Progressive Propaganda: The 2nd Amendment Edition

[Pilot1]

Also, school shooting are very rare, and small numbers die in these shootings. Go to inner city Chicago if you want to stop murders.

 

[danielpalos]

If guns make us safe and secure, why so many gun deaths compared to other civilized nations?

Because idiot progressives illegally ban firearms where they can - creating victim zones. Such as schools.

The fact is, crime has been plummeting over the past 30 years as firearm sales have been skyrocketing. Game over.

You mean the liberal hotbeds of Texas and Florida where these last two big school shootings happened?

you do know that school shootings account for less than 1% of all murders don't you?

Why are you comparing it to “all murders”?

If school shootings are no big deal why bother having police guards and armed teachers ?

Why is being murdered in a school shooting somehow worse than being murdered anywhere else?

Murder is murder one is no worse than another.

It's just as horrible to be murdered by stabbing as it is to be murdered by shooting.

It's you people who want to make the distinction that being murdered with a gun is somehow worse than being murdered in any other way

We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems in our free States.

 

[Pilot1]

Many states illegally restrict their citizens from legally being able to carry a gun, and also some types of guns. These states have no business passing any gun laws.

 

[danielpalos]

Many states illegally restrict their citizens from legally being able to carry a gun, and also some types of guns. These states have no business passing any gun laws.

States should simply organize their gun lovers into well regulated militia.

 

[Pilot1]

States should simply organize their gun lovers into well regulated militia.

They don't have to. All able bodied men over 17 are already in the unorganized militia. Well regulated means trained, and well equipped, which most law abiding gun owners are.

 

[danielpalos]

States should simply organize their gun lovers into well regulated militia.

They don't have to. All able bodied men over 17 are already in the unorganized militia. Well regulated means trained, and well equipped, which most law abiding gun owners are.

sorry; that is just right wing fantasy.

this is the common law for the common defense:

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

 

[Pilot1]

The Supreme Court also correctly ruled that the right to keep and BEAR arms is an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT. Here's how the Militia is defined in U.S. Code. Not a right wing fantasy. It is U.S. law.

(a)
The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1)
the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2)
the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

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

 

[danielpalos]

The Supreme Court also correctly ruled that the right to keep and BEAR arms is an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT. Here's how the Militia is defined in U.S. Code. Not a right wing fantasy. It is U.S. law.

(a)
The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1)
the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2)
the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

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

you are either, organized or unorganized for Second Amendment purposes.

 

[Pilot1]

you are either, organized or unorganized for Second Amendment purposes.

No. The Second Amendment's right to keep and bear arms is NOT tied to being in a militia, even though all able bodied men can be in a militia if they so choose.

 

[danielpalos]

you are either, organized or unorganized for Second Amendment purposes.

No. The Second Amendment's right to keep and bear arms is NOT tied to being in a militia, even though all able bodied men can be in a militia if they so choose.

The People are the Militia; you are either organized or not.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

you are either, organized or unorganized for Second Amendment purposes.

Wrong.

Neither the 2nd Amendment nor 10 USC 246 can restrict the right of individuals to keep and bear arms. Congress is banned from restricting arms. All federal laws that restrict the ownership or use of arms are unconstitutional.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The People are the Militia; you are either organized or not.

The people have the right, not the militia.

There are no collective rights. Those who claim that collective rights exist are those who respect no individual rights.

 

[danielpalos]

you are either, organized or unorganized for Second Amendment purposes.

Wrong.

Neither the 2nd Amendment nor 10 USC 246 can restrict the right of individuals to keep and bear arms. Congress is banned from restricting arms. All federal laws that restrict the ownership or use of arms are unconstitutional.

the people are the militia and subject to an act of Congress;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

the militia is either organized or unorganized.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

the people are the militia and subject to an act of Congress;

The only thing the 2nd Amendment does is prohibit Congress from regulating arms. Nothing more.

 

[danielpalos]

the people are the militia and subject to an act of Congress;

The only thing the 2nd Amendment does is prohibit Congress from regulating arms. Nothing more.

Our Second Amendment is about the security of our free States. It says so in the first clause. The second clause must follow the first clause.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Our Second Amendment is about the security of our free States. It says so in the first clause. The second clause must follow the first clause.

And, to secure a free state, the right of the people...shall not be infringed.

The operation is to limit congressional power. You know I am right, you are just being a shit head.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

"A well-regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state."

That alone DOES NOTHING!!!!

With or without the first clause,

"The right of the people...shall not be infringed."

Specifically limits ANY action to limit the right.

You know I am right.

 

[danielpalos]

Our Second Amendment is about the security of our free States. It says so in the first clause. The second clause must follow the first clause.

And, to secure a free state, the right of the people...shall not be infringed.

The operation is to limit congressional power. You know I am right, you are just being a shit head.

It is not about natural rights; it is about the security of a free State. It says so in the first clause.

 

[danielpalos]

"A well-regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state."

That alone DOES NOTHING!!!!

With or without the first clause,

"The right of the people...shall not be infringed."

Specifically limits ANY action to limit the right.

You know I am right.

We should have no security problems in our free States.

You know I am right, even though I am on the left.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

It is not about natural rights; it is about the security of a free State. It says so in the first clause.

One clause:
"A well-regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state"

...is wholly dependent on the second clause.

The second clause can stand on its own.

It's not about a militia or a free state. It is SOLELY about Congressional Power. It still does not protect individual natural rights. It only limits Congress. And, as you said, leaves the power to states to protect natural rights.

Admit that or I have nothing more to say to you. Even the most one-sided partisan hack will admit that a proper reading of the 2nd Amendment demonstrates an intent to limit the power of Congress, regardless of the purpose.