What Do The Words "A Well Regulated Militia" Mean?

[westwall]

Nimrod? Well fuck you asshole. How many pens did it require to kill 20 five and six year olds? Apples and oranges dipshit - grow up and take that pen and shuff it.

BTW moron, Fraud is not Robbery. Robbery is to take someone's property by force or fear.

Fraud is akin to robbery. After all, the victim has lost whatever it was to an illegal action. At least if the asshole was trying to rob me I could shoot the asshole first now couldn't I? In cases of fraud you're usually just fucked.

It took one pen to order the deaths of millions so your point is obviously a failure. And the point was to compare the First vs. the Second Amendment. How unsurprising that a public servant, who's main claim to fame is you passed the public employee test, doesn't understand that.

Let me guess, you were one of the morons standing around watching the poor guy drown off of Alameda when you couldn't figure out how to wade out into the surf.

"Police and firefighters stood on a California beach and watched as a suicidal man waded into the San Francisco Bay and drowned in the surf.

The body of Raymond Zack was finally pulled from the 54-degree water by a passerby as local fire officials blamed budget cuts for their inability to save the man."


Read more: California man drowns himself in San Francisco Bay while emergency responders stand by and watch - NY Daily News

Fraud is akin to robbery? You're one of those who can't ever admit to being wrong. Do you also believe petty theft is also akin to robbery?

My point was a failure? You really are a moron. Not one five or six year old was murdered by a pen, they were shot to death with a gun. Or is a pen akin to a gun in your pea brain?

I remember that incident, a black eye to be sure on Alameda Fire; FDNY lost how many 'civil servants' on Sept 11, 2001? How many NYPD, Harbor Police lost their lives that day?

Only a real stupid asshole - that be you - would point out such a failure when it is common knowledge that first responders willing go into harms way everyday.

Tell that to the Jews in the camps and the victims of Stalin's gulags and the 100 million people.....men, women, and children, murdered during the Cultural Revolution. You are simply one of the most ignorant jackasses to post on this board.

 

[westwall]

And why do RWers and other Republicans like to ignore it?

We don't ignore it, the 2nd provides two distinct rights. One to the States to maintain militias at their discretion and the individual right to keep and bear arms.

You on the other hand like to claim incorrectly that there is only one right and that it belongs to the States.

"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."

Where is the "and" part in that?

You just read shit how you want it.

The comma actually takes the place of the "and". Try learning some ENGLISH sometime.

 

[RKMBrown]

We don't ignore it, the 2nd provides two distinct rights. One to the States to maintain militias at their discretion and the individual right to keep and bear arms.

You on the other hand like to claim incorrectly that there is only one right and that it belongs to the States.

"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."

Where is the "and" part in that?

You just read shit how you want it.

The comma actually takes the place of the "and". Try learning some ENGLISH sometime.

Huh?

 

[westwall]

It doesn't say it is an example. Your just making shit up

No I am citing English sentence structure. I repeat is English your native language? If so I suggest you take remedial English lessons on sentence structure.

My education far exceed yours. As does my ability to know that it says what itbsays, no more, no less.

And it doesn't say, "as an example"? It really isn't hard to tell the difference between reality and fantacy. That is if you can deal with it, which you obviouly can't.

Funny, the Supreme Court disagrees with you. I guess you're not as educated as you think you are.

 

[westwall]

http://www.libertygunrights.com/4pg2A Diagram.pdf

What an expert says about the sentence.

So you need help reading?

No, but you clearly do.

 

[RKMBrown]

No I am citing English sentence structure. I repeat is English your native language? If so I suggest you take remedial English lessons on sentence structure.

My education far exceed yours. As does my ability to know that it says what itbsays, no more, no less.

And it doesn't say, "as an example"? It really isn't hard to tell the difference between reality and fantacy. That is if you can deal with it, which you obviouly can't.

Funny, the Supreme Court disagrees with you. I guess you're not as educated as you think you are.

Huh? Are you drinking?

 

[westwall]

"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."

Where is the "and" part in that?

You just read shit how you want it.

The comma actually takes the place of the "and". Try learning some ENGLISH sometime.

Huh?

It's a joke.....

 

[RKMBrown]

the comma actually takes the place of the "and". Try learning some english sometime.

huh?

It's a joke.....

ah ok

 

[westwall]

My education far exceed yours. As does my ability to know that it says what itbsays, no more, no less.

And it doesn't say, "as an example"? It really isn't hard to tell the difference between reality and fantacy. That is if you can deal with it, which you obviouly can't.

Funny, the Supreme Court disagrees with you. I guess you're not as educated as you think you are.

Huh? Are you drinking?

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



<Supreme Court Decision in Heller is Pending>

 

[Wry Catcher]

Actually I'm a gun owner. I do believe a sober, sane and the non criminal should have the right to own, possess and have in his or her custody or control a firearm. Sadly, too many who are not sober, sane or law abiding are able to easily own possess and have in their custody and control a gun. Thus I support gun control....

...which infringes on the rights of the law abiding and does nothing to prevent those people fom getting guns.

The idea that no solution exists never occurs to you, and that is your strength. I don't expect law abiding citizens will be prevented from getting guns, only drunks/addicts those who commit violent act, criminals and the mentally ill.

Too bad if you or I are infringed, if we can mitigate the violence and prevent one chld from being murdered, I have no problem getting a license and registering my guns.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Funny, the Supreme Court disagrees with you. I guess you're not as educated as you think you are.

Huh? Are you drinking?

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



<Supreme Court Decision in Heller is Pending>

Heller was decided 5 to 4; it is no more decided law than was Dred Scott. If the carnage continues, and the NRA and its followers continue on the path of zero tolerance for gun control, we might very well see a new SC decide a gun control law using common sense.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Heller was decided 5 to 4; it is no more decided law than was Dred Scott.

That's true. Justice Scalia pointed out in the decision, that this decision would not address the issue of "reasonable restrictions" now, and so those could stand for the present.

But he plainly intended to leave room for "reasonable restrictions" to be re-examined and (finally) adjudicated in a future case.

I'm sure he did that because he is starkly aware that the 2nd amendment leaves NO room for "reasonable restrictions", no matter how much various leftists and big-govt pushers wished it did.

 

[itfitzme]

Only in some mutant form of English.
But, even if so, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Not the milita, the people.

Only as it applies to the security of a free state. Oh, and as it appliesd to a well regulated militia.

:roll:
I see you're one of those people that likes to be worng on purpose.

Fact:
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

You can choose to believe otherwise, but that only means you choose to be wrong.

I see you are one of those people that can't tell fantacy from reality, denying it when is right in your face. It clearly is connected to a well rgulated militia. It even starts with that? I'm just amazed at how hard work to be ignorant of the patently obvious.

 

[itfitzme]

http://www.libertygunrights.com/4pg2A Diagram.pdf

What an expert says about the sentence.

So you need help reading?

You do, as you do not know what the sentence means and have proven it in this thread. This reply indicates you are to stupid to read the evidence you are simply wrong.

You have proven nothing except to make it obvious that you will entirely ignore the patently ovbious.

Read it again. "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."

It is all about a well regulated militia and the security of a free state. The free state and a well regulated militia are the reason for the right. The right is predicated on the well regulated militia and a free state. The purpose is to ensure a free state by having a well regulated militia.

Hell, they went through the trouble to write it so they were in that order.

 

[daveman]

What Do The Words "A Well Regulated Militia" Mean?

And why do RWers and other Republicans like to ignore it?

What Do The Words "A Butthurt Leftist" Mean?

And why do MarcATL and other leftists like to ignore it?

 

[AntiParty]

And why do RWers and other Republicans like to ignore it?

The Left see's it as it's stated.

The Right is divided on the topic.

All Right Wingers are scared of the Extremeists in the roomparty. The sum of the Libertarian/Tea Party story is all citizens should have the Liberty to own every Arm the Military has. They hook you in with nonsense, then inform you that you are part of a dangerous cult.

Or just ask your Libertarian leaders in the area. "Should I have the Liberty to own a tank with bullets?" He will say yes. "Should I have the Liberty to own an Air Craft Carrier full of fully armed jets?" He will say yes.

"Well regulated Militia" is seen in 2 ways. The small brains use secondary definitions of the words "regulated" and "militia". They will say that "regulated" means "trained" which makes sense to almost no one because it's not a primary definition.

The term "Militia" has a LOT of history. Sadly, I believe in citizen gun ownership but the wing pushing for this doesn't know what the term means yet again.

EVERYONE with a brain in America should be able to own a gun. Why do we keep justifying gun ownership for people who OBVIOUSLY don't fit the profile for responsible gun ownership?...................................FREEDOM.

Too many people need to learn what Freedom actually means. It's a double edged sword.

IT IS NOT THE NIHILIST IDIOTIC VIEW POINT FOX NEWS HAS PAINTED IT SHOULD BE TODAY. That is good for Corporate profit, but not for humanity.

Wake up children.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Actually I'm a gun owner. I do believe a sober, sane and the non criminal should have the right to own, possess and have in his or her custody or control a firearm. Sadly, too many who are not sober, sane or law abiding are able to easily own possess and have in their custody and control a gun. Thus I support gun control....

...which infringes on the rights of the law abiding and does nothing to prevent those people fom getting guns.

I don't expect law abiding citizens will be prevented from getting guns, only drunks/addicts those who commit violent act, criminals and the mentally ill.

You must have missed the part about the gun control laws you want doing nothing to prevent criminals, et al, from getting guns. Laws can not prevent people from breaking the law.

Too bad if you or I are infringed, if we can mitigate the violence and prevent one chld from being murdered, I have no problem getting a license and registering my guns.

Ah yes -- there we have it..
Thank you for helping to prove the premise that anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance anf/or dishonesty.
Well done.


Tell me, sport: How does gun licensing and registratrion prevent someone from murdering a child?

 

[KNB]

If laws can't stop anyone from breaking the law then what's the point of passing a law in the first place?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Only as it applies to the security of a free state. Oh, and as it appliesd to a well regulated militia.

:roll:
I see you're one of those people that likes to be worng on purpose.

Fact:
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

You can choose to believe otherwise, but that only means you choose to be wrong.

I see you are one of those people that can't tell fantacy from reality, denying it when is right in your face. It clearly is connected to a well rgulated militia. It even starts with that? I'm just amazed at how hard work to be ignorant of the patently obvious.

As I aaid:
You can choose to believe otherwise, but that only means you choose to be wrong.

 

[M14 Shooter]

If laws can't stop anyone from breaking the law then what's the point of passing a law in the first place?

All criminal, and most civil, law exists so that the state can punish people who step outside the boundaries set by society and violate the rights of others.

That is, laws against murder do not and can not prevent murder, only punish people who commit it.

Hopefully that clears things up for you.