Jump to content

A Well Regulated Militia...


Recommended Posts

  • 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 hour ago, Scout said:

The founders were not rightwingers.

They were not people who sit around fantasizing about murdering people.

They were people who wanted to create a safe world, not a violent one.

They were NOT EVER rightwingers EXCEPT the ones

that owned slaves.  

they must have been leftist because they turned into Demonrats and KKK.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The larger problem with a market-driven theory of gun policy is that it is the opposite of the Founders’ intent as well as the plain meaning of the text. The Second Amendment was not designed to hobble government regulation. At the time, men arrived for military service already armed with guns the government required them to purchase. Contrary to Thomas and Scalia, the law did not countenance Americans simply showing up with whatever weapons they owned—that is, what was in common use. Without specific regulations and instead following common use or preference, most Americans would likely have shown up for active duty with fowling pieces, which were more like shot guns than muskets, because these were better suited for putting food on the table. In other words, the Founders recognized that if left to the free market and people’s own preferences, America’s militias would be prepared to hunt turkeys, not fight a powerful European standing army. A reliance on the market could have cost America its freedom. The various militia regulations enacted by states in the colonial period and after the adoption of the Second Amendment specified what weapons were required to meet the legal obligation of citizens to serve in the militia. Failing to report to the militia properly armed with the right weapon could result in fines. If the Founders had understood the Second Amendment in the way Scalia and Thomas suggest, the United States would likely have lost the American Revolution.

 

-- Saul Cornell 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the decades after the adoption of the Second Amendment, gun regulations only became more stringent. As guns became cheaper and more reliable, they posed an ever-greater threat to public safety. In response, the first modern-style gun-control laws were passed. To be sure, some of these laws were challenged in court, and some courts, particularly those in the slave-holding South, struck them down. In his Heller opinion, Scalia ignored the history of cases upholding new gun regulations—that is, the vast majority of cases—and focused instead on the few slave-state cases that struck them down.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fortunately, it appears that the current majority of justices do not accept that the Scalia-Thomas common-use theory is central to the Heller holding. Instead, most courts and scholars have read Heller as limiting the right to own a gun to self-defense and have noted that this right is greatest in the home. The state, Heller acknowledges, has a much greater interest in limiting the proliferation of guns in public squares and thoroughfares. In England, such restrictions date back to the 14th century; they were then transplanted into U.S. law in many states by the Founding generation. The history of the Second Amendment does not supplant the government with the market; it supports a robust public power to regulate guns for reasons of public safety.

The good news is that those on the Court who see any attempt to regulate guns as unconstitutional are a small and isolated minority. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Scout said:

The history of the Second Amendment does not supplant the government with the market; it supports a robust public power to regulate guns for reasons of public safety.

There is nothing in the 2nd amendment that allows gun regulations. 

What did the founding Fathers think about gun control?  They never mention it except to oppose disarming Americans.

 

“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.

 

“Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence.” – George Washington

 

“Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?” – Patrick Henry.

 

“The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.” – Alexander Hamilton.

 

“To disarm the people is the most effectual way to enslave them.” – George Mason.

 

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe.” – Noah Webster.

 

“Americans have the right and advantage of being armed, unlike the people of other countries, whose leaders are afraid to trust them with arms.” – James Madison.

 

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” – Benjamin Franklin.

 

“A free people ought to be armed.” – George Washington.

 

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” – Thomas Jefferson.

 

“The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.” – George Washington.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Scout said:

No, but according to gun nutters, they should have the freedom to 

arm themselves with anything the military uses.

 

So, what is your point?  

My point is that 2A uses the phrases "the right of the people" and "shall not be infringed" .  you have gotten hung up on the word militia. . I want to know who you believe "the people" are and what does it mean to you "shall not be infringed".  Pretend , for the sake of this discussion that , shall not be infringed were to be applied to abortion. What is an infringement, and what infringements would you accept.

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

My point is that 2A uses the phrases "the right of the people" and "shall not be infringed" .  you have gotten hung up on the word militia. . I want to know who you believe "the people" are and what does it mean to you "shall not be infringed".  Pretend , for the sake of this discussion that , shall not be infringed were to be applied to abortion. What is an infringement, and what infringements would you accept.

I believe what the Founders themselves did to be the intended meaning.....

they had gun control and we have gun control.  

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

 In England, such restrictions date back to the 14th century

The Irish were unarmed. That certainly did them a world of good. 

Queen Elizabeth I and her genocide policy: if she had lived in the 20th Century. she would have been viewed with the same horror as Hitler and Stalin.

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

I believe what the Founders themselves did to be the intended meaning.....

they had gun control and we have gun control.  

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

  • Like 1
  • Thumb up 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Scout said:

I believe what the Founders themselves did to be the intended meaning.....

they had gun control and we have gun control.  

The Founders did NOT impose gun control.  You're a liar. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Scout said:

I believe what the Founders themselves did to be the intended meaning.....

they had gun control and we have gun control.  

The founders used shall not be infringed. Other than cannons, I am unaware of restrictions on arms, hence the "shall not be infringed"

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AnotherJim said:

The Irish were unarmed. That certainly did them a world of good. 

Queen Elizabeth I and her genocide policy: if she had lived in the 20th Century. she would have been viewed with the same horror as Hitler and Stalin.

If Queen Elizabeth I had lived in the 20th Century. she would have been viewed with the same horror as Hitler and Stalin. Her policy of Irish genocide was pursued with such evil zest it boggles the mind of modern men. But Elizabeth was only setting the stage for the even more savage program that was to follow her, directed specifically to exterminate the Irish. James II and Charles I continued Elizabeth�s campaign, but Cromwell almost perfected it. Few people in modern so-called �civilized history� can match the horrors of Cromwell in Ireland. It is amazing what one man can do to his fellow man under the banner that God sanctions his actions!

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

The Founders did NOT impose gun control.  You're a liar. 

They most certainly did.  YOu are an uneducated Trump voter.

YOu believe in lying - not the liberals.  LYING is a Republican thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Scout said:

They most certainly did.  YOu are an uneducated Trump voter.

YOu believe in lying - not the liberals.  LYING is a Republican thing.

Funny you can't support your claim.  You never do. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/1/2020 at 10:04 AM, Scout said:

The founders were not rightwingers.

They were not people who sit around fantasizing about murdering people.

They were people who wanted to create a safe world, not a violent one.

They were NOT EVER rightwingers EXCEPT the ones

that owned slaves.  

The founders wanted a nation built on liberty.

Nobody sits around fantasizing about murder, except maybe ANTIFA, (they actually do it)

There was nothing safe about what they did.

They were willing to take up arms against the most powerful nation in the world to gain their liberty

It was your democrat party that owned slaves, shot Lincoln, started the KKK, and promoted segregation.

HELL , your nominee, Joe Biden is a segregationist. 

 

You should do some research, BEFORE you post silly stuff like that. It makes you look delusional. 

  • Thumb up 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/1/2020 at 6:29 PM, AnotherJim said:

If Queen Elizabeth I had lived in the 20th Century. she would have been viewed with the same horror as Hitler and Stalin. Her policy of Irish genocide was pursued with such evil zest it boggles the mind of modern men. But Elizabeth was only setting the stage for the even more savage program that was to follow her, directed specifically to exterminate the Irish. James II and Charles I continued Elizabeth�s campaign, but Cromwell almost perfected it. Few people in modern so-called �civilized history� can match the horrors of Cromwell in Ireland. It is amazing what one man can do to his fellow man under the banner that God sanctions his actions!

 

I thought they were going after Catholics who just happened to be

Irish.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Scout said:

 

I thought they were going after Catholics who just happened to be

Irish.  

I believe it pretty much started with Henry the 8th. Could not get a divorce, so he started the Poof Church of England. Then Catholics who would not renounce their faith were persecuted. Before that, Henry was a defender of the Catholic church; but being a snowflake, and a whiner; he had a tantrum & since he was king, he immediately began to abuse his power; like Harris who issued a bogus warrant to persecute the people who exposed Planned Parenthood ( one of her donors ). Same shit, different century.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a bunch of Morons and Losers, all over weight all full of HATE and all delusional and dumb as a door knob.

 

They do not have a clue to what they are talking about and what I gather from these idiotic remarks is between beer drinking self promotion of imaginary wrongs play video games that do not shoot back and they have NO idea of what goes on in a WAR. Their imaginary strength comes from a imaginary enemy  and a real and vile Hatred of anyone that is a different color and international location.

 

There emotional IQ for Ignorance is off the scale and their comprehension of real world problems are none existing, they are vile EVIL people and when they meet those of us that will not put up with their bullshit they will die crying and begging for their life.

 

It will be then they realize they do not have a clue and wish they were dead and I will accommodate them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AnotherJim said:

I believe it pretty much started with Henry the 8th. Could not get a divorce, so he started the Poof Church of England.

 

Instead of the "Fuck little boys" Pope in the Catholic Church.  

Martin Luther had started the anti-Catholic movement nearly

two decades earlier.   

 

The Irish were seen as puppets of the Pope......which was pretty accurate.

If they had converted, QE#1 would have left them alone.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Freethinker said:

What a bunch of Morons and Losers, all over weight all full of HATE and all delusional and dumb as a door knob.

 

They do not have a clue to what they are talking about and what I gather from these idiotic remarks is between beer drinking self promotion of imaginary wrongs play video games that do not shoot back and they have NO idea of what goes on in a WAR. Their imaginary strength comes from a imaginary enemy  and a real and vile Hatred of anyone that is a different color and international location.

 

There emotional IQ for Ignorance is off the scale and their comprehension of real world problems are none existing, they are vile EVIL people and when they meet those of us that will not put up with their bullshit they will die crying and begging for their life.

 

It will be then they realize they do not have a clue and wish they were dead and I will accommodate them.

I have a very good idea what goes on in war. I wish I didn't. By 18 years old, I had seen the very worst of life. I wish I hadn't. But at least I know what to expect; and I know the steps that must be taken to handle it. I hope I don't need to ever take those steps again. That thought scares me. 

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...