So since Buffalo, it's been Laguna Woods, Uvalde and now Tulsa.
How soon have we forgotten about the victims of Buffalo.
It's been barely a fortnight
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Nothing On The Buffalo Mass Shooting?
Collapse
Google Ads
Collapse
X
-
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Who makes up the militia? The people duh!
So let's focus on the word militia instead of the word people
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Deschet View Post
Yes. They were mindful of these things. They were also very fearful of a standing army, and as they had no design for there to be one, included the 2A in the Bill of Rights.
Madison (and Mason) indeed proposed it primarily to bolster state militias. Remember, that the 2A was an anti-federalist measure and, the well-regulated militia clause can be argued as clearly defining the rationale for gun ownership. After all, these were not men that minced words, and if they didn’t intend to qualify the amendment, they wouldn’t have included the militia clause. As they did include it, it’s therefore reasonable to conclude this.
Regardless, it’s not logical to conclude that any civilian force, no matter how armed-to-the-teeth, could ever, at this point, present even a tiny threat to the government. Thus, the militia point as a bulwark against government tyranny is rendered moot.
IIRC, that quote was penned to Madison after the 2 amendment was written, but before being finalized because Mason felt the term Militia was ambiguous and wanted it worded differently. That is when Madison added the line "the right of the people" to the second amendment. It's been a while since I have researched the constitutional congress and read most of the letters between the framers though, so I may have the order on that wrong.Last edited by DSMoneypit; 05-28-2022, 04:31 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by DSMoneypit View Post
https://www.rcfp.org/journals/wake-j...ews-publishin/
This is why I don't trust the government with a registry. That information has, until recently, been public record. News agencies have used this information to intimidate carry permit holders in the past. They got their hand slapped, and now they're trying to say that proposed legislation to prevent them from having access to that information is an infringement of their rights. With the constant push by the anti-gun lobby to restrict, ban, abolish everything related to guns, I have no doubt they would use a registry to intimidate gun owners.
If the govt wanted to fuck you personally don't you think they have your IRS info, service record, census record, voter id and driver's license?
Why do you trust the govt with that info but not gun ownership?
If you show any aggressive behavior using your guns, the cops can 55-19 your Marine ass in a second.
Please stop your stupid slippery slope arguments about gun registry.
Last edited by sctrojan; 05-27-2022, 10:24 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Deschet View Post
Yes. They were mindful of these things. They were also very fearful of a standing army, and as they had no design for there to be one, included the 2A in the Bill of Rights.
Madison (and Mason) indeed proposed it primarily to bolster state militias. Remember, that the 2A was an anti-federalist measure and, the well-regulated militia clause can be argued as clearly defining the rationale for gun ownership. After all, these were not men that minced words, and if they didn’t intend to qualify the amendment, they wouldn’t have included the militia clause. As they did include it, it’s therefore reasonable to conclude this.
Regardless, it’s not logical to conclude that any civilian force, no matter how armed-to-the-teeth, could ever, at this point, present even a tiny threat to the government. Thus, the militia point as a bulwark against government tyranny is rendered moot.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by sctrojan View PostSo you don't trust our govt for gun registries why is that an infringement on your privacy? The 4th and the 1st protect your 2nd.
I suppose you don't trust the govt for voter id info either which means voting is fraudulent forever.
This is why I don't trust the government with a registry. That information has, until recently, been public record. News agencies have used this information to intimidate carry permit holders in the past. They got their hand slapped, and now they're trying to say that proposed legislation to prevent them from having access to that information is an infringement of their rights. With the constant push by the anti-gun lobby to restrict, ban, abolish everything related to guns, I have no doubt they would use a registry to intimidate gun owners.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Deschet View Post
Dude. You need to crack open a history book. That might have been the last time both parties were on the same page. I realize that this doesn’t fit your imaginary narrative. But… just look it up, sport.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by sctrojan View PostHuh? Patriot act was started by Bush
Leave the Dems cock out of your filthy mouth
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by sctrojan View PostAt a time when the country was under attack? Sure Dems were put in a corner - support Bush or you're with the enemy.
Dems were in the minority in 2003
- 1 like
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: