GUN GRAB !!! (Page 5): The only reason the fed. requires a registry is so they know who owns firearms ! What purpose does this solve ? Other than to INFRINGE on my Constitutional...

zillaorange

woodguru wrote:

You are aware that there are many states that laws are not in force? Which is the problem, this constant rhetoric that there are laws "in place" is pure BS... does every state have laws in place like California does? Not hardly. No law being looked at interferes with a normal person's ability to buy guns, I just bought a shotgun and when I was picking it up bought a nice sized pistol for concealed carry. I have to wait ten days, but 20 wouldn't k**l me.

The only reason the fed. requires a registry is so they know who owns firearms ! What purpose does this solve ? Other than to INFRINGE on my Constitutional Rights ?

zillaorange

Bad Bob wrote:

Where is the "well regulated"?

Orderly !

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

zillaorange wrote:

The only reason the fed. requires a registry is so they know who owns firearms ! What purpose does this solve ? Other than to INFRINGE on my Constitutional Rights ?

One of the first thing that Hitler did when he seized power was to impose strict gun registration and that enabled him to identify people and then confiscate their guns.

zillaorange

byronglimish wrote:

One of the first thing that Hitler did when he seized power was to impose strict gun registration and that enabled him to identify people and then confiscate their guns.

That's what il duce cuomo tried here in N. Y. It didn't work out for him !!! Heads up, the man's a bald face liar !!! Claims he doesn't want to run for Pres. 2020 ! LOL

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer , our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future"

Adolf Hitler..1935.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

zillaorange wrote:

That's what il duce cuomo tried here in N. Y. It didn't work out for him !!! Heads up, the man's a bald face liar !!! Claims he doesn't want to run for Pres. 2020 ! LOL

I can't hardly stand his lying face.

Bad Bob Loc: Virginia

Smedley_buzk**l wrote:

Before you expose your ignorance any further, (in the unlikely event such a thing can happen) you should look up the meaning of well-regulated as it was defined in 1790. I know that would probably tax your limited mental resources to the utmost, but do try and keep up, troll. There is more to this posting business that typing f this or f that and posting childish pictures that do nothing other than reaffirm your ignorance, which needs no further reaffirmation.

And arms defined in 1790.

Smedley_buzkill

Bad Bob wrote:

And arms defined in 1790.

Basically, anything capable of being used as an offensive or defensive weapon. This included firearms, swords, bows and arrows, cannons, spears, or wh**ever. I can also provide you with the definition of well-regulated in 1790, but first I would like to see if you are smart enough to find it yourself.
Fat chance.

Bad Bob Loc: Virginia

Smedley_buzk**l wrote:

Basically, anything capable of being used as an offensive or defensive weapon. This included firearms, swords, bows and arrows, cannons, spears, or wh**ever. I can also provide you with the definition of well-regulated in 1790, but first I would like to see if you are smart enough to find it yourself.
Fat chance.

F the 2nd amendment.

Smedley_buzkill

Bad Bob wrote:

F the 2nd amendment.

How does it feel to be the poster child for Invincible Ignorance?

Bad Bob Loc: Virginia

Smedley_buzk**l wrote:

How does it feel to be the poster child for Invincible Ignorance?

I don't know, tell me how it feels.

Smedley_buzkill

Bad Bob wrote:

I don't know, tell me how it feels.

Of course you don't know. That would require an IQ of more than room temperature. You do serve a useful purpose; anytime I do something that makes me feel stupid, I just read any of your posts at random and I am reminded what really stupid looks like. Now go on back to your nasal strip mining activities and try not to eat the resultant excavations.

Bad Bob Loc: Virginia

Smedley_buzk**l wrote:

Of course you don't know. That would require an IQ of more than room temperature. You do serve a useful purpose; anytime I do something that makes me feel stupid, I just read any of your posts at random and I am reminded what really stupid looks like. Now go on back to your nasal strip mining activities and try not to eat the resultant excavations.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

Smedley_buzk**l wrote:

Basically, anything capable of being used as an offensive or defensive weapon. This included firearms, swords, bows and arrows, cannons, spears, or wh**ever. I can also provide you with the definition of well-regulated in 1790, but first I would like to see if you are smart enough to find it yourself.
Fat chance.

Don't forget when someone like me goes full on hillbilly..chairs, tire irons, two by fours, bricks, biting...and so on.

zillaorange

Blade_Runner wrote:

Your total ignorance of our nation's founding is noted. The glaring clue in your thoroughly ridiculous opinion is the use of the word "collective". That is about as Marxian as one can get. C*******m all the way, hey Kev?

There was no National Guard when the 2nd amendment was written, the m*****a referred to in the 2nd amendment is neither a federal or state controlled military force, it is every American capable of bearing arms.

If I thought you were capable of honest research, I'd recommend you study Federalist #29 and #46. Our founders made it quite clear who and what the "m*****a" is.

Gun Control Myth: The Second Amendment Makes Clear Guns Aren't Just For the Military

A common misconception about the Second Amendment is that it only protects arms for the m*****a, or in modern day, the National Guard or other government-organized military group. This is simply untrue; a belief arising from ignorance about the language used in the Second Amendment and understanding its meaning as it was understood originally when the Bill of Rights was ratified. Fortunately, the Supreme Court helps us understand the original intent of the Second Amendment and the words used in their historical context.

In the landmark Supreme Court case, D.C. vs Heller, the court explains that all citizens are the m*****a; the Second Amendment is an individual right, just like every other right protected in the Bill of Rights, and is independent of membership in any organized group or military unit.

The Second Amendment reads: “A well regulated M*****a, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

There are two clauses that comprise the Second Amendment, an operative clause, and a prefatory clause.

Operative clause: "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The operative clause is the actual protected right; kind of the 'meat and potatoes.' The court wrote: "1. Operative Clause. a. 'Right of the People.' [used 3 times in Bill of Rights] ... All three of these instances unambiguously refer to individual rights, not 'collective' rights, or rights that may be exercised only through participation in some corporate body." (p.5).

Prefatory clause: "A well regulated M*****a, being necessary to the security of a free State."

The prefatory clause is the lead-in that “announces a purpose” for the operative clause. The court stated: "The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms"(Heller law syllabus p.1).

The court also stated: "The Amendment could be rephrased, 'Because a well regulated M*****a is necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.'” (Heller law syllabus p.3, emphasis added).

Note: “syllabus” in law briefs is not like a college course summary, but “a short note preceding the text of a reported case that briefly summarizes the rulings of the court on the points decided in the case."

The M*****a is all of the people

The court states: "It was clearly an individual right, having nothing wh**ever to do with service in a m*****a" (p.20), adding "Reading the Second Amendment as protecting only the right to “keep and bear Arms” in an organized m*****a therefore fits poorly with the operative clause’s description of the holder of that right as “the people” (p.7).

It's clear from the court's ruling regarding the relationship between the prefatory and operative clause (p.25) that the m*****a meant that all of the people were armed.

“The 'm*****a' comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Anti-federalists feared that the federal government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ m*****a, enabling a politicized standing army or a select m*****a to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ m*****a would be preserved” (Heller law syllabus, p.2, emphasis added).

“Keep arms” was simply a common way of referring to possessing arms, for m*****amen and everyone else" (p.9).

Congress creates the Army and Navy, but not the already existent m*****a

The court states that while Congress is given the power in Article I of the Constitution to create the Army and the Navy, it may simply organize the m*****a because it already existed:

"Unlike armies and navies, which Congress is given the power to create, the m*****a is assumed by Article I already to be in existence. Congress is given the power ... to organize “the” m*****a, connoting a body already in existence," (p.23).

Second Amendment doesn't mean any organized military unit

We find on page 11: "In numerous instances, 'bear arms' was unambiguously used to refer to the carrying of weapons outside of an organized m*****a," adding further that, "It is clear from those formulations that 'bear arms' did not refer only to carrying a weapon in an organized military unit" (p.11-12). Fun fact: The National Guard, as it exists today, wasn't created until 1903.

So we see that at the time of its writing, it was clearly understood that the Second Amendment protected the right of all citizenry to have and carry arms. Our ignorance of the terminology, and perhaps the phrasing of the two clauses has clouded this t***h, so obvious to our Founders. The Second Amendment means all of us, since we are all since we are all the m*****a, and in no way means only an organized military unit or the National Guard.

Your total ignorance of our nation's founding is n... (show quote)