt-heads. Yet not really. Allowing for a group of authorized citizens under an individual state to maintain a standing army following strict military protocol in the practice and use of its weapons "shall not be infringed." YOU CANNOT OVERLOOK "a well regulated militia."
Why is this part of the Second Amendment scrupulou... (show quote)


Yeah right punk.

So whatever you do, don't try to buy a gun.

You're not a militia man so you can't have a firearm.

The rest of us are militiamen, so you can stay with the women and children while we protect our homeland.

And dont let me hear you even say the word "gun" ever again............WUSS !!

Reply
Jun 16, 2016 03:26:54   #
Ferrous Loc: Pacific North Coast, CA
 
A well regulated Militia would be the patriotic citizens joining ranks of other citizens to fight for the Freedon bestowed upon this.

Thomas Jefferson knew this very well... One of the first things tyrants do is to disarm their citizens.


"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
-Thomas Jefferson, Proposed Virginia Constitution, 1776, Jefferson Papers 344

"False is the idea of utility...that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction (of liberty). The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...such laws serve rather to encourage than to prevent homocides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
Thomas Jefferson 'Commonplace Book' 1775


"And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."

- Thomas Jefferson – 1787

Reply
 
 
Jun 16, 2016 03:29:24   #
PeterS
 
Meister wrote:
Why is this part of the Second Amendment scrupulously overlooked? The 2nd Amendment clearly does not say that all citizens have the right to bear arms. Maintaining a well regulated militia should not be infringed--and there is just cause for that. But nearly no gun owner is part of a well regulated militia. But "well regulated" and "shall not be infringed" seem to butt-heads. Yet not really. Allowing for a group of authorized citizens under an individual state to maintain a standing army following strict military protocol in the practice and use of its weapons "shall not be infringed." YOU CANNOT OVERLOOK "a well regulated militia."
Why is this part of the Second Amendment scrupulou... (show quote)


There is only one clause in the second amendment that matters. Besides, that first clause just mucks things up...

Reply
Jun 16, 2016 03:45:47   #
JW
 
Meister wrote:
Why is this part of the Second Amendment scrupulously overlooked? The 2nd Amendment clearly does not say that all citizens have the right to bear arms. Maintaining a well regulated militia should not be infringed--and there is just cause for that. But nearly no gun owner is part of a well regulated militia. But "well regulated" and "shall not be infringed" seem to butt-heads. Yet not really. Allowing for a group of authorized citizens under an individual state to maintain a standing army following strict military protocol in the practice and use of its weapons "shall not be infringed." YOU CANNOT OVERLOOK "a well regulated militia."
Why is this part of the Second Amendment scrupulou... (show quote)


It would not be so mysterious if you looked up what 'well regulated' meant in 1776.

Reply
Jun 16, 2016 05:58:00   #
Gatsby
 
Try reading the Heller decision before you come up with such BS
Meister wrote:
Why is this part of the Second Amendment scrupulously overlooked? The 2nd Amendment clearly does not say that all citizens have the right to bear arms. Maintaining a well regulated militia should not be infringed--and there is just cause for that. But nearly no gun owner is part of a well regulated militia. But "well regulated" and "shall not be infringed" seem to butt-heads. Yet not really. Allowing for a group of authorized citizens under an individual state to maintain a standing army following strict military protocol in the practice and use of its weapons "shall not be infringed." YOU CANNOT OVERLOOK "a well regulated militia."
Why is this part of the Second Amendment scrupulou... (show quote)

Reply
Jun 16, 2016 06:01:32   #
Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA
 
JW wrote:
It would not be so mysterious if you looked up what 'well regulated' meant in 1776.


Exactly...

Reply
 
 
Jun 16, 2016 07:53:07   #
PeterS
 
JW wrote:
It would not be so mysterious if you looked up what 'well regulated' meant in 1776.


It meant that it was regulated by the state in order to have the ability to be called up and have a uniform fighting force. In a time of war you didn't want a bunch of half trained buffoons but a well trained force capable of dealing with any threat!

Reply
Jun 16, 2016 07:54:17   #
PeterS
 
Gatsby wrote:
Try reading the Heller decision before you come up with such BS


I know, reading the second amendment just wouldn't do would it...

Reply
Jun 16, 2016 07:58:20   #
Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA
 
PeterS wrote:
I know, reading the second amendment just wouldn't do would it...
If you bothered to check, you would know that 'well regulated' meant supported by the government, not banned by the government.

The entire (yes, 100%) Bill of Rights is a limitation on the federal government. Not a single part of the BoR is a limitation on citizen's liberty.

Reply
Jun 16, 2016 08:12:01   #
rjoeholl
 
Meister wrote:
Why is this part of the Second Amendment scrupulously overlooked? The 2nd Amendment clearly does not say that all citizens have the right to bear arms. Maintaining a well regulated militia should not be infringed--and there is just cause for that. But nearly no gun owner is part of a well regulated militia. But "well regulated" and "shall not be infringed" seem to butt-heads. Yet not really. Allowing for a group of authorized citizens under an individual state to maintain a standing army following strict military protocol in the practice and use of its weapons "shall not be infringed." YOU CANNOT OVERLOOK "a well regulated militia."
Why is this part of the Second Amendment scrupulou... (show quote)


YOU CANNOT OVERLOOK that pesky little comma after the word militia. Did you pass reading comprehension in school?

Reply
 
 
Jun 16, 2016 08:31:13   #
robmull Loc: florida
 
Super Dave wrote:
If you bothered to check, you would know that 'well regulated' meant supported by the government, not banned by the government.

The entire (yes, 100%) Bill of Rights is a limitation on the federal government. Not a single part of the BoR is a limitation on citizen's liberty.







That's why it is so important for ANY tyrant to "shred" our "negative" ["BHB"] Constitution and our Bill of Rights, to disarm America. FAT CHANCE!!! The "Marx/Alinsky" crowd has been trying to do THAT since before "red-diaper" baby, Saul Alinsky, was even a toddler!!! Now that 7th century barbaric, pro-Sharia [radical] Islam, has been idiotically hired by the "Infidel," "Marx/Alinsky" crowd [OWS], I'm sure things will continue to go swimmingly for "liberalism," in general, the way it's always been in America; a totally dangerously misguided, mentally-disordered, hypocritical bunch of radical losers who now seem determined and overly excited to do the "DoDo bird" thing; again. TO AMERICA!!! It's time to throw these idiots, morons, anti-Americans and 7th century pro-Sharia law traitors off OUR 21st century free-market American train!!! Hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO TRUMP!!!

Reply
Jun 16, 2016 08:49:59   #
Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA
 
robmull wrote:
That's why it is so important for ANY tyrant to "shred" our "negative" ["BHB"] Constitution and our Bill of Rights, to disarm America. FAT CHANCE!!! The "Marx/Alinsky" crowd has been trying to do THAT since before "red-diaper" baby, Saul Alinsky, was even a toddler!!! Now that 7th century barbaric, pro-Sharia [radical] Islam, has been idiotically hired by the "Infidel," "Marx/Alinsky" crowd [OWS], I'm sure things will continue to go swimmingly for "liberalism," in general, the way it's always been in America; a totally dangerously misguided, mentally-disordered, hypocritical bunch of radical losers who now seem determined and overly excited to do the "DoDo bird" thing; again. TO AMERICA!!! It's time to throw these idiots, morons, anti-Americans and 7th century pro-Sharia law traitors off OUR 21st century free-market American train!!! Hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO TRUMP!!!
That's why it is so important for ANY tyrant to &q... (show quote)

While you're through cheerleading you might look at Trump's past and present positions.

Trump reacts to Orlando by joining Democrats, speaking in favor of allowing POTUS to unilaterally revoke 2A by putting citizens on a terror watch list. Perhaps he'll make Lois Learner his Sec of Homeland Security.

Reply
Jun 16, 2016 09:05:47   #
no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun
 
Meister wrote:
Why is this part of the Second Amendment scrupulously overlooked? The 2nd Amendment clearly does not say that all citizens have the right to bear arms. Maintaining a well regulated militia should not be infringed--and there is just cause for that. But nearly no gun owner is part of a well regulated militia. But "well regulated" and "shall not be infringed" seem to butt-heads. Yet not really. Allowing for a group of authorized citizens under an individual state to maintain a standing army following strict military protocol in the practice and use of its weapons "shall not be infringed." YOU CANNOT OVERLOOK "a well regulated militia."
Why is this part of the Second Amendment scrupulou... (show quote)


Why don't you read this great explanation about a well regulated militia?

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/gun01.htm

Reply
Jun 16, 2016 09:06:44   #
lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas
 
Meister wrote:
Why is this part of the Second Amendment scrupulously overlooked? The 2nd Amendment clearly does not say that all citizens have the right to bear arms. Maintaining a well regulated militia should not be infringed--and there is just cause for that. But nearly no gun owner is part of a well regulated militia. But "well regulated" and "shall not be infringed" seem to butt-heads. Yet not really. Allowing for a group of authorized citizens under an individual state to maintain a standing army following strict military protocol in the practice and use of its weapons "shall not be infringed." YOU CANNOT OVERLOOK "a well regulated militia."
Why is this part of the Second Amendment scrupulou... (show quote)


SCOTUS chose to overlook it, even though the famous and much revered conservative Justice Scalia said that they would HAVE to deal with that phrase - eventually. The cowards succumbed to popular belief, rather than the rule of law.

Reply
Page 1 of 20 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.