One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Here's the proof. Now STFU!
Oct 31, 2016 20:24:16   #
Little Ball of Hate
 
Here is my proof that the Framers intended the militia to be the people themselves and keep and possess their arms.

A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." - Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, WHO ARE PEACEABLE CITIZENS, from keeping their own arms; …" Samuel Adams quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, "Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State"

"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." - George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops." - Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country." - James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

Any questions?

Reply
Oct 31, 2016 20:32:54   #
robmull Loc: florida
 
Little Ball of Hate wrote:
Here is my proof that the Framers intended the militia to be the people themselves and keep and possess their arms.

A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." - Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, WHO ARE PEACEABLE CITIZENS, from keeping their own arms; …" Samuel Adams quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, "Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State"

"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." - George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops." - Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country." - James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

Any questions?
Here is my proof that the Framers intended the mil... (show quote)











None whatsoever, Lboh!!! Our Creator and our Founding Fathers made it a PATRIOTIC, CONSTITUTIONALIST, AMERICAN OBLIGATION, to "civilly disobey" ANY law, health ordinance, regulation or executive fiat that goes "under over or around {Pelosi} our Constitution with (D)esigns to (D)isarm America. No ifs ands or buts!!! GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO TRUMP!!!

Reply
Oct 31, 2016 20:36:01   #
MarvinSussman
 
Little Ball of Hate wrote:
Here is my proof that the Framers intended the militia to be the people themselves and keep and possess their arms.

A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." - Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, WHO ARE PEACEABLE CITIZENS, from keeping their own arms; …" Samuel Adams quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, "Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State"

"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." - George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops." - Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country." - James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

Any questions?
Here is my proof that the Framers intended the mil... (show quote)


You are unable to document a single statement by anyone important threatening to confiscate legally obtained weapons from law-abiding citizens. The above is garbage implying the opposite.

Reply
 
 
Oct 31, 2016 20:45:17   #
Little Ball of Hate
 
MarvinSussman wrote:
You are unable to document a single statement by anyone important threatening to confiscate legally obtained weapons from law-abiding citizens. The above is garbage implying the opposite.


There is a city, or state. Can't remember the name. It's legal to buy a gun. However, there is no open carry law, and they will not issue concealed carry permits. This has effectively stripped these people of the right to keep and bear arms. How does it feel to be so stupid? But then, you aren't stupid. Are you. You know we're right, yet you continue to sing the praises of gun control. You're not fooling anyone. Then again, maybe you are that stupid.

Reply
Oct 31, 2016 20:51:34   #
MarvinSussman
 
Little Ball of Hate wrote:
There is a city, or state. Can't remember the name. It's legal to buy a gun. However, there is no open carry law, and they will not issue concealed carry permits. This has effectively stripped these people of the right to keep and bear arms. How does it feel to be so stupid? But then, you aren't stupid. Are you. You know we're right, yet you continue to sing the praises of gun control. You're not fooling anyone. Then again, maybe you are that stupid.


Nice try but being able to carry a gun wherever you go is not the same as a militia being able to defend itself against the fedrill gummint. You know that but think I am stupid enough not to catch you misleading the morons who inhabit this echo chamber.

Reply
Oct 31, 2016 21:04:19   #
Little Ball of Hate
 
MarvinSussman wrote:
Nice try but being able to carry a gun wherever you go is not the same as a militia being able to defend itself against the fedrill gummint. You know that but think I am stupid enough not to catch you misleading the morons who inhabit this echo chamber.


And just how, exactly, would a militia be able to resist the government if they are not allowed to leave their homes with a gun? Damn! You are one dishonest F*CK!

Reply
Oct 31, 2016 21:13:04   #
MarvinSussman
 
Little Ball of Hate wrote:
And just how, exactly, would a militia be able to resist the government if they are not allowed to leave their homes with a gun? Damn! You are one dishonest F*CK!


Walking through a school yard is not the same as resisting fedrill gummint troops coming through your neighborhood.

You know that but think you can hoodwink the morons on this echo chamber without me catching you. You don't need a gun to walk in public on a peaceful sunny day unless you are a maniac.

Reply
 
 
Oct 31, 2016 21:36:42   #
Little Ball of Hate
 
MarvinSussman wrote:
Walking through a school yard is not the same as resisting fedrill gummint troops coming through your neighborhood.

You know that but think you can hoodwink the morons on this echo chamber without me catching you. You don't need a gun to walk in public on a peaceful sunny day unless you are a maniac.


Can you really be that stupid? There are hundreds of thousands of criminals who own guns out there. And you're saying that no one, especially women, do not need a gun outside their home? Do you know how many women are raped every year? Do you know how many are killed because they were not armed? You're too stupid to live. I believe I have sufficient cause to add your ignorant, deceitful ass to my ignore list. If you were at least entertaining, I wouldn't do it. After all, stupid can be funny. But you can't even get that right.



Reply
Oct 31, 2016 22:56:59   #
kenjay Loc: Arkansas
 
MarvinSussman wrote:
Walking through a school yard is not the same as resisting fedrill gummint troops coming through your neighborhood.

You know that but think you can hoodwink the morons on this echo chamber without me catching you. You don't need a gun to walk in public on a peaceful sunny day unless you are a maniac.

Marvin STFU if I have the constitutional right, which I do then exercising that right doesn't qualify me as a maniac. Your statement does qualify you as a morally bankrupt moron.

Reply
Nov 1, 2016 00:25:11   #
Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON
 
MarvinSussman wrote:
You are unable to document a single statement by anyone important threatening to confiscate legally obtained weapons from law-abiding citizens. The above is garbage implying the opposite.
Obviously the federally subsidized public indoctrination system and its liberal union "teachers" do not instruct its "students" to actually listen to what the "important" liberal party hacks (elected or otherwise) have to say about critical issues. Instead, they are taught only to focus their anti-American rants on the US constitution and "the deplorables" loyal to it.

How many examples of a "single statement by anyone important threatening to confiscate legally obtained weapons from law-abiding citizens" do you want?

How about we begin with this one:

On CBS-TV's 60 Minutes, February 5, 1995, Senator Diane Feinstein said, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in.

Reply
Nov 1, 2016 11:59:21   #
Little Ball of Hate
 
Blade_Runner wrote:
Obviously the federally subsidized public indoctrination system and its liberal union "teachers" do not instruct its "students" to actually listen to what the "important" liberal party hacks (elected or otherwise) have to say about critical issues. Instead, they are taught only to focus their anti-American rants on the US constitution and "the deplorables" loyal to it.

How many examples of a "single statement by anyone important threatening to confiscate legally obtained weapons from law-abiding citizens" do you want?

How about we begin with this one:

On CBS-TV's 60 Minutes, February 5, 1995, Senator Diane Feinstein said, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in.
Obviously the federally subsidized public indoctri... (show quote)


Thank you. I was gonna look for something like that, but I didn't want to waste anymore time on that punk. He will no longer haunt MY threads. Life is too short to be dealing with the likes of him. He's the first person I've blocked in almost a month, and he richly deserved it. As I said, if his stupidity was at least entertaining, I could put up with him. But he is just plain obnoxious. He is an affront to the sensibilities of every thinking person.

Reply
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.