April 9th, 1775: Six to eight hundred British regulars, marched upon the arsenal located at Concord Massachusetts,
with the intention of seizing or destroying the arms, powder, shot and other supplies stored there.
They were met, first at Lexington Green by a force consisting of 38 men, then, at the North Bridge (Concord)
by 450 "farmers". That day the best equipped, best trained army in the world was soundly defeated by a force
that one British officer described as a "mere mob without order or discipline".
The American lost 93, k**led, wounded or missing that day; the British 273.
Now why do you think that the Bill of Rights contains Article II?
PeterS wrote:
So what is the citizens right being defined here? "A well regulated M*****a, being necessary to the security of a free State,"
The Founding Fathers were all about the People controlling the government, NOT the other way around!
Smokie wrote:
The Founding Fathers were all about the People controlling the government, NOT the other way around!
Yes, and that is the reason for the 2nd amendment.
Gatsby wrote:
April 9th, 1775: Six to eight hundred British regulars, marched upon the arsenal located at Concord Massachusetts,
with the intention of seizing or destroying the arms, powder, shot and other supplies stored there.
They were met, first at Lexington Green by a force consisting of 38 men, then, at the North Bridge (Concord)
by 450 "farmers". That day the best equipped, best trained army in the world was soundly defeated by a force
that one British officer described as a "mere mob without order or discipline".
The American lost 93, k**led, wounded or missing that day; the British 273.
Now why do you think that the Bill of Rights contains Article II?
April 9th, 1775: Six to eight hundred British regu... (
show quote)
A "well regulated m*****a," not mob gun-rule.
reconreb wrote:
YEEEE,,,,HAAAAAA you mean we ain't regulated already , Hey PA !!! can I get out the Gatl'en Gun Now ?
YEEEEE,, HAAAAA !!!!! We's go'en posome hunt'n ta nite !!!!!!.. Hey Meister ,with that German handle your sporting it looks like you would understand the 2nd Admin. and not have to add to or detract from what is a very clear statement .... Whoops , I guess you could be a N**I ..
Some strong coffee, perhaps?
Super Dave wrote:
I'll bet the liberals that think the 2nd amendment says POTUS controls the arming of the m*****a are the same ones that think the 1st amendment mandates that government stop religious expressions in a school houses and government buildings.
How the Right distorts things is amazing. And always a taste or a meal of conspiracy. Obama was, according to the NRA, going to do away with guns his first term. Upon re-e******n they said it was a ruse that Obama passed several looser restrictions on guns: FEMA and his secret Soviet Army were at that moment in black helicopters to confiscate all guns and usher in the New World Order. Reality is very harsh for the Right.
Super Dave wrote:
The facts are very clear. The M*****a is to be regulated (supported), but citizens are not to have their right to arms infringed upon.
Again, 100% of the Bill of Rights is a limitation on government. 0% of the Bill of Rights is a limitation on citizens.
How bloody stupid are you? We the people were given the right to infringe on our rights where necessary, like in the 1st amendment infringements of free speech called libel and plagiarism.
PeterS wrote:
Supported? So how was the government supposed to know if the m*****a was properly armed and trained in order to make up a sufficient fighting force to protect this country? That was the purpose of the m*****a you know--to provide for a fighting force sufficient to protect the county. Was the president supposed to think that this would happen all by itself. When he called up the m*****a did he not care what he would find?
And are you saying the government can pose no regulation on the weapons that someone can own? Remember, the biggest responsibility government has is ensuring the safety of it's citizens. How could government do so if it can't prevent the types of weapons that we might obtain. Timothy McVeigh was free to build a huge bomb--the only thing illegal was for him to detonate it. We should be able to buy machine guns if we want, or rocket launchers, or grenades, or any type of armament that we might so desire. The only laws controlling them is after their misuse.
Supported? So how was the government supposed to k... (
show quote)
The 2nd Amendment, parsed: (Because it is part of the established law of the land, being ratified by the Federal Government, representing our nation, "we the people" refers to the populace in general and states specifically.) The Federal government grants the right of all states to maintain "a well regulated m*****a, and that right (of we the people) shall not be infringed. Duh?
When the document was drafted, well regulated meant well supported, not well stifled!
Super Dave wrote:
The facts are very clear. The M*****a is to be regulated (supported), but citizens are not to have their right to arms infringed upon.
Again, 100% of the Bill of Rights is a limitation on government. 0% of the Bill of Rights is a limitation on citizens.
If you look into any writing on this topic, it is not that "citizens are not to have their right to arms infringed upon" but the state's formation of a well-regulated m*****a, which consists of we the people. "A m*****a, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves …"
Smokie wrote:
The Founding Fathers were all about the People controlling the government, NOT the other way around!
No, the majority of the Founding Fathers and our Constitution was meant to avoid a democracy: most had a very low opinion of self-governance and put such safeguards in the Constitution to protect America from such madness.
Our present way of arriving at a candidate, would sicken our Founding Fathers.
Meister wrote:
No, the majority of the Founding Fathers and our Constitution was meant to avoid a democracy: most had a very low opinion of self-governance and put such safeguards in the Constitution to protect America from such madness.
Our present way of arriving at a candidate, would sicken our Founding Fathers.
The topic is the 2nd Amendment.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.