Jump to content

A Well Regulated Militia...


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, RollingRock said:

Why do you think the founders wanted someone to be able to fire off hundreds of rounds a minute?  I say someone who has that poor an aim shouldn't own a gun at all.  

When you say someone shouldn't have a gun at all because they are a poor shot, you are touching on the real agenda of Democrats and that is to remove all guns from the hands of civilians.

 

 

It is our aim to ban the manufacture and sale of handguns to private individuals … the coalition’s emphasis is to keep handguns out of private possession — where they do the most harm.

– Recruiting flyer distributed by The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, formerly called The National Coalition to Ban Handguns

 

We’re going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily-given the political realities-going to be very modest…So then we’ll have to start working again to strengthen the law, and then again to strengthen the next law, and maybe again and again…Our ultimate goal-total control of handguns in the US-is going to take time….the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors — totally illegal.

– Pete Shields, Chairman Emeritus, Handgun Control, Inc. (“The New Yorker”, July 26, 1976)

 

Handguns should be outlawed. Our organization will probably take this stand in time but we are not anxious to rouse the opposition before we get the other legislation passed.

–Elliot Corbett, Secretary, National Council For A Responsible Firearms Policy

 

We are at the point in time and terror where nothing short of a strong uniform policy of domestic disarmament will alleviate the danger which is crystal clear and perilously present. Let us take the guns away from the people. Exemptions should be limited to the military, the police, and those licensed for good and sufficient reasons. And I would look forward to the day when it would not be necessary for the policeman to carry a sidearm.

–Patrick V. Murphy, former New York City Police Commissioner, and now a member of Handgun Control’s National Committee, during testimony to the National Association of Citizens Crime Commissions

 

The Brady Bill is the minimum step Congress should take…we need much stricter gun control, and eventually should bar the ownership of handguns, except in a few cases.

–U.S. Representative William Clay, Democrat (quoted in the St. Louis Post Dispatch on May 6, 1991)

 

Banning guns is an idea whose time has come.

– U.S. Sen. Joseph Biden

 

Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe.

– Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Associated Press, Nov. 18, 1993

 

We’re here to tell the NRA their nightmare is true! … We’re going to hammer guns on the anvil of relentless legislative strategy. We’re going to beat guns into submission!

– Rep. Charles Schumer, NBC Nightly News — Nov. 30, 1993.

 

We have to start with a ban on the manufacturing & import of handguns. From there we register the guns which are currently owned, and follow that with additional bans and acquisitions of handguns and rifles with no sporting purpose.

–U.S. Representative Owens, Democrat

 

This is not all we will have in future Congresses, but this is a crack in the door. There are too many handguns in the hands of citizens. The right to keep and bear arms has nothing to do with the Brady Bill.

–Craig Washington, Dem.

 

If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them: “Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in,” I would have done it. I *could not* do that. The votes weren’t here.

–U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), CBS-TV’s “60 Minutes,” 2/5/95

 

We urge passage of federal legislation–and meanwhile, in its absence, the partial remedy of state law–to prohibit, with few and narrowly drawn exceptions, the private ownership and possession of handguns, much the way existing laws prohibit machine guns, grenades and cannons.

– Adopted by American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) Board of Directors in September 1976; see national ACLU policy #47, “Gun Control”

 

My experience as a street cop suggests that most merchants should not have guns. But I feel even stronger about the average person having them…most homeowners…simply have no need to own guns.

– Joseph McNamara, HCI spokesman, and former Chief of Police of San Jose, California

 

Yes, I’m for an outright ban (on handguns).

– Pete Shields, Chairman emeritus, Handgun Control, Inc., during a 60 Minutes interview

 

There is no reason for anyone in this country — anyone except a police officer or a military person — to buy, to own, to have, to use a handgun …The only way to control handgun use in this country is to prohibit the guns. And the only way to do that is to change the Constitution.

– Michael Gardner, president of NBC News, in USA Today, January 16, 1992.

 

Only the police should have handguns.

–B.J.Clinton

 

I’m personally all for taxing guns to pay for health care coverage.

– Hillary Clinton, Nov. 4, 1993 New York Times

 

No, we’re not looking at how to control criminals … we’re talking about banning the AK-47 and semi-automatic guns.

–U.S. Senator Howard Metzenbaum, Democrat

 

The only thing a riflescope is good for is assassination.

–U.S. Senator Ira Metzenbaum, Democrat

 

The National Guard fulfills the militia mentioned in the Second Amendment. Citizens no longer need to protect the states or themselves.

–Sen. Diane Feinstein, Democrat

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

What is a gun nutter? And yes, the constitution says we may arm ourselves with whatever firearm we want .  Would you like to rewrite the constitution? To bend it to fit YOUR feelings ?  fuck your

sad Scout doesn't understand the 2nd Amendment... the bitch doesn't realize that without the 2nd you don't have the 1st.

Yes, they did.  

1 minute ago, rick55 said:

When you say someone shouldn't have a gun at all because they are a poor shot, you are touching on the real agenda of Democrats and that is to remove all guns from the hands of civilians.

 

I'm not a Democrat and am a longtime gun owner myself.  So spare me the idiotic crap about me wanting to ban guns.

 

Are you saying that people who have no idea how to use a gun and who have really poor aim should be able to own and use automatic and semiautomatic weapons? :huh:  That's kind of dumb, don't you think?  

 

Do you believe in gun rights for the blind, too?

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Skans said:

Because the founders didn't put any limiting language in the 2nd Amendment.   They could have, but didn't.  They could have said swords and sabers but not firearms, but didn't.  They could have said muskets, but not rifles.  They could have said muskets and rifles, but not pistols. They could have said small arms, but not cannons or Congreve rockets.  They didn't.

And believe it or not, they didn't say anything about guns to be used for hunting. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Skans said:

Because the founders didn't put any limiting language in the 2nd Amendment.   They could have, but didn't.  They could have said swords and sabers but not firearms, but didn't.  They could have said muskets, but not rifles.  They could have said muskets and rifles, but not pistols. They could have said small arms, but not cannons or Congreve rockets.  They didn't.

 

"...shall not be infringed."


Second-_Amendment--620x358.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Are you saying that people who have no idea how to use a gun and who have really poor aim should be able to own and use automatic and semiautomatic weapons?   That's kind of dumb, don't you think?  

 

Do you believe in gun rights for the blind, too?

I do believe that people who have no idea how to use a gun, have never fired a gun, should be able to own fully automatic and semiautomatic weapons.  I also believe that the blind, or any other disabled person should be able to own firearms.

 

It certainly would be "dumb" as you put it, for people with no experience to pick up a fully-automatic firearm and attempt to fire it.  Likewise, it wold be "dumb" for inexperienced people to pick up a 12-gauge shotgun, a .308 pistol (or even a .357 magnum pistol) or a bunch of other types of firearms and attempt to shoot them with no guidance or experience. 

 

But, here is the real difference between you and I.  I am 100% against the government protecting us from our own dumb actions.  That just isn't government's roll.  Liberals believe Government needs to protect us from a whole host of dumb things, from labels on cigarettes to labels on alcohol (where's the label on my car?), to gun locks, to sugar warnings on soda cans.  I HATE all of this.  It is anti-personal responsibility.  We must protect ourselves and teach those around us to protect themselves from "dumb".  Relying on government to do this is the epitome  of dumb.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically, you guys are saying you need military style weapons to protect yourself from tyranny or because you simply want it.

 

As for tyranny, have you seen what are military is capable of????? 

Good luck standing up to them with your AR15 and 12 back of beer.

 

As for simply wanting it?

How does that fit with "well regulated militia"?

 

As for there being no limit on the 2nd amendment...

Should private citizens be allowed to purchase nuclear weapons? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RollingRock said:

I'm not a Democrat and am a longtime gun owner myself.  So spare me the idiotic crap about me wanting to ban guns.

 

Are you saying that people who have no idea how to use a gun and who have really poor aim should be able to own and use automatic and semiautomatic weapons? :huh:  That's kind of dumb, don't you think?  

 

Do you believe in gun rights for the blind, too?

OK

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, leftjohn said:

So basically, you guys are saying you need military style weapons to protect yourself from tyranny or because you simply want it.

 

As for tyranny, have you seen what are military is capable of????? 

Good luck standing up to them with your AR15 and 12 back of beer.

 

As for simply wanting it?

How does that fit with "well regulated militia"?

 

As for there being no limit on the 2nd amendment...

Should private citizens be allowed to purchase nuclear weapons? 

^^ wasn't paying attention to how difficult it was to root out the terrorist in Mosul during the Surge. 

We've explained what the 2nd amendment says, repeatedly.  You're inability to grasp simple English sentence construction is your personal issue, not ours.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RollingRock said:

I'm not a Democrat and am a longtime gun owner myself.  So spare me the idiotic crap about me wanting to ban guns.

 

Are you saying that people who have no idea how to use a gun and who have really poor aim should be able to own and use automatic and semiautomatic weapons? :huh:  That's kind of dumb, don't you think?  

 

Do you believe in gun rights for the blind, too?

Yes.   The 2nd amendment is quite clear - Congress shall make no law infringing the people's right to keep and bear arms.    

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, leftjohn said:

So basically, you guys are saying you need military style weapons to protect yourself from tyranny or because you simply want it.

 

As for tyranny, have you seen what are military is capable of????? 

Good luck standing up to them with your AR15 and 12 back of beer.

 

As for simply wanting it?

How does that fit with "well regulated militia"?

 

As for there being no limit on the 2nd amendment...

Should private citizens be allowed to purchase nuclear weapons? 

 

You are... tedious, Comrade.

 

Militia - Armed Citizens.

Arms - Individual Combat arms.

 

And you would be surprised what a well regulated militia is capable of in times of Tyranny.

 

 

355e4c084c8795aa2e3f5779f8e06c39.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Blue Devil said:

 

You are... tedious, Comrade.

 

Militia - Armed Citizens.

Arms - Individual Combat arms.

 

And you would be surprised what a well regulated militia is capable of in times of Tyranny.

 

You are.... naive, Comrade.

 

Well regulated militia - not drunken rednecks with low self esteem

Arms - 2nd amendment doesn't specify. Is there a limit? Can I arm myself with a nuke?

 

And, you would be surprised by what the US military is capable of at anytime.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, leftjohn said:

 

You are.... naive, Comrade.

 

Well regulated militia - not drunken rednecks with low self esteem

Arms - 2nd amendment doesn't specify. Is there a limit? Can I arm myself with a nuke?

 

And, you would be surprised by what the US military is capable of at anytime.

 

The US military?

 

...is made up of the militia.

 

Obtuse Liberal fool.

 

60de27163ff7980e2180e9075e14c36b--george

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, leftjohn said:

 

Over the years, I have learned that when folks are left with only insults, it means they are literally have no other rebuttal. 

 

Night Night Comrade

 

Over the years, I have learned to never argue with obtuse Liberal fools, as they will drag you down to their level, and then attempt to beat you with their experience.

 

Riddance, Comrade.

 

 

Second-_Amendment--620x358.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Blue Devil said:

 

Over the years, I have learned to never argue with obtuse Liberal fools, as they will drag you down to their level, and then attempt to beat you with their experience.

 

Riddance, Comrade.

 

You, dear Comrade, were the one that resulted to insults because you had no rebuttal.

 

Sleep well, Comrade.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Blue Devil said:

 

You are... tedious, Comrade.

 

Militia - Armed Citizens.

Arms - Individual Combat arms.

 

And you would be surprised what a well regulated militia is capable of in times of Tyranny.

 

 

 

The ironic part of this is, that idiots like littleJohn said Bush's fight against the Iraq insurgency and the Afghanistan war is unwinnable because you can't put down insurgencies. 

These idiots don't care that they argue opposite sides of the same issue, whenever it's convenient to them at the time. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Golfboy said:

The ironic part of this is, that idiots like littleJohn said Bush's fight against the Iraq insurgency and the Afghanistan war is unwinnable because you can't put down insurgencies. 

These idiots don't care that they argue opposite sides of the same issue, whenever it's convenient to them at the time. 

 

 

When exactly did I ever say that?

 

Here is the irony in this situation....

You trying to rebuke someone for what you considered a false statement while completely fabricating the statement. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, rick55 said:

When you say someone shouldn't have a gun at all because they are a poor shot, you are touching on the real agenda of Democrats and that is to remove all guns from the hands of civilians.

 

 

It is our aim to ban the manufacture and sale of handguns to private individuals … the coalition’s emphasis is to keep handguns out of private possession — where they do the most harm.

– Recruiting flyer distributed by The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, formerly called The National Coalition to Ban Handguns

 

We’re going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily-given the political realities-going to be very modest…So then we’ll have to start working again to strengthen the law, and then again to strengthen the next law, and maybe again and again…Our ultimate goal-total control of handguns in the US-is going to take time….the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors — totally illegal.

– Pete Shields, Chairman Emeritus, Handgun Control, Inc. (“The New Yorker”, July 26, 1976)

 

Handguns should be outlawed. Our organization will probably take this stand in time but we are not anxious to rouse the opposition before we get the other legislation passed.

–Elliot Corbett, Secretary, National Council For A Responsible Firearms Policy

 

We are at the point in time and terror where nothing short of a strong uniform policy of domestic disarmament will alleviate the danger which is crystal clear and perilously present. Let us take the guns away from the people. Exemptions should be limited to the military, the police, and those licensed for good and sufficient reasons. And I would look forward to the day when it would not be necessary for the policeman to carry a sidearm.

–Patrick V. Murphy, former New York City Police Commissioner, and now a member of Handgun Control’s National Committee, during testimony to the National Association of Citizens Crime Commissions

 

The Brady Bill is the minimum step Congress should take…we need much stricter gun control, and eventually should bar the ownership of handguns, except in a few cases.

–U.S. Representative William Clay, Democrat (quoted in the St. Louis Post Dispatch on May 6, 1991)

 

Banning guns is an idea whose time has come.

– U.S. Sen. Joseph Biden

 

Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe.

– Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Associated Press, Nov. 18, 1993

 

We’re here to tell the NRA their nightmare is true! … We’re going to hammer guns on the anvil of relentless legislative strategy. We’re going to beat guns into submission!

– Rep. Charles Schumer, NBC Nightly News — Nov. 30, 1993.

 

We have to start with a ban on the manufacturing & import of handguns. From there we register the guns which are currently owned, and follow that with additional bans and acquisitions of handguns and rifles with no sporting purpose.

–U.S. Representative Owens, Democrat

 

This is not all we will have in future Congresses, but this is a crack in the door. There are too many handguns in the hands of citizens. The right to keep and bear arms has nothing to do with the Brady Bill.

–Craig Washington, Dem.

 

If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them: “Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in,” I would have done it. I *could not* do that. The votes weren’t here.

–U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), CBS-TV’s “60 Minutes,” 2/5/95

 

We urge passage of federal legislation–and meanwhile, in its absence, the partial remedy of state law–to prohibit, with few and narrowly drawn exceptions, the private ownership and possession of handguns, much the way existing laws prohibit machine guns, grenades and cannons.

– Adopted by American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) Board of Directors in September 1976; see national ACLU policy #47, “Gun Control”

 

My experience as a street cop suggests that most merchants should not have guns. But I feel even stronger about the average person having them…most homeowners…simply have no need to own guns.

– Joseph McNamara, HCI spokesman, and former Chief of Police of San Jose, California

 

Yes, I’m for an outright ban (on handguns).

– Pete Shields, Chairman emeritus, Handgun Control, Inc., during a 60 Minutes interview

 

There is no reason for anyone in this country — anyone except a police officer or a military person — to buy, to own, to have, to use a handgun …The only way to control handgun use in this country is to prohibit the guns. And the only way to do that is to change the Constitution.

– Michael Gardner, president of NBC News, in USA Today, January 16, 1992.

 

Only the police should have handguns.

–B.J.Clinton

 

I’m personally all for taxing guns to pay for health care coverage.

– Hillary Clinton, Nov. 4, 1993 New York Times

 

No, we’re not looking at how to control criminals … we’re talking about banning the AK-47 and semi-automatic guns.

–U.S. Senator Howard Metzenbaum, Democrat

 

The only thing a riflescope is good for is assassination.

–U.S. Senator Ira Metzenbaum, Democrat

 

The National Guard fulfills the militia mentioned in the Second Amendment. Citizens no longer need to protect the states or themselves.

–Sen. Diane Feinstein, Democrat

 

I am a little disappointed your quote list does not include Republicans. Is that by your biased design or the author's? Either way, it is dishonest and deceiving. Until gun owners can be honest with themselves and gun control political leanings, you can expect to continue to lose ground to anti-gunners.

 

As far back as Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr. & Bush Jr. were all antigunners. Even the NRA has supported anti-gun legislation. The Brady Bill and Sarah Brady with Handgun control supported antigun legislation.

 

The only way to beat down & turn around removing gun laws is gunners from both party's working to remove antigunners from power. I have consistently voted against U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein, who would remove my rights to own a gun, but protect her rights to guns.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...