Thank God for our RIGHT to keep and bear arms

[RetiredGySgt]

The 2nd Amendment isn't going anywhere you crazy paranoids.

They ignore or do not know the meaning of the term "well regulated Militia". I doubt they know the difference between "keep" and "bear".

Except that it doesn't say "well regulated militia" junior. It says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". The right belongs to the people junior.

Are you sure? I thought the 2nd Amendment was a single sentence that began with "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State...". What 2nd Amendment are you using?

I am sure. It clearly states "the right of the people". The right belongs to the people. There is simply no denying it.

The right of the people is clearly defined as for the purpose of maintaining a well regulated Militia. That is why the Amendment starts out with the purpose of the Amendment. You do not understand the meaning of Militia and how the SCOTUS has judged and confirmed its meaning since the inception of the United States.

Every person 17 to 45 is a member of the militia there fore EVERY person 17 to 45 has the right to own possess and bear arms thanks for playing.

 

[PK1]

They ignore or do not know the meaning of the term "well regulated Militia". I doubt they know the difference between "keep" and "bear".

Except that it doesn't say "well regulated militia" junior. It says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". The right belongs to the people junior.

---
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
.

.... The previous section was simply the why. And the why (while important for sure in context), is largely irrelevant what it comes to the what. And the what is that the people have the right to keep and bear arms.

---
Before the "why" & "what" is the intent of the writers during their era.
.

Uh....no genius. Their intent was "the right of the people". Which is why they said "the right of the people".

---
The intent was to maintain "the security of a free state" and "A well regulated militia being necessary"
was how that intent was achieved during that era.
.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

I thank the Constitution and those who refuse to let others subvert it,

 

[RandallFlagg]

No need to thank 'God'. Humans are the source of vocabulary.

A secular humanist I see... Perhaps you might think of reading the Bible (The Tower of Babel). Humans are NOT the source of the vocabulary. Nice try, though.

 

[Camp]

They ignore or do not know the meaning of the term "well regulated Militia". I doubt they know the difference between "keep" and "bear".

Except that it doesn't say "well regulated militia" junior. It says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". The right belongs to the people junior.

Are you sure? I thought the 2nd Amendment was a single sentence that began with "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State...". What 2nd Amendment are you using?

I am sure. It clearly states "the right of the people". The right belongs to the people. There is simply no denying it.

The right of the people is clearly defined as for the purpose of maintaining a well regulated Militia. That is why the Amendment starts out with the purpose of the Amendment. You do not understand the meaning of Militia and how the SCOTUS has judged and confirmed its meaning since the inception of the United States.

Every person 17 to 45 is a member of the militia there fore EVERY person 17 to 45 has the right to own possess and bear arms thanks for playing.

That is correct and that is why "well regulated" is the introduction to the Amendment is included. The State has the authority to impose regulations. As long as the regulations are followed every able bodied citizen is part of the militia and the right can not be infringed. The SCOTUS is the final arbiter of whether a regulation is an infringement of not.
Not sure about the age limitations. Is that a SCOTUS ruling?

 

[RandallFlagg]

The 2nd Amendment isn't going anywhere you crazy paranoids.

I'll bet you a dollar and a quarter that if Hillary (the murderer) Clinton wins the election - within the bitchs' first term, there will be a movement to strike the second from the Constitution. Care to wager?

 

[RandallFlagg]

I thank the Constitution and those who refuse to let others subvert it,

Indeed. Our founders were absolute geniuses.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Another perfect example of how the Constitution saves lives and liberal policy would cause deaths. This hatchet-wielding maniac would be fully compliant with law under liberals gun control utopia. But thankfully, the Constitution granted this person the right to protect himself and those around him.

Customer Steps Up to Stop a Hatchet-Wielding Masked Man From Wreaking Havoc at a 7-Eleven

You have to have a basic understanding of the liberal mindset. To liberals, the word "freedom" is abhorent to them. They despise the word. Liberals are sheep, willing to say and do whatever they are told by their masters. They are followers - not leaders. They cower in shadows, only to emerge when the odds are in their favor. They are cowards.

 

[PK1]

The 2nd Amendment isn't going anywhere you crazy paranoids.

I'll bet you a dollar and a quarter that if Hillary (the murderer) Clinton wins the election - within the bitchs' first term, there will be a movement to strike the second from the Constitution. Care to wager?

---
Your wager is as worthless as your perceptions, or is it your brain's fault?
.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Except that it doesn't say "well regulated militia" junior. It says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". The right belongs to the people junior.

Are you sure? I thought the 2nd Amendment was a single sentence that began with "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State...". What 2nd Amendment are you using?

I am sure. It clearly states "the right of the people". The right belongs to the people. There is simply no denying it.

The right of the people is clearly defined as for the purpose of maintaining a well regulated Militia. That is why the Amendment starts out with the purpose of the Amendment. You do not understand the meaning of Militia and how the SCOTUS has judged and confirmed its meaning since the inception of the United States.

Every person 17 to 45 is a member of the militia there fore EVERY person 17 to 45 has the right to own possess and bear arms thanks for playing.

That is correct and that is why "well regulated" is the introduction to the Amendment is included. The State has the authority to impose regulations. As long as the regulations are followed every able bodied citizen is part of the militia and the right can not be infringed. The SCOTUS is the final arbiter of whether a regulation is an infringement of not.
Not sure about the age limitations. Is that a SCOTUS ruling?

The Supreme Court has ALREADY RULED and that ruling is that the 2nd Amendment conveys an INDIVIDUAL Right not a collective right. Perhaps you should actually catch up with the times?

 

[RandallFlagg]

The 2nd Amendment isn't going anywhere you crazy paranoids.

I'll bet you a dollar and a quarter that if Hillary (the murderer) Clinton wins the election - within the bitchs' first term, there will be a movement to strike the second from the Constitution. Care to wager?

---
Your wager is as worthless as your perceptions, or is it your brain's fault?
.

So, I take it that you are afraid to lose $1.25? You liberal sheep fool no one.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Are you sure? I thought the 2nd Amendment was a single sentence that began with "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State...". What 2nd Amendment are you using?

I am sure. It clearly states "the right of the people". The right belongs to the people. There is simply no denying it.

The right of the people is clearly defined as for the purpose of maintaining a well regulated Militia. That is why the Amendment starts out with the purpose of the Amendment. You do not understand the meaning of Militia and how the SCOTUS has judged and confirmed its meaning since the inception of the United States.

Every person 17 to 45 is a member of the militia there fore EVERY person 17 to 45 has the right to own possess and bear arms thanks for playing.

That is correct and that is why "well regulated" is the introduction to the Amendment is included. The State has the authority to impose regulations. As long as the regulations are followed every able bodied citizen is part of the militia and the right can not be infringed. The SCOTUS is the final arbiter of whether a regulation is an infringement of not.
Not sure about the age limitations. Is that a SCOTUS ruling?

The Supreme Court has ALREADY RULED and that ruling is that the 2nd Amendment conveys an INDIVIDUAL Right not a collective right. Perhaps you should actually catch up with the times?

Couldn't agree more. However. The problem arises with the next two-three appointments to the SCOTUS. One thing about this bullshit "court" is that they change rulings at will - according to whom is sitting their fat asses on the bench at any given time. The Supremes, like every other "court" in the land legislates from the bench MORE than the Congress does.

 

[PK1]

The 2nd Amendment isn't going anywhere you crazy paranoids.

I'll bet you a dollar and a quarter that if Hillary (the murderer) Clinton wins the election - within the bitchs' first term, there will be a movement to strike the second from the Constitution. Care to wager?

---
Your wager is as worthless as your perceptions, or is it your brain's fault?
.

So, I take it that you are afraid to lose $1.25? You liberal sheep fool no one.

---
Looks like it was your brain's fault.

Have you collected any dollars or quarters via this forum before?
.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

Except that it doesn't say "well regulated militia" junior. It says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". The right belongs to the people junior.

---
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
.

.... The previous section was simply the why. And the why (while important for sure in context), is largely irrelevant what it comes to the what. And the what is that the people have the right to keep and bear arms.

---
Before the "why" & "what" is the intent of the writers during their era.
.

Uh....no genius. Their intent was "the right of the people". Which is why they said "the right of the people".

---
The intent was to maintain "the security of a free state" and "A well regulated militia being necessary"
was how that intent was achieved during that era.
.

The security of a free state meant that the citizenry had the means to protect itself from a tyrannical government. The intent was made very clear in other writings by the Framers of the Constitution.
The Lessons Of History - The Founding Fathers On Right To Bear Arms

The 2nd Amendment does not have a but or an except for anywhere in it. If you believe the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringe means it can then the only thing to do is get together with all of the other gun control wackadoodles and call for a constitutional amendment. I doubt you'll get many Representatives stupid enough to bring it up for a vote and you damn sure won't get many votes at the State level so shit out of luck doesn't quiet cover it.

 

[RandallFlagg]

The 2nd Amendment isn't going anywhere you crazy paranoids.

I'll bet you a dollar and a quarter that if Hillary (the murderer) Clinton wins the election - within the bitchs' first term, there will be a movement to strike the second from the Constitution. Care to wager?

---
Your wager is as worthless as your perceptions, or is it your brain's fault?
.

So, I take it that you are afraid to lose $1.25? You liberal sheep fool no one.

---
Looks like it was your brain's fault.

Have you collected any dollars or quarters via this forum before?
.

Good Lord. A literalist as well.....

 

[RandallFlagg]

---
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
.

.... The previous section was simply the why. And the why (while important for sure in context), is largely irrelevant what it comes to the what. And the what is that the people have the right to keep and bear arms.

---
Before the "why" & "what" is the intent of the writers during their era.
.

Uh....no genius. Their intent was "the right of the people". Which is why they said "the right of the people".

---
The intent was to maintain "the security of a free state" and "A well regulated militia being necessary"
was how that intent was achieved during that era.
.

The security of a free state meant that the citizenry had the means to protect itself from a tyrannical government. The intent was made very clear in other writings by the Framers of the Constitution.
The Lessons Of History - The Founding Fathers On Right To Bear Arms

The 2nd Amendment does not have a but or an except for anywhere in it. If you believe the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringe means it can then the only thing to do is get together with all of the other gun control wackadoodles and call for a constitutional amendment. I doubt you'll get many Representatives stupid enough to bring it up for a vote and you damn sure won't get many votes at the State level so shit out of luck doesn't quiet cover it.

Exactly. The second was put there EXPRESSELY for the purpose of (1) Defense of ones property and family and (2) to be used to overthrow a tyrannical government.

Problem is? Liberals do NOT believe in personal defense and they abhore the idea of "standing up" to the government - the same central government that feeds them.

 

[Camp]

I am sure. It clearly states "the right of the people". The right belongs to the people. There is simply no denying it.

The right of the people is clearly defined as for the purpose of maintaining a well regulated Militia. That is why the Amendment starts out with the purpose of the Amendment. You do not understand the meaning of Militia and how the SCOTUS has judged and confirmed its meaning since the inception of the United States.

Every person 17 to 45 is a member of the militia there fore EVERY person 17 to 45 has the right to own possess and bear arms thanks for playing.

That is correct and that is why "well regulated" is the introduction to the Amendment is included. The State has the authority to impose regulations. As long as the regulations are followed every able bodied citizen is part of the militia and the right can not be infringed. The SCOTUS is the final arbiter of whether a regulation is an infringement of not.
Not sure about the age limitations. Is that a SCOTUS ruling?

The Supreme Court has ALREADY RULED and that ruling is that the 2nd Amendment conveys an INDIVIDUAL Right not a collective right. Perhaps you should actually catch up with the times?

Couldn't agree more. However. The problem arises with the next two-three appointments to the SCOTUS. One thing about this bullshit "court" is that they change rulings at will - according to whom is sitting their fat asses on the bench at any given time. The Supremes, like every other "court" in the land legislates from the bench MORE than the Congress does.

Are you sure? I thought the 2nd Amendment was a single sentence that began with "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State...". What 2nd Amendment are you using?

I am sure. It clearly states "the right of the people". The right belongs to the people. There is simply no denying it.

The right of the people is clearly defined as for the purpose of maintaining a well regulated Militia. That is why the Amendment starts out with the purpose of the Amendment. You do not understand the meaning of Militia and how the SCOTUS has judged and confirmed its meaning since the inception of the United States.

Every person 17 to 45 is a member of the militia there fore EVERY person 17 to 45 has the right to own possess and bear arms thanks for playing.

That is correct and that is why "well regulated" is the introduction to the Amendment is included. The State has the authority to impose regulations. As long as the regulations are followed every able bodied citizen is part of the militia and the right can not be infringed. The SCOTUS is the final arbiter of whether a regulation is an infringement of not.
Not sure about the age limitations. Is that a SCOTUS ruling?

The Supreme Court has ALREADY RULED and that ruling is that the 2nd Amendment conveys an INDIVIDUAL Right not a collective right. Perhaps you should actually catch up with the times?

It does not convey that regulations or laws designed for and under the Militia standard can not be the same for individuals. The rulings support non-discrimination between a Militia person and a non-militia person. A person can reject being a Militia member due to the 1rst Amendment. Just because a person is a conscientious objector does not mean the person does not have a right to self-defense.

 

[Jack4jill]

The perpetrator was armed with a knife. This woman would have been dead if not for her 2nd Amendment right. Of course, the left have been waging a disgusting war on women for decades so they wouldn't have cared. In fact, I suspect that's why they want to disarm everyone. More female victims for them. Demand men have access to women's locker rooms, showers, and rest rooms and then disarm them.

Woman leaves would-be attacker bloody and wounded

Do you take God into court to defend your right? No, you take a lawyer and the Constitution. Your right to arms was granted by men, not your mythical God.

 

[Jack4jill]

Yet another person who was able to save themselves and their family because the Constitution afforded them the right to do so.

Family of Four Awakened by Man Shattering Windows and Kicking at Their Front Door. So Dad Pulls Out His 9mm Handgun and Heads Toward the Trouble.

By the Constitution, not your God, Puddles. Good, you're learning.

 

[2aguy]

God is positive energy....guns are negative energy that destroys....therefore you worship Satan.

Guns in this country save far more lives than people using them illegally take.....