A Majority of people polled want the Supremes to rule based upon what the Constitution means today.

[Rosy]

All bearable arms are not protected....................

Try again

From D.C. v Heller...on what is protected...

We start therefore with a strong presumption that the Second Amendment right is exercised individually and belongs to all Americans.

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment.

We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35–36 (2001), the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.

How is a street legal AR-15 going to beat an invading military

The same way the AK-47 defeated Helicopters, Tanks, Machine Guns, and every other known modern weapon including attack aircraft and heavy bombers in Vietnam. The same way that the simple rifle is defeating us in Afghanistan today. The same way that weapons bought in Miami gun shops overthrew the Government and Military of Cuba. But let’s play like the revolution that people warn about does happen shall we?

First, the Military has Helicopters, Jets, Drones, Satellites, Tanks, and armored vehicles right? But how many do they have? If you count every single person in the Military, Active Duty, Reserve, National Guard, and Coast Guard, you have perhaps two million. Of those two million, perhaps one hundred thousand are actually Infantry. Now, I don’t know about you, but I doubt that the clerks at Headquarters or the Dental Technicians from Medical are going to be doing a lot of fighting.

About a third of those are navy. How far inland can the Navy reach? A hundred miles? Four hundred? Again, look at the map, and see how thinly the coverage really is, not just limited in distance. There just ain’t that many planes and carriers.

But wait, there is more to consider. Napoleon said an Army marches on it’s stomach. That was true. Then. Now, the Army floats on a sea of Diesel Fuel. Tanks can’t just drive where they want to go, they are amazingly fragile pieces of equipment. So they need trucks to carry them, and fuel to make the truck and the tank go. A tank is not exactly like your car. It isn’t even remotely fuel efficient. A company of Armor burns hundreds of gallons of diesel every day. That is why the tanks spend most of their time in the Motor Pool. It is really expensive to drive them about. Helicopters, Jets, transports, drones, and all that neat flying stuff also burns a hell of a lot of fuel every single day.

If a Revolution starts, and most of the fuel is refined in Texas and Louisiana, where is the Military going to get it when the good old boys there stop showing up to work? Or worse, tamper with the fuel to make it tear up the engines of the tanks? Then how do you get it to the tanks from the refinery? Any revolution worth the word would target logistics first. You see, a lot of us are ex military, and we know what makes an army work. We know it desperately needs fuel, parts, and other supplies. This is why there were so many Convoys for the Insurgents to attack in Iraq and in Afghanistan. It’s why they are still being attacked.

Without Fuel, tanks, trucks, planes, helicopters, and drones are just static display pieces. Patton ran out of fuel on his attack, so it happens even when people are struggling to get the supplies to the front where it is needed.

All those awesome weapons of war also need maintainance. Generally speaking, for every hour of flight time, a helicopter needs ten hours of maintainance. Engines break, transmissions wear, rotors need replacement, and the electronics need repair. So you need a lot of parts to keep those things flying. Tanks too need a lot of maintainance. Tracks wear out quickly. Then if they are not replaced, the tank “throws a track” which means the hundred million dollar awesome tank has just become a stationary pillbox. Still dangerous, but not really threatening.

So in the first month, if the Government was unable to put the revolution down, the Government eventually lose. As the logistic train dried up, the ability of the small military to go where it was neeeded evaporates.

But where are the insurgents? Everywhere. Some here, some there, loosely affiliated, all just pissed off. They’ll fight the cops, and some will die, and so will the cops. The National Guard will probably refuse to move, because who wants to fight their own families? I suppose you could try and Motivate the Soldiers by shooting one or two but then you can never turn your back on the troops, because they fragged officers in Vietnam, and they can and will do so again.

When I made Sergeant, I called my Dad just as proud as could be. My Dad said to remember one thing. While I was leading the troops, I should look over my shoulder now and then to make sure someone was following me. I didn’t get that at first, but I did later. My soldiers might not be willing to follow me, and if they aren’t there isn’t much I can do about it.

If you imagine the military is filled with automatons, you are sadly mistaken. There are five types who join the military. The first group are the legacy’s. These are people who joined because Dad, Granddad, Great Granddad, and so on joined. These are the Lieutenant Dan’s of the military. The second Group are the lack of option people. They joined because there were no jobs, and it was either join the military, or end up in jail. The third group are the killers. These are the guys who want to kill someone. There aren’t many of them, thankfully. But there are always one or two in a company. The rest of the soldiers generally don’t trust them too much, but that is a case by case basis.

The fourth type are the college fund. These guys and girls just want to do their tour, and get the hell out and go to school. They have dreams that they want to pursue, and they are willing to serve, but aren’t looking for any heroics. They just want to do their time, and get the hell out.

The Fifth Type, that is the largest group. These are the Patriots. They believe that serving is good. They are off to defend their families, friends, neighbors. They love the nation, and their hearts swell hearing John Phillips Sousa’s various marches.

The Killers might fire on fellow Americans. The Legacy’s probably won’t. The College fund types, call that a coin toss. The lack of option people? They’ll go with the majority. They’re trying to stay out of trouble. The vast majority of the Patriots will not do it. They won’t fire on fellow Americans. They joined to defend America, and America is the people to them.

Or do you think that the Georgia National Guard will fire on their neighbors and friends? If you do, you are sadly mistaken. Oh, and all those drones, haven’t won anything.

So you think that a semi auto AR-15 is the same weapon as a full auto AK-47..............

Kid go play with your toys

I get it, you asked a question that you thought was clever, and now it was answered with intelligent responses......yes, irregular warfare can defeat a superior military force.....

Now you don't know how to respond...

You provided no answer of your own, you copy and pasted a bunch of krap that could have been pasted by a 3 year old

 

[Rosy]

Neither the Constitution or it's meaning has changed one bit since it was written

Not quite true. Since it was written, the Constitution has been changed twenty-seven times.

Not by SCOTUS.

No, not by SCOTUS, but by COTUS under the authority of Art. V. A number of the changes by amendment are the result of the popular will of the people.

The second amendment was repealed a long time ago

 

[boedicca]

There is some good news, and some bad news in that by the way. First the link. Pew: Majority now says SCOTUS should base rulings on what Constitution means "in current times," not originally

For years now people like myself have been pointing out that the asinine arguments of the anti-gunners that the Second Amendment applies to the National Guard, what they see as the “Militia” is wrong. We have been pointing out with links, and articles, that the Militia at the time the Constitution was Ratified, was every single person. Ok, actually it was every able bodied free man. But that is because Women and Slaves were not considered for the right. A belief fixed by Amendments later on.

Well the good news is that people are obviously learning. The bad news, they still don’t want those rules to apply to Supreme Court Decisions. Instead, they want the Constitution viewed by what the words mean TODAY.

This means that the education is working. Those of us who keep trying to educate our fellow citizens should feel gratified that our efforts are showing results. Now, if we could only explain to them that the words used were an effort to capture an ideal, a principle intended to guide us, then we would be better off.

President Obama understood much of this. He said that the Constitution was a series of negative rights. It said what the States, the Government could not do to you, but did not say what the Government can do for you.

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/arti...obamas-poor-understanding-of-the-constitution

He was right. The Consititution sets out things that may never be taken from someone, things that they may never endure at the hands of their Government. The Government may not abridge your Freedom of Speech, it may not prevent you form worshipping in your own way. Everything in there are things it can’t do.

The Constitution was never intended to limit the citizenry, but to limit the power of the Government. Those are the Negative Rights that Obama talked about. The Government can’t just walk in and search your home, and go through your stuff on a whim. It must have a Warrant.

Every time the Supreme Court rules that there are exceptions, those negative rights get weaker. Those exceptions should be in the most extreme circumstances, never the standard by which we remove even more of your rights.

I feel good that people are learning the truth about the history of the Constitution. Now it is time to start explaining why the Constitution is set up the way it is. If you want a more modern reading of a right, then we have a process for that. It is called an Amendment. Those are very hard to get because they should be. It should be hard to place restrictions on the people. It should be hard to take away their rights. It should be damned near impossible to remove a right from an individual in this nation.

More people are learning what, now it is time to teach them why.

What a tub of fertilizer.

Seriously. The Constitution means exactly the same things in the ENGLISH LANGUAGE that it meant when written. Changing the meaning of words to change the intent is a game that the Progs have played for decades.

No thank you.

 

[OKTexas]

Better write SCOTUS, or Stare decisis overrules Originalism. The Constitutional text continues to evolve, as it has from the first day. That is not going to stop to please those who believe in Originalism.

Really, since when does the terms of a contract get redefined by the simple passage of time?


.

 

[JakeStarkey]

From D.C. v Heller...on what is protected...

We start therefore with a strong presumption that the Second Amendment right is exercised individually and belongs to all Americans.

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment.

We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35–36 (2001), the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.

How is a street legal AR-15 going to beat an invading military

The same way the AK-47 defeated Helicopters, Tanks, Machine Guns, and every other known modern weapon including attack aircraft and heavy bombers in Vietnam. The same way that the simple rifle is defeating us in Afghanistan today. The same way that weapons bought in Miami gun shops overthrew the Government and Military of Cuba. But let’s play like the revolution that people warn about does happen shall we?

First, the Military has Helicopters, Jets, Drones, Satellites, Tanks, and armored vehicles right? But how many do they have? If you count every single person in the Military, Active Duty, Reserve, National Guard, and Coast Guard, you have perhaps two million. Of those two million, perhaps one hundred thousand are actually Infantry. Now, I don’t know about you, but I doubt that the clerks at Headquarters or the Dental Technicians from Medical are going to be doing a lot of fighting.

About a third of those are navy. How far inland can the Navy reach? A hundred miles? Four hundred? Again, look at the map, and see how thinly the coverage really is, not just limited in distance. There just ain’t that many planes and carriers.

But wait, there is more to consider. Napoleon said an Army marches on it’s stomach. That was true. Then. Now, the Army floats on a sea of Diesel Fuel. Tanks can’t just drive where they want to go, they are amazingly fragile pieces of equipment. So they need trucks to carry them, and fuel to make the truck and the tank go. A tank is not exactly like your car. It isn’t even remotely fuel efficient. A company of Armor burns hundreds of gallons of diesel every day. That is why the tanks spend most of their time in the Motor Pool. It is really expensive to drive them about. Helicopters, Jets, transports, drones, and all that neat flying stuff also burns a hell of a lot of fuel every single day.

If a Revolution starts, and most of the fuel is refined in Texas and Louisiana, where is the Military going to get it when the good old boys there stop showing up to work? Or worse, tamper with the fuel to make it tear up the engines of the tanks? Then how do you get it to the tanks from the refinery? Any revolution worth the word would target logistics first. You see, a lot of us are ex military, and we know what makes an army work. We know it desperately needs fuel, parts, and other supplies. This is why there were so many Convoys for the Insurgents to attack in Iraq and in Afghanistan. It’s why they are still being attacked.

Without Fuel, tanks, trucks, planes, helicopters, and drones are just static display pieces. Patton ran out of fuel on his attack, so it happens even when people are struggling to get the supplies to the front where it is needed.

All those awesome weapons of war also need maintainance. Generally speaking, for every hour of flight time, a helicopter needs ten hours of maintainance. Engines break, transmissions wear, rotors need replacement, and the electronics need repair. So you need a lot of parts to keep those things flying. Tanks too need a lot of maintainance. Tracks wear out quickly. Then if they are not replaced, the tank “throws a track” which means the hundred million dollar awesome tank has just become a stationary pillbox. Still dangerous, but not really threatening.

So in the first month, if the Government was unable to put the revolution down, the Government eventually lose. As the logistic train dried up, the ability of the small military to go where it was neeeded evaporates.

But where are the insurgents? Everywhere. Some here, some there, loosely affiliated, all just pissed off. They’ll fight the cops, and some will die, and so will the cops. The National Guard will probably refuse to move, because who wants to fight their own families? I suppose you could try and Motivate the Soldiers by shooting one or two but then you can never turn your back on the troops, because they fragged officers in Vietnam, and they can and will do so again.

When I made Sergeant, I called my Dad just as proud as could be. My Dad said to remember one thing. While I was leading the troops, I should look over my shoulder now and then to make sure someone was following me. I didn’t get that at first, but I did later. My soldiers might not be willing to follow me, and if they aren’t there isn’t much I can do about it.

If you imagine the military is filled with automatons, you are sadly mistaken. There are five types who join the military. The first group are the legacy’s. These are people who joined because Dad, Granddad, Great Granddad, and so on joined. These are the Lieutenant Dan’s of the military. The second Group are the lack of option people. They joined because there were no jobs, and it was either join the military, or end up in jail. The third group are the killers. These are the guys who want to kill someone. There aren’t many of them, thankfully. But there are always one or two in a company. The rest of the soldiers generally don’t trust them too much, but that is a case by case basis.

The fourth type are the college fund. These guys and girls just want to do their tour, and get the hell out and go to school. They have dreams that they want to pursue, and they are willing to serve, but aren’t looking for any heroics. They just want to do their time, and get the hell out.

The Fifth Type, that is the largest group. These are the Patriots. They believe that serving is good. They are off to defend their families, friends, neighbors. They love the nation, and their hearts swell hearing John Phillips Sousa’s various marches.

The Killers might fire on fellow Americans. The Legacy’s probably won’t. The College fund types, call that a coin toss. The lack of option people? They’ll go with the majority. They’re trying to stay out of trouble. The vast majority of the Patriots will not do it. They won’t fire on fellow Americans. They joined to defend America, and America is the people to them.

Or do you think that the Georgia National Guard will fire on their neighbors and friends? If you do, you are sadly mistaken. Oh, and all those drones, haven’t won anything.

So you think that a semi auto AR-15 is the same weapon as a full auto AK-47..............

Kid go play with your toys

I get it, you asked a question that you thought was clever, and now it was answered with intelligent responses......yes, irregular warfare can defeat a superior military force.....

Now you don't know how to respond...

You provided no answer of your own, you copy and pasted a bunch of krap that could have been pasted by a 3 year old

If he wants to stay on the payroll, he pastes what he is sent.

 

[Rosy]

How is a street legal AR-15 going to beat an invading military

The same way the AK-47 defeated Helicopters, Tanks, Machine Guns, and every other known modern weapon including attack aircraft and heavy bombers in Vietnam. The same way that the simple rifle is defeating us in Afghanistan today. The same way that weapons bought in Miami gun shops overthrew the Government and Military of Cuba. But let’s play like the revolution that people warn about does happen shall we?

First, the Military has Helicopters, Jets, Drones, Satellites, Tanks, and armored vehicles right? But how many do they have? If you count every single person in the Military, Active Duty, Reserve, National Guard, and Coast Guard, you have perhaps two million. Of those two million, perhaps one hundred thousand are actually Infantry. Now, I don’t know about you, but I doubt that the clerks at Headquarters or the Dental Technicians from Medical are going to be doing a lot of fighting.

About a third of those are navy. How far inland can the Navy reach? A hundred miles? Four hundred? Again, look at the map, and see how thinly the coverage really is, not just limited in distance. There just ain’t that many planes and carriers.

But wait, there is more to consider. Napoleon said an Army marches on it’s stomach. That was true. Then. Now, the Army floats on a sea of Diesel Fuel. Tanks can’t just drive where they want to go, they are amazingly fragile pieces of equipment. So they need trucks to carry them, and fuel to make the truck and the tank go. A tank is not exactly like your car. It isn’t even remotely fuel efficient. A company of Armor burns hundreds of gallons of diesel every day. That is why the tanks spend most of their time in the Motor Pool. It is really expensive to drive them about. Helicopters, Jets, transports, drones, and all that neat flying stuff also burns a hell of a lot of fuel every single day.

If a Revolution starts, and most of the fuel is refined in Texas and Louisiana, where is the Military going to get it when the good old boys there stop showing up to work? Or worse, tamper with the fuel to make it tear up the engines of the tanks? Then how do you get it to the tanks from the refinery? Any revolution worth the word would target logistics first. You see, a lot of us are ex military, and we know what makes an army work. We know it desperately needs fuel, parts, and other supplies. This is why there were so many Convoys for the Insurgents to attack in Iraq and in Afghanistan. It’s why they are still being attacked.

Without Fuel, tanks, trucks, planes, helicopters, and drones are just static display pieces. Patton ran out of fuel on his attack, so it happens even when people are struggling to get the supplies to the front where it is needed.

All those awesome weapons of war also need maintainance. Generally speaking, for every hour of flight time, a helicopter needs ten hours of maintainance. Engines break, transmissions wear, rotors need replacement, and the electronics need repair. So you need a lot of parts to keep those things flying. Tanks too need a lot of maintainance. Tracks wear out quickly. Then if they are not replaced, the tank “throws a track” which means the hundred million dollar awesome tank has just become a stationary pillbox. Still dangerous, but not really threatening.

So in the first month, if the Government was unable to put the revolution down, the Government eventually lose. As the logistic train dried up, the ability of the small military to go where it was neeeded evaporates.

But where are the insurgents? Everywhere. Some here, some there, loosely affiliated, all just pissed off. They’ll fight the cops, and some will die, and so will the cops. The National Guard will probably refuse to move, because who wants to fight their own families? I suppose you could try and Motivate the Soldiers by shooting one or two but then you can never turn your back on the troops, because they fragged officers in Vietnam, and they can and will do so again.

When I made Sergeant, I called my Dad just as proud as could be. My Dad said to remember one thing. While I was leading the troops, I should look over my shoulder now and then to make sure someone was following me. I didn’t get that at first, but I did later. My soldiers might not be willing to follow me, and if they aren’t there isn’t much I can do about it.

If you imagine the military is filled with automatons, you are sadly mistaken. There are five types who join the military. The first group are the legacy’s. These are people who joined because Dad, Granddad, Great Granddad, and so on joined. These are the Lieutenant Dan’s of the military. The second Group are the lack of option people. They joined because there were no jobs, and it was either join the military, or end up in jail. The third group are the killers. These are the guys who want to kill someone. There aren’t many of them, thankfully. But there are always one or two in a company. The rest of the soldiers generally don’t trust them too much, but that is a case by case basis.

The fourth type are the college fund. These guys and girls just want to do their tour, and get the hell out and go to school. They have dreams that they want to pursue, and they are willing to serve, but aren’t looking for any heroics. They just want to do their time, and get the hell out.

The Fifth Type, that is the largest group. These are the Patriots. They believe that serving is good. They are off to defend their families, friends, neighbors. They love the nation, and their hearts swell hearing John Phillips Sousa’s various marches.

The Killers might fire on fellow Americans. The Legacy’s probably won’t. The College fund types, call that a coin toss. The lack of option people? They’ll go with the majority. They’re trying to stay out of trouble. The vast majority of the Patriots will not do it. They won’t fire on fellow Americans. They joined to defend America, and America is the people to them.

Or do you think that the Georgia National Guard will fire on their neighbors and friends? If you do, you are sadly mistaken. Oh, and all those drones, haven’t won anything.

So you think that a semi auto AR-15 is the same weapon as a full auto AK-47..............

Kid go play with your toys

I get it, you asked a question that you thought was clever, and now it was answered with intelligent responses......yes, irregular warfare can defeat a superior military force.....

Now you don't know how to respond...

You provided no answer of your own, you copy and pasted a bunch of krap that could have been pasted by a 3 year old

If he wants to stay on the payroll, he pastes what he is sent.

He is too dumb to pick grapes

 

[JakeStarkey]

Better write SCOTUS, or Stare decisis overrules Originalism. The Constitutional text continues to evolve, as it has from the first day. That is not going to stop to please those who believe in Originalism.

Really, since when does the terms of a contract get redefined by the simple passage of time?.

When the contract has its renegotiation terms.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The same way the AK-47 defeated Helicopters, Tanks, Machine Guns, and every other known modern weapon including attack aircraft and heavy bombers in Vietnam. The same way that the simple rifle is defeating us in Afghanistan today. The same way that weapons bought in Miami gun shops overthrew the Government and Military of Cuba. But let’s play like the revolution that people warn about does happen shall we?

First, the Military has Helicopters, Jets, Drones, Satellites, Tanks, and armored vehicles right? But how many do they have? If you count every single person in the Military, Active Duty, Reserve, National Guard, and Coast Guard, you have perhaps two million. Of those two million, perhaps one hundred thousand are actually Infantry. Now, I don’t know about you, but I doubt that the clerks at Headquarters or the Dental Technicians from Medical are going to be doing a lot of fighting.

About a third of those are navy. How far inland can the Navy reach? A hundred miles? Four hundred? Again, look at the map, and see how thinly the coverage really is, not just limited in distance. There just ain’t that many planes and carriers.

But wait, there is more to consider. Napoleon said an Army marches on it’s stomach. That was true. Then. Now, the Army floats on a sea of Diesel Fuel. Tanks can’t just drive where they want to go, they are amazingly fragile pieces of equipment. So they need trucks to carry them, and fuel to make the truck and the tank go. A tank is not exactly like your car. It isn’t even remotely fuel efficient. A company of Armor burns hundreds of gallons of diesel every day. That is why the tanks spend most of their time in the Motor Pool. It is really expensive to drive them about. Helicopters, Jets, transports, drones, and all that neat flying stuff also burns a hell of a lot of fuel every single day.

If a Revolution starts, and most of the fuel is refined in Texas and Louisiana, where is the Military going to get it when the good old boys there stop showing up to work? Or worse, tamper with the fuel to make it tear up the engines of the tanks? Then how do you get it to the tanks from the refinery? Any revolution worth the word would target logistics first. You see, a lot of us are ex military, and we know what makes an army work. We know it desperately needs fuel, parts, and other supplies. This is why there were so many Convoys for the Insurgents to attack in Iraq and in Afghanistan. It’s why they are still being attacked.

Without Fuel, tanks, trucks, planes, helicopters, and drones are just static display pieces. Patton ran out of fuel on his attack, so it happens even when people are struggling to get the supplies to the front where it is needed.

All those awesome weapons of war also need maintainance. Generally speaking, for every hour of flight time, a helicopter needs ten hours of maintainance. Engines break, transmissions wear, rotors need replacement, and the electronics need repair. So you need a lot of parts to keep those things flying. Tanks too need a lot of maintainance. Tracks wear out quickly. Then if they are not replaced, the tank “throws a track” which means the hundred million dollar awesome tank has just become a stationary pillbox. Still dangerous, but not really threatening.

So in the first month, if the Government was unable to put the revolution down, the Government eventually lose. As the logistic train dried up, the ability of the small military to go where it was neeeded evaporates.

But where are the insurgents? Everywhere. Some here, some there, loosely affiliated, all just pissed off. They’ll fight the cops, and some will die, and so will the cops. The National Guard will probably refuse to move, because who wants to fight their own families? I suppose you could try and Motivate the Soldiers by shooting one or two but then you can never turn your back on the troops, because they fragged officers in Vietnam, and they can and will do so again.

When I made Sergeant, I called my Dad just as proud as could be. My Dad said to remember one thing. While I was leading the troops, I should look over my shoulder now and then to make sure someone was following me. I didn’t get that at first, but I did later. My soldiers might not be willing to follow me, and if they aren’t there isn’t much I can do about it.

If you imagine the military is filled with automatons, you are sadly mistaken. There are five types who join the military. The first group are the legacy’s. These are people who joined because Dad, Granddad, Great Granddad, and so on joined. These are the Lieutenant Dan’s of the military. The second Group are the lack of option people. They joined because there were no jobs, and it was either join the military, or end up in jail. The third group are the killers. These are the guys who want to kill someone. There aren’t many of them, thankfully. But there are always one or two in a company. The rest of the soldiers generally don’t trust them too much, but that is a case by case basis.

The fourth type are the college fund. These guys and girls just want to do their tour, and get the hell out and go to school. They have dreams that they want to pursue, and they are willing to serve, but aren’t looking for any heroics. They just want to do their time, and get the hell out.

The Fifth Type, that is the largest group. These are the Patriots. They believe that serving is good. They are off to defend their families, friends, neighbors. They love the nation, and their hearts swell hearing John Phillips Sousa’s various marches.

The Killers might fire on fellow Americans. The Legacy’s probably won’t. The College fund types, call that a coin toss. The lack of option people? They’ll go with the majority. They’re trying to stay out of trouble. The vast majority of the Patriots will not do it. They won’t fire on fellow Americans. They joined to defend America, and America is the people to them.

Or do you think that the Georgia National Guard will fire on their neighbors and friends? If you do, you are sadly mistaken. Oh, and all those drones, haven’t won anything.

So you think that a semi auto AR-15 is the same weapon as a full auto AK-47..............

Kid go play with your toys

I get it, you asked a question that you thought was clever, and now it was answered with intelligent responses......yes, irregular warfare can defeat a superior military force.....

Now you don't know how to respond...

You provided no answer of your own, you copy and pasted a bunch of krap that could have been pasted by a 3 year old

If he wants to stay on the payroll, he pastes what he is sent.

He is too dumb to pick grapes

Hey, the job keeps in some pesos.

 

[OKTexas]

Better write SCOTUS, or Stare decisis overrules Originalism. The Constitutional text continues to evolve, as it has from the first day. That is not going to stop to please those who believe in Originalism.

Really, since when does the terms of a contract get redefined by the simple passage of time?.

When the contract has its renegotiation terms.

So tell me, where and when was the commerce clause renegotiated to include intrastate commerce? And who were the parties to this renegotiation?


.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

The problem is that the context has changed, and the actual words do not apply. A well-regulated militia is no longer necessary for the security of a free state. We have a secure free state, guaranteed by a permanent standing army. This something the Founding Father never anticipated.

Therefore, it would not be entirely specious for the USSC to declare the entire Second Amendment void, because it no longer applies.

Not that I expect that to happen anytime soon.

Supremely misguided and if truly expressed as intended, perhaps the saddest testament to a human mind in modern history.

Evil men are just as prevalent today as they were in the 1700's. Maybe MORE so.
Your lack of insight is astonishing...and such is EXACTLY why Venezuelans have a murderous dictator today.
Humans lacking in hindsight are also why China just fell to what promises to be another long era of human suffering.
They didn't need a militia or arms either.....ditto North Korea & Russia.

Your words should make Tyrants and evil men happy.
That you can vote is a travesty and one of the few failures apparent in the US Constitution.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Better write SCOTUS, or Stare decisis overrules Originalism. The Constitutional text continues to evolve, as it has from the first day. That is not going to stop to please those who believe in Originalism.

Really, since when does the terms of a contract get redefined by the simple passage of time?.

When the contract has its renegotiation terms.

So tell me, where and when was the commerce clause renegotiated to include intrastate commerce? And who were the parties to this renegotiation?.

Go read the Constitution for the first time, please.

 

[Rosy]

So you think that a semi auto AR-15 is the same weapon as a full auto AK-47..............

Kid go play with your toys

I get it, you asked a question that you thought was clever, and now it was answered with intelligent responses......yes, irregular warfare can defeat a superior military force.....

Now you don't know how to respond...

You provided no answer of your own, you copy and pasted a bunch of krap that could have been pasted by a 3 year old

If he wants to stay on the payroll, he pastes what he is sent.

He is too dumb to pick grapes

Hey, the job keeps in some pesos.

I am sure that Muller will hire him to make stuff up

 

[OKTexas]

Better write SCOTUS, or Stare decisis overrules Originalism. The Constitutional text continues to evolve, as it has from the first day. That is not going to stop to please those who believe in Originalism.

Really, since when does the terms of a contract get redefined by the simple passage of time?.

When the contract has its renegotiation terms.

So tell me, where and when was the commerce clause renegotiated to include intrastate commerce? And who were the parties to this renegotiation?.

Go read the Constitution for the first time, please.

You fucking coward, answer the questions.


.

 

[blastoff]

There is some good news, and some bad news in that by the way. First the link. Pew: Majority now says SCOTUS should base rulings on what Constitution means "in current times," not originally

For years now people like myself have been pointing out that the asinine arguments of the anti-gunners that the Second Amendment applies to the National Guard, what they see as the “Militia” is wrong. We have been pointing out with links, and articles, that the Militia at the time the Constitution was Ratified, was every single person. Ok, actually it was every able bodied free man. But that is because Women and Slaves were not considered for the right. A belief fixed by Amendments later on.

Well the good news is that people are obviously learning. The bad news, they still don’t want those rules to apply to Supreme Court Decisions. Instead, they want the Constitution viewed by what the words mean TODAY.

This means that the education is working. Those of us who keep trying to educate our fellow citizens should feel gratified that our efforts are showing results. Now, if we could only explain to them that the words used were an effort to capture an ideal, a principle intended to guide us, then we would be better off.

President Obama understood much of this. He said that the Constitution was a series of negative rights. It said what the States, the Government could not do to you, but did not say what the Government can do for you.

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/arti...obamas-poor-understanding-of-the-constitution

He was right. The Consititution sets out things that may never be taken from someone, things that they may never endure at the hands of their Government. The Government may not abridge your Freedom of Speech, it may not prevent you form worshipping in your own way. Everything in there are things it can’t do.

The Constitution was never intended to limit the citizenry, but to limit the power of the Government. Those are the Negative Rights that Obama talked about. The Government can’t just walk in and search your home, and go through your stuff on a whim. It must have a Warrant.

Every time the Supreme Court rules that there are exceptions, those negative rights get weaker. Those exceptions should be in the most extreme circumstances, never the standard by which we remove even more of your rights.

I feel good that people are learning the truth about the history of the Constitution. Now it is time to start explaining why the Constitution is set up the way it is. If you want a more modern reading of a right, then we have a process for that. It is called an Amendment. Those are very hard to get because they should be. It should be hard to place restrictions on the people. It should be hard to take away their rights. It should be damned near impossible to remove a right from an individual in this nation.

More people are learning what, now it is time to teach them why.

Do you happen to have a list of the questions that were asked?

Not to mention a breakdown of those selected to participate in the poll. After the many different poll findings about the Hildebeast's impending presidency most pollsters have be proven to be nothing more than lefty partisan hacks, and doubt they've done anything to change their stripes.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The problem is that the context has changed, and the actual words do not apply. A well-regulated militia is no longer necessary for the security of a free state. We have a secure free state, guaranteed by a permanent standing army. This something the Founding Father never anticipated.

Therefore, it would not be entirely specious for the USSC to declare the entire Second Amendment void, because it no longer applies.

Not that I expect that to happen anytime soon.

No, that would be the responsibility of the Congress to amend the Constitution as that is how changes were intended.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

There is some good news, and some bad news in that by the way. First the link. Pew: Majority now says SCOTUS should base rulings on what Constitution means "in current times," not originally

I don't buy the "majority" claim, but never let it be said there is a shortage of uneducated morons among the current American citizenry, and however many illegal "guests" responded to that poll.

never let it be said there is a shortage of uneducated morons among the current American citizenry,
That's for sure. Look at who's President.

You can take the blinders off now so you can all of the winning that is occuring.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Better write SCOTUS, or Stare decisis overrules Originalism. The Constitutional text continues to evolve, as it has from the first day. That is not going to stop to please those who believe in Originalism.

Really, since when does the terms of a contract get redefined by the simple passage of time?.

When the contract has its renegotiation terms.

So tell me, where and when was the commerce clause renegotiated to include intrastate commerce? And who were the parties to this renegotiation?.

Go read the Constitution for the first time, please.

You fucking coward, answer the questions..

tsk tsk I did. You have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[blastoff]

The problem is that the context has changed, and the actual words do not apply. A well-regulated militia is no longer necessary for the security of a free state. We have a secure free state, guaranteed by a permanent standing army. This something the Founding Father never anticipated.

Therefore, it would not be entirely specious for the USSC to declare the entire Second Amendment void, because it no longer applies.

Not that I expect that to happen anytime soon.

No, that would be the responsibility of the Congress to amend the Constitution as that is how changes were intended.

True. But amendment is such a BIG word for these low info idiots.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The Founders could envision a standing army. The Founding Fathers prohibited a Standing Army. They understood that such a force had been used to subjugate the populations before, and made efforts to prevent that from happening in the future. This is where the principles that are supposed to guide us come in.

In the time of the Founders, a few weeks could allow an individual who was untrained, or barely trained, to be of sufficient skill to be a soldier. Remember in those days fighting in an army meant marching right at the enemy with bayonets fixed to muskets. Today, it is understood that it takes two years before a soldier is sufficiently trained and experienced. Unless all you want are armies of cannon fodder, which we tend to frown upon.

The Principles are what matter. The reasons behind the Amendment, which was a statement of principle. It used terms that were widely understood, and in use, at the time. Common terms. It would be as if I wrote it during the 1980’s. It would have used Dude, Bogus, and Fucked up. Terms that today, are pretty much as archaic as the ones used. Language changes over time. To understand the intent, you have to read, study, and think so you can understand the language of the era, and what the people were trying to say.

It is why the Fourth Amendment applies to email, and phone calls. Because the intent of secure in their person and papers was not just whatever notes they had tucked in a drawer, but all versions of the written word, and communications.

The term Cruel and Unusual Punishment. At the time, Stocks and floggings were if not common, certainly not unheard of. Public Hangings were the norm for serious crimes like Murder.

Yet, today we consider those things to be Cruel and Unsual. The intent behind that was not to insist that the old punishments were the standard for all the time to come. The intent was that things which were outrageous would be prohibited. What those things were, well that was left up to the people to decide.

There is some room for evolution, interpretation. But that interpretation must be within the principles of the Founders. You can’t argue that emails don’t apply when we are discussing the Fourth Amendment, because the Founders never imagined electronic communication. Yet, you make the same argument about rights you wish we did not have. You have to have them all or you will have none.

If the founders wanted us to have guns to shoot our elected officials the amendment would say that. It doesn`t. How do you know what the founders could envision? You don`t.

Sure we do. We have far more to read than the Constitution. Start with the Federalist Papers. It is long, but a good view inside the minds of the people who started all this.

Secondly, we can read the laws they passed, including the Militia acts. Those identified the Militia as every able bodied free man. Today, thanks to our process of Amendments, able bodied free men mean men, and women, of all colors and creeds.

So if the Militia of the era was every able bodied free man, literally everyone, then why do you think that the founders never imagined what we have today?

Oh, and if you are wondering what Well Regulated means, that’s covered too. You see, the Governors of the new States had the authority to appoint Officers. That is to say they got a piece of paper that said they were commissioned to be an officer of this rank. Those Officers appointed by the Goverors, were the ones who commanded the Militia when it was raised. The other half of that was the fact that when activated, Military Discipline was provided for. The Militia was expected to obey orders, and follow the rules of war.

The Draft of the era was one of the Officers would ride into the town, and announce that the militia was being called up, and the town of two hundred able bodied men, would provide twenty bodies. If twenty men volunteered then no one was “drafted”.

All of this is known from the writings of the era. If you don’t know it, it is not because the Founders did not tell us, it is because you have not tried to learn it. Judging what someone intended while wallowing in ignorance is not the best way to come to an accurate conclusion. You might find one, but it would be chance not intent.

The writings are not the Constitution and they mean nothing in the year 2018. I know about the militias and how worthless they were. They butchered Indian women and children and ran from Indian warriors which is one of the reasons we turned to a real army.Gnadenhutten massacre

There are many things we’ve done wrong in our history. We should learn from them, and then make sure we avoid repeating the wrongs. It is one of the things that annoys me when I hear of a story that has clear parallels to historic errors. I’ve even written about how we tend to learn the wrong lesson and how it screws up our efforts to minimize a repeat.

Now, the writings of the era describe principles. Principles that at the time were radical. By using those principles, we can continue to improve, and grow, and be guided as to what is right for us. By ignoring those principles we can only demolish what is, and what could be. The quotes and statements from the past not just from the founders, but from radical thinkers through history are our guide. We must learn them, and understand them in context, in order to be guided to a better future.

The problem with history is that we know what happens. We know how the story ends. We look and point and scream you idiots, can’t you see what happens if you do this? We look at the First World War and the demand for reparations from Germany, and we know that it contributes to the Great Depression. We look at the horrors we have committed in history, the evils we have done and we should learn from them.

Before we can learn, we must understand them. Not from our current point of view, but from the point of view of those involved.

Look at World War II. The Allies committed a great number of atrocities, things that we consider War Crimes today. Firebombing Tokyo, Dresden, and many other cities as one of a long list of atrocities. Do you think that the leaders of the era woke up one day and decided to barbecue Tokyo? It wasn’t a decision made that morning, it was the end of a long series of decisions. One led to the other, each justification was used to justify the next one. The Slippery Slope I mentioned in another response.

Now, the simple thing to do is to stand around and scream that we were awful and we did terrible things. But to truly understand it, you have to understand how we got to that point, what led to it?

Precision Bombing was simply put, not possible. We learned that the hard way. We learned that perhaps ten percent of the bombs dropped would land within five miles of the target, never mind hitting the target. We believed that if we could make the people suffer, they would demand peace. But it hadn’t ever worked in history. But the argument went, we didn’t have this weapon, or that tactic, or this tool.

We learned. We learned and we developed the technology to try and minimize civilian casualties. The collateral damage that we dismissed before. We developed the tactics, and techniques, to go with that technology.

We no longer firebomb a city to destroy the infrastructure required to run the factories. We don’t bomb dams to flood the valley and drown the people, all in an effort to disrupt the hydroelectric power to factories. We don’t bomb a city hoping that one of the bombs we flung in their general direction might hit the factory. We use precision munitions, which are still not kisses on the cheek, but we do it because we don’t want to repeat those actions of history.

I can’t go back in time and stop the horrible things that happened. I can only try and learn from those events. I can only hope that if we learn enough history, we might not repeat it. I can hope that we can understand what the historical figures were really trying to do, even if, especially if, it did not turn out the way they hoped. That is the only way we can prevent such things from happening again.

History does repeat it's self. This is really true if you don't teach it in school the little ones don't hear about the horror of WWII or anyother war it will be repeated. False history is taught in most countries. Russia is a good example in they teach that the State of Alaska was rented to the USA for 99 years and will be returned to the USSR or Russia at that time. This was told to me by a Russian student who was attending school at MTSU (Middle Tenn State University)

That would have been in the 1960s. Didn't happen, did it?

 

[rightwinger]

A Majority of people polled want the Supremes to rule based upon what the Constitution means today.

Who cares what Diana Ross has to say?