2nd Amendment Discussion

[Porter Rockwell]

The Second Amendment does exactly what it says it does. It guarantees the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE to keep and bear Arms as a measure to insure the security of a free state. It does not authorize nor create nor even secure ANYTHING. You have been provided with enough legal precedent to verify that.

Furthermore, the individual states ruled that the Second Amendment is absolute and is above the law making power.

Regardless of what it originally meant, that is all irrelevant. The Constitution isn't worth the paper it's written on and there are no militias that enforce the Constitution or repel a dictator because most people live in total darkness of what their Rights and RESPONSIBILITIES are..

Where do you get your propaganda and rhetoric from?

The People are the Militia. You are either, well regulated or unorganized. Well regulated militia have literal recourse to our Second Amendment when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

STFU you imbecile. "Well-regulated" meant "In proper working order" in those times.

No, you don't get free hand jobs and to grope girls, dumbass!

lol. Where does the right wing find their propaganda and rhetoric?

Well regulated must be defined by our federal Congress, for the militia of the United States.

Well. It was defined at the time. The Militia was every able bodied free man.

well regulated militia are declared necessary to the security of a free State.

The MILITIA was what was intended to be regulated, not the firearms... AND under your theory regulated firearms means registration, limitations, etc.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Why do you believe the government needs a second amendment right?

It is due to our federal form of Government. The several States of our Union are sovereign within their jurisdiction, with the general Government handling inter-State and inter-national stuff.

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

As with the 14th Amendment, states cannot deprive citizens of their second amendment right. They cannot infringe upon it because it's federally protected.

lol. The People are the Militia. Only the unorganized militia whines about gun control.

men don't whine we react

Get Organized, don't be all Talk and no action.

Damn, one intelligible post AND one wherein I can agree. Did Hell just freeze over?

 

[Porter Rockwell]

“Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American...The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.” ( Tench Coxe (a Framer of the United States Constitution, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788

Tench Coxe

Only the unorganized militia complains about gun control not the organized militia.

You are repeating the same post verbatim. You need some new material. Of course the unorganized militia is complaining. It is their Liberties and gun Rights the politicians are after.

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.”
– Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

States have a right to their own security.

There is a long line of state court authority recognizing a right to self-defense — and a right to defend property — under state constitutions. Twenty-one state constitutions expressly secure such rights, often using language such as this:

"All men … have certain unalienable Rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, [and] acquiring, possessing and protecting property."

Government only recognizes Individual rights and Individual liberty. Government in the US delegates to Counties.

Counties have power to "commandeer the People" to help ensure County security.

What has Posse Comitatus to do with an individual's Right to keep and bear Arms?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Why do you believe the government needs a second amendment right?

It is due to our federal form of Government. The several States of our Union are sovereign within their jurisdiction, with the general Government handling inter-State and inter-national stuff.

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

As with the 14th Amendment, states cannot deprive citizens of their second amendment right. They cannot infringe upon it because it's federally protected.

lol. The People are the Militia. Only the unorganized militia whines about gun control.

men don't whine we react

Get Organized, don't be all Talk and no action.

What have you done as a member of the unorganized Militia?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Yes, well regulated militia of the People may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

"(1) The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53." United States Supreme Court HOLDING in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

Thanks for citing the error in that opinion.

There is no one who is unconnected with the militia, only militia service well regulated. Our Second Amendment is clear in Any conflict of law.

Why do you believe the government needs a second amendment right?

It is due to our federal form of Government. The several States of our Union are sovereign within their jurisdiction, with the general Government handling inter-State and inter-national stuff.

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

The individual Right to keep and bear Arms and the militia are two separate and distinct issues.

You and every abled body man and woman are members of the unorganized militia

 

[danielpalos]

STFU you imbecile. "Well-regulated" meant "In proper working order" in those times.

No, you don't get free hand jobs and to grope girls, dumbass!

lol. Where does the right wing find their propaganda and rhetoric?

Well regulated must be defined by our federal Congress, for the militia of the United States.

Well. It was defined at the time. The Militia was every able bodied free man.

Trained in the discipline of firearms

There is no appeal to ignorance of the Laws of Government.

10 U.S. Code § 246.Militia: composition and classes

In other words, you want to wallow in your own stupidity

I am not the frivolous one appealing to ignorance of the legal and lawful, law.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, well regulated militia of the People may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

"(1) The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53." United States Supreme Court HOLDING in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

Thanks for citing the error in that opinion.

There is no one who is unconnected with the militia, only militia service well regulated. Our Second Amendment is clear in Any conflict of law.

Why do you believe the government needs a second amendment right?

It is due to our federal form of Government. The several States of our Union are sovereign within their jurisdiction, with the general Government handling inter-State and inter-national stuff.

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

The individual Right to keep and bear Arms and the militia are two separate and distinct issues.

Thank you for finally recognizing that legal fact.

There is no provision for natural rights and individual rights in our Second Article of Amendment. All terms are expressly collective and plural.

The first clause must command the second clause.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

lol. Where does the right wing find their propaganda and rhetoric?

Well regulated must be defined by our federal Congress, for the militia of the United States.

Well. It was defined at the time. The Militia was every able bodied free man.

Trained in the discipline of firearms

There is no appeal to ignorance of the Laws of Government.

10 U.S. Code § 246.Militia: composition and classes

In other words, you want to wallow in your own stupidity

I am not the frivolous one appealing to ignorance of the legal and lawful, law.

I told you, I am not appealing to your ignorance of anything legal OR the law. Since you brought it up, however, what ARE your legal qualifications / education?

I realize you like for us to babysit you every day, but you're not the only person who reads these exchanges - which is why I'm not appealing to your ignorance. I'm using your trolling as a learning experience for others who are reading this stuff.

 

[danielpalos]

Where do you get your propaganda and rhetoric from?

The People are the Militia. You are either, well regulated or unorganized. Well regulated militia have literal recourse to our Second Amendment when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

STFU you imbecile. "Well-regulated" meant "In proper working order" in those times.

No, you don't get free hand jobs and to grope girls, dumbass!

lol. Where does the right wing find their propaganda and rhetoric?

Well regulated must be defined by our federal Congress, for the militia of the United States.

Well. It was defined at the time. The Militia was every able bodied free man.

well regulated militia are declared necessary to the security of a free State.

The MILITIA was what was intended to be regulated, not the firearms... AND under your theory regulated firearms means registration, limitations, etc.

Well regulated militia have literal recourse to our Second Amendment in Any conflict of laws.

natural and individual rights are recognized and secured in State Constitutions and available via Due Process in federal venues.

 

[danielpalos]

It is due to our federal form of Government. The several States of our Union are sovereign within their jurisdiction, with the general Government handling inter-State and inter-national stuff.

As with the 14th Amendment, states cannot deprive citizens of their second amendment right. They cannot infringe upon it because it's federally protected.

lol. The People are the Militia. Only the unorganized militia whines about gun control.

men don't whine we react

Get Organized, don't be all Talk and no action.

Damn, one intelligible post AND one wherein I can agree. Did Hell just freeze over?

dears, there is no provision for excuses in our federal doctrine.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

"(1) The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53." United States Supreme Court HOLDING in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

Thanks for citing the error in that opinion.

There is no one who is unconnected with the militia, only militia service well regulated. Our Second Amendment is clear in Any conflict of law.

Why do you believe the government needs a second amendment right?

It is due to our federal form of Government. The several States of our Union are sovereign within their jurisdiction, with the general Government handling inter-State and inter-national stuff.

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

The individual Right to keep and bear Arms and the militia are two separate and distinct issues.

Thank you for finally recognizing that legal fact.

There is no provision for natural rights and individual rights in our Second Article of Amendment. All terms are expressly collective and plural.

The first clause must command the second clause.

Now, you're back to talking nonsense.

There are two parts to the Second Amendment, the NEED to insure the security of a free state AND an ACKNOWLEDGEMENT by the government to guarantee a preexisting Right.

 

[danielpalos]

Only the unorganized militia complains about gun control not the organized militia.

You are repeating the same post verbatim. You need some new material. Of course the unorganized militia is complaining. It is their Liberties and gun Rights the politicians are after.

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.”
– Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

States have a right to their own security.

There is a long line of state court authority recognizing a right to self-defense — and a right to defend property — under state constitutions. Twenty-one state constitutions expressly secure such rights, often using language such as this:

"All men … have certain unalienable Rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, [and] acquiring, possessing and protecting property."

Government only recognizes Individual rights and Individual liberty. Government in the US delegates to Counties.

Counties have power to "commandeer the People" to help ensure County security.

What has Posse Comitatus to do with an individual's Right to keep and bear Arms?

There is no such Thing as a well regulated militia of Individuals in our Republic under our federal doctrine.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

STFU you imbecile. "Well-regulated" meant "In proper working order" in those times.

No, you don't get free hand jobs and to grope girls, dumbass!

lol. Where does the right wing find their propaganda and rhetoric?

Well regulated must be defined by our federal Congress, for the militia of the United States.

Well. It was defined at the time. The Militia was every able bodied free man.

well regulated militia are declared necessary to the security of a free State.

The MILITIA was what was intended to be regulated, not the firearms... AND under your theory regulated firearms means registration, limitations, etc.

Well regulated militia have literal recourse to our Second Amendment in Any conflict of laws.

natural and individual rights are recognized and secured in State Constitutions and available via Due Process in federal venues.

Asked, answered and refuted dannyboy. You need some new material. You're going to force me to become repetitive.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

You are repeating the same post verbatim. You need some new material. Of course the unorganized militia is complaining. It is their Liberties and gun Rights the politicians are after.

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.”
– Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

States have a right to their own security.

There is a long line of state court authority recognizing a right to self-defense — and a right to defend property — under state constitutions. Twenty-one state constitutions expressly secure such rights, often using language such as this:

"All men … have certain unalienable Rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, [and] acquiring, possessing and protecting property."

Government only recognizes Individual rights and Individual liberty. Government in the US delegates to Counties.

Counties have power to "commandeer the People" to help ensure County security.

What has Posse Comitatus to do with an individual's Right to keep and bear Arms?

There is no such Thing as a well regulated militia of Individuals in our Republic under our federal doctrine.

“To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike especially when young, how to use them.”

Richard Henry Lee

There is your well regulated militia. What we should do is have firearm safety marksmanship classes as a prerequisite in school before a person can graduate.

 

[danielpalos]

Thanks for citing the error in that opinion.

There is no one who is unconnected with the militia, only militia service well regulated. Our Second Amendment is clear in Any conflict of law.

Why do you believe the government needs a second amendment right?

It is due to our federal form of Government. The several States of our Union are sovereign within their jurisdiction, with the general Government handling inter-State and inter-national stuff.

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

The individual Right to keep and bear Arms and the militia are two separate and distinct issues.

Thank you for finally recognizing that legal fact.

There is no provision for natural rights and individual rights in our Second Article of Amendment. All terms are expressly collective and plural.

The first clause must command the second clause.

Now, you're back to talking nonsense.

There are two parts to the Second Amendment, the NEED to insure the security of a free state AND an ACKNOWLEDGEMENT by the government to guarantee a preexisting Right.

natural rights are recognized and secured in State Constitutions and available via Due Process not our Second Amendment.

 

[Marion Morrison]

lol. Where does the right wing find their propaganda and rhetoric?

Well regulated must be defined by our federal Congress, for the militia of the United States.

Well. It was defined at the time. The Militia was every able bodied free man.

well regulated militia are declared necessary to the security of a free State.

The MILITIA was what was intended to be regulated, not the firearms... AND under your theory regulated firearms means registration, limitations, etc.

Well regulated militia have literal recourse to our Second Amendment in Any conflict of laws.

natural and individual rights are recognized and secured in State Constitutions and available via Due Process in federal venues.

Asked, answered and refuted dannyboy. You need some new material. You're going to force me to become repetitive.

Tell danielfailosbot to go down to the rub-n-tug, it's the 1st, he gots his check..

 

[Dan Stubbs]

Dear Gracie
The 2nd Amendment is one of the Bill of Rights that also includes
* right of the people PEACEABLY to assemble
* right of people to SECURITY in their persons houses and effects
* right of people NOT to be DEPRIVED of life liberty or property without due process of laws

We need to unite in ENFORCING the whole context and not teaching
false interpretations or misrepresentations that the Constitution in any way allows
for the bearing of arms that VIOLATES other rights within the same set of Constitutional principles
that the 2nd Amendment is PART OF.

No part can be "taken out of context" to abuse to VIOLATE other rights
freedoms and protections under the same laws.

The point of the 2nd Amendment is to ENFORCE and DEFEND laws, not to violate them.

So if someone is stockpiling or threatening to abuse weapons where they
are already causing a threat, disruption, or breach to the peace, health or safety of others,
that's already violating Constitutional principles where it is creating a threat or hazard endangering others and violating their equal rights to protection, security and peace.

The benefit of teaching and enforcing these laws consistently in every district,
is the process of outreach and setting up means for making and resolving complaints
of threats, hazards or dangers ALSO serves to SCREEN OUT people with disabilities or
disorders that prevent them from complying with laws and authorities.

So we'd solve the mental health issue as well by setting up outreach programs
that would serve to screen and refer people who trigger threats and complaints
to get help in advance. This would have prevented the issues in cases like Cruz in the
Parkland shooting who would have received help in time had a local system been
in operation to address complaints when they were first reported. This can be
done through local school districts and county health programs without any
conflict or issue raised affecting gun rights and beliefs about gun regulations.

Yes, we can own and use Machine guns with a permit from the ATF you have to fill out a long questionnaire and show you are a responsible citizen. It cost you 1,400.00 bucks and the cost of whatever the Machine gun cost. You can buy Tanks without the guns, you can buy a lot of USA surplus.

 

[danielpalos]

lol. Where does the right wing find their propaganda and rhetoric?

Well regulated must be defined by our federal Congress, for the militia of the United States.

Well. It was defined at the time. The Militia was every able bodied free man.

well regulated militia are declared necessary to the security of a free State.

The MILITIA was what was intended to be regulated, not the firearms... AND under your theory regulated firearms means registration, limitations, etc.

Well regulated militia have literal recourse to our Second Amendment in Any conflict of laws.

natural and individual rights are recognized and secured in State Constitutions and available via Due Process in federal venues.

Asked, answered and refuted dannyboy. You need some new material. You're going to force me to become repetitive.

Simon already told me You are wrong, even If hell freezes over.

 

[danielpalos]

States have a right to their own security.

There is a long line of state court authority recognizing a right to self-defense — and a right to defend property — under state constitutions. Twenty-one state constitutions expressly secure such rights, often using language such as this:

"All men … have certain unalienable Rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, [and] acquiring, possessing and protecting property."

Government only recognizes Individual rights and Individual liberty. Government in the US delegates to Counties.

Counties have power to "commandeer the People" to help ensure County security.

What has Posse Comitatus to do with an individual's Right to keep and bear Arms?

There is no such Thing as a well regulated militia of Individuals in our Republic under our federal doctrine.

“To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike especially when young, how to use them.”

Richard Henry Lee

There is your well regulated militia. What we should do is have firearm safety marksmanship classes as a prerequisite in school before a person can graduate.

that is your appeal to ignorance of federal law and statute.

 

[danielpalos]

Well. It was defined at the time. The Militia was every able bodied free man.

well regulated militia are declared necessary to the security of a free State.

The MILITIA was what was intended to be regulated, not the firearms... AND under your theory regulated firearms means registration, limitations, etc.

Well regulated militia have literal recourse to our Second Amendment in Any conflict of laws.

natural and individual rights are recognized and secured in State Constitutions and available via Due Process in federal venues.

Asked, answered and refuted dannyboy. You need some new material. You're going to force me to become repetitive.

Tell danielfailosbot to go down to the rub-n-tug, it's the 1st, he gots his check..

nobody takes right wingers seriously about the "greater glory of our immortal souls", not even on Sundays.