2nd Amendment should not be infringed upon because of Las Vegas shooter.

[danielpalos]

Musket practice, every Sunday!

 

[Humorme]

FYI Private militias are not illegal in all states

Private Militias

Anybody can form a club/group and call it a militia, it doesn't make it an actual militia.

The laws you quote only say only pertain to private militia carrying weapons and training in public. It says nothing of training on private lands.

And if it was, as you say, illegal in all states to be in a private militia then no one could call any old club a militia without breaking the law

Well regulated militia are authorized their own colors, standards, banners and guidons, by our Government.

The Right to keep and bear Arms is an individual Right and one need not be in the militia in order to have a firearm.

According to the United States Supreme Court:

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia,"

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

That is the HOLDING of the Court... the bottom line from the final arbiters of what the law means. So, you can believe danielpalos or the United States Supreme Court.

It is a simple appeal to ignorance of the law. There is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

The People are the Militia; You are either, well regulated or you are unorganized.

There you go again spouting stupidity. What in the Hell is an "appeal to ignorance of the law?" How many years have you been spewing that line? If you're ignorant, I'm NOT appealing to you. I can't fix your stupidity. You'll have to see Dr. Phil about that. Or are you trying to piss me off again so your buddies will delete my post because it is factual?

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia,"

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

 

[danielpalos]

Anybody can form a club/group and call it a militia, it doesn't make it an actual militia.

The laws you quote only say only pertain to private militia carrying weapons and training in public. It says nothing of training on private lands.

And if it was, as you say, illegal in all states to be in a private militia then no one could call any old club a militia without breaking the law

Well regulated militia are authorized their own colors, standards, banners and guidons, by our Government.

The Right to keep and bear Arms is an individual Right and one need not be in the militia in order to have a firearm.

According to the United States Supreme Court:

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia,"

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

That is the HOLDING of the Court... the bottom line from the final arbiters of what the law means. So, you can believe danielpalos or the United States Supreme Court.

It is a simple appeal to ignorance of the law. There is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

The People are the Militia; You are either, well regulated or you are unorganized.

There you go again spouting stupidity. What in the Hell is an "appeal to ignorance of the law?" How many years have you been spewing that line? If you're ignorant, I'm NOT appealing to you. I can't fix your stupidity. You'll have to see Dr. Phil about that. Or are you trying to piss me off again so your buddies will delete my post because it is factual?

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia,"

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

A simple appeal to ignorance (of the law).

Only in right wing cognitive disconnect can anyone be unconnected with the militia, only with militia service, well regulated.

 

[Humorme]

Assault style firearms obviously appeal to the onerous, darker side of those who adhere to the second amendment so ferociously. They are certainly not necessary, while being outstanding as the 'weapon of choice' by domestic sickos. Many models of semi-automatic rifles in .556 caliber exist on the market, but if they have a wooden stock, they just don't look mean enough to satisfy the 'Rambo' in the "gut-gun kult".
The 'right' to possess and, in certain situations, carry firearms may be protected by the Constitution, but that by no means makes all and every aspect of firearms, ammunition, sales and taxation sacrosanct.

I really like you making value judgments of people you've never met.

The M1 Rifle was, according to General George Patton, the greatest battle instrument ever devised. Those weapons, like the .30 carbine, bolt actions, and the .45 acp pistol are sold by the government to the public.

Many people own that genre of rifle and some like the M1a which is the modern civilian version of the M14. Those of us who like that genre of weapons are more pro-gun than even the guys who are only into the AR family of weapons. But, to accuse me of being on the darker side of anything says that you are uneducated, ignorant, and prejudicial to the point that you cannot say anything that would benefit this thread.

Stereotyping cannot change the fact that most of the gun laws you support are designed as infringements to the Right, and consequently, unconstitutional. The M1a is the last wood and steel rifle that the militia uses. The M1a is superior to the AR in a number of ways,

 

[Humorme]

The laws you quote only say only pertain to private militia carrying weapons and training in public. It says nothing of training on private lands.

And if it was, as you say, illegal in all states to be in a private militia then no one could call any old club a militia without breaking the law

Well regulated militia are authorized their own colors, standards, banners and guidons, by our Government.

The Right to keep and bear Arms is an individual Right and one need not be in the militia in order to have a firearm.

According to the United States Supreme Court:

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia,"

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

That is the HOLDING of the Court... the bottom line from the final arbiters of what the law means. So, you can believe danielpalos or the United States Supreme Court.

It is a simple appeal to ignorance of the law. There is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

The People are the Militia; You are either, well regulated or you are unorganized.

There you go again spouting stupidity. What in the Hell is an "appeal to ignorance of the law?" How many years have you been spewing that line? If you're ignorant, I'm NOT appealing to you. I can't fix your stupidity. You'll have to see Dr. Phil about that. Or are you trying to piss me off again so your buddies will delete my post because it is factual?

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia,"

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

A simple appeal to ignorance (of the law).

Only in right wing cognitive disconnect can anyone be unconnected with the militia, only with militia service, well regulated.

You're a dumbass. I'm not appealing to the law. The law is the law. I'm appealing to the posters. You're arguing with the United States Supreme Court. Did it ever dawn on you that you might be freaking delusional? You would be well advised to give it some thought.

There are a lot of people who own firearms and are not active in the militia. The weapons and the Rights of the people are protected from infringements.

 

[danielpalos]

Well regulated militia are authorized their own colors, standards, banners and guidons, by our Government.

The Right to keep and bear Arms is an individual Right and one need not be in the militia in order to have a firearm.

According to the United States Supreme Court:

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia,"

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

That is the HOLDING of the Court... the bottom line from the final arbiters of what the law means. So, you can believe danielpalos or the United States Supreme Court.

It is a simple appeal to ignorance of the law. There is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

The People are the Militia; You are either, well regulated or you are unorganized.

There you go again spouting stupidity. What in the Hell is an "appeal to ignorance of the law?" How many years have you been spewing that line? If you're ignorant, I'm NOT appealing to you. I can't fix your stupidity. You'll have to see Dr. Phil about that. Or are you trying to piss me off again so your buddies will delete my post because it is factual?

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia,"

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

A simple appeal to ignorance (of the law).

Only in right wing cognitive disconnect can anyone be unconnected with the militia, only with militia service, well regulated.

You're a dumbass. I'm not appealing to the law. The law is the law. I'm appealing to the posters. You're arguing with the United States Supreme Court. Did it ever dawn on you that you might be freaking delusional? You would be well advised to give it some thought.

There are a lot of people who own firearms and are not active in the militia. The weapons and the Rights of the people are protected from infringements.

Not even the Judicature is immune, as a privilege, from political influence.

Nothing but repeal instead of a valid argument, means I win, by default.

This was established as federal doctrine, with the ratification of our federal Constitution:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

 

[Liquid Reigns]

The laws you quote only say only pertain to private militia carrying weapons and training in public. It says nothing of training on private lands.

And if it was, as you say, illegal in all states to be in a private militia then no one could call any old club a militia without breaking the law

I quoted your link. :SHRUG:

Private militias are not recognized by the govt, state or federal.
By having a group and calling it/claiming it to be a militia, whether on private/public land, doesn't matter.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The laws you quote only say only pertain to private militia carrying weapons and training in public. It says nothing of training on private lands.

And if it was, as you say, illegal in all states to be in a private militia then no one could call any old club a militia without breaking the law

I quoted your link. :SHRUG:

Private militias are not recognized by the govt, state or federal.
By having a group and calling it/claiming it to be a militia, whether on private/public land, doesn't matter.

So what if they are not recognized? They don't need to be recognized.

They are not illegal in every state as you claim are they?

 

[Liquid Reigns]

Private militias are not state militias (Air and Army National Guard). SMFH (Private militias are outlawed in all states.)

According to your back and forth, every able body man is in the unorganized militia.

You yourself have never served in the States Militia, let alone the military.

Talk about being a poser. LMFAO

FYI Private militias are not illegal in all states

Private Militias

Anybody can form a club/group and call it a militia, it doesn't make it an actual militia.

The laws you quote only say only pertain to private militia carrying weapons and training in public. It says nothing of training on private lands.

And if it was, as you say, illegal in all states to be in a private militia then no one could call any old club a militia without breaking the law

Well regulated militia are authorized their own colors, standards, banners and guidons, by our Government.

The Right to keep and bear Arms is an individual Right and one need not be in the militia in order to have a firearm.

According to the United States Supreme Court:

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia,"

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

That is the HOLDING of the Court... the bottom line from the final arbiters of what the law means. So, you can believe danielpalos or the United States Supreme Court.

So you do use Heller and the Supreme Court when they fit your narrative, yet condemn them when they don't, how idiotic of you. SMFH

 

[Liquid Reigns]

The laws you quote only say only pertain to private militia carrying weapons and training in public. It says nothing of training on private lands.

And if it was, as you say, illegal in all states to be in a private militia then no one could call any old club a militia without breaking the law

I quoted your link. :SHRUG:

Private militias are not recognized by the govt, state or federal.
By having a group and calling it/claiming it to be a militia, whether on private/public land, doesn't matter.

So what if they are not recognized? They don't need to be recognized.

They are not illegal in every state as you claim are they?

Calling your group/club meetings a militia is hilarious, when all they are is a group of wanna-bes, doesn't make them a militia, or a Constitutional Militia as Humorme likes to call his defunct group, the Militia of Georgia. :SHRUG:

 

[danielpalos]

The laws you quote only say only pertain to private militia carrying weapons and training in public. It says nothing of training on private lands.

And if it was, as you say, illegal in all states to be in a private militia then no one could call any old club a militia without breaking the law

I quoted your link. :SHRUG:

Private militias are not recognized by the govt, state or federal.
By having a group and calling it/claiming it to be a militia, whether on private/public land, doesn't matter.

Militia may be "over reaching" by gun lovers. Regulators is more like it.

Posse comitatus is the common-law or statute law authority of a county sheriff, or other law officer, to conscript any able-bodied man to assist him in keeping the peace or to pursue and arrest a felon, similar to the concept of the "hue and cry." Originally found in English common law,[2] it is generally obsolete; however, it survives in the United States, where it is the law enforcement equivalent of summoning the militia for military purposes.--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_comitatus

 

[danielpalos]

A posse register for gun lovers who love to love their guns in public.

 

[Humorme]

The Right to keep and bear Arms is an individual Right and one need not be in the militia in order to have a firearm.

According to the United States Supreme Court:

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia,"

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

That is the HOLDING of the Court... the bottom line from the final arbiters of what the law means. So, you can believe danielpalos or the United States Supreme Court.

It is a simple appeal to ignorance of the law. There is no appeal to ignorance of the law.

The People are the Militia; You are either, well regulated or you are unorganized.

There you go again spouting stupidity. What in the Hell is an "appeal to ignorance of the law?" How many years have you been spewing that line? If you're ignorant, I'm NOT appealing to you. I can't fix your stupidity. You'll have to see Dr. Phil about that. Or are you trying to piss me off again so your buddies will delete my post because it is factual?

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia,"

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

A simple appeal to ignorance (of the law).

Only in right wing cognitive disconnect can anyone be unconnected with the militia, only with militia service, well regulated.

You're a dumbass. I'm not appealing to the law. The law is the law. I'm appealing to the posters. You're arguing with the United States Supreme Court. Did it ever dawn on you that you might be freaking delusional? You would be well advised to give it some thought.

There are a lot of people who own firearms and are not active in the militia. The weapons and the Rights of the people are protected from infringements.

Not even the Judicature is immune, as a privilege, from political influence.

Nothing but repeal instead of a valid argument, means I win, by default.

This was established as federal doctrine, with the ratification of our federal Constitution:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on
Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

If you aren't the most delusional person on this board, there isn't a cow in the whole state of Texas.

Your repetition of nonsense doesn't mean squat, danielpalos. You've been repeating bullshit this many years because you thought the repetition means you win? Really? You've only to proven to be the most delusional poster on USM.

Look dude,, the words unorganized and disorganized are different in the English language.

The word unorganized is "not brought into a coherent or well-ordered whole"

The word disorganized is lacking coherence, system, or central guiding agency :not organized (Disorganized is the antonym for regulated; unorganized is NOT)

I found great synonyms for "regulate" on the new Thesaurus.com!

What you're selling is snake oil. You've been lying. The unorganized militia simply means we haven't been brought into the regular militia. A disorganized militia would be a group with no central guiding agency. Even the unorganized militia, when called into service, knows full well who the guiding agency is.

It's just that we don't have to be a part of the organized militia in order to own private firearms... and even if we are not in the militia, we still have a Right to keep and bear Arms. The Second Amendment is not about the military. It is about the Right of the people.

 

[Humorme]

The laws you quote only say only pertain to private militia carrying weapons and training in public. It says nothing of training on private lands.

And if it was, as you say, illegal in all states to be in a private militia then no one could call any old club a militia without breaking the law

I quoted your link. :SHRUG:

Private militias are not recognized by the govt, state or federal.
By having a group and calling it/claiming it to be a militia, whether on private/public land, doesn't matter.

So what if they are not recognized? They don't need to be recognized.

They are not illegal in every state as you claim are they?

I have been in a citizen militia since 1987. You cannot get any more public than the militia I belong to. Their leadership has been on the front pages of newspapers; on television; on radio.

We once had a meeting in a large restaurant. Neither of us knew but, both had an event on the same day! Half of the banquet hall was a police award ceremony and on the other side of the partition, a militia meeting was going on. Anyone that tells you civilian militias are not recognized is a liar.

If the militia were some kind of illegal organization, the cops would round up the leaders, seize any membership lists and kill / imprison the members. Recognition does not mean they give you some kind of certificate, certifying you're the last line of defense.

Recognition lies in the fact that the United States government sells to the citizens working M1 rifles, .30 carbines, bolt action rifles and .45 acp pistols. That is all the recognition you need.

 

[Humorme]

A posse register for gun lovers who love to love their guns in public.

WTF does that mean danielpalos? You couldn't dazzle with me brilliance so you changed tactics and are trying to baffle me with bullshit?

Son, give it up. How many times did you see me with a gun in public?

 

[Liquid Reigns]

The laws you quote only say only pertain to private militia carrying weapons and training in public. It says nothing of training on private lands.

And if it was, as you say, illegal in all states to be in a private militia then no one could call any old club a militia without breaking the law

I quoted your link. :SHRUG:

Private militias are not recognized by the govt, state or federal.
By having a group and calling it/claiming it to be a militia, whether on private/public land, doesn't matter.

So what if they are not recognized? They don't need to be recognized.

They are not illegal in every state as you claim are they?

I have been in a citizen militia since 1987. You cannot get any more public than the militia I belong to. Their leadership has been on the front pages of newspapers; on television; on radio.

We once had a meeting in a large restaurant. Neither of us knew but, both had an event on the same day! Half of the banquet hall was a police award ceremony and on the other side of the partition, a militia meeting was going on. Anyone that tells you civilian militias are not recognized is a liar.

If the militia were some kind of illegal organization, the cops would round up the leaders, seize any membership lists and kill / imprison the members. Recognition does not mean they give you some kind of certificate, certifying you're the last line of defense.

Recognition lies in the fact that the United States government sells to the citizens working M1 rifles, .30 carbines, bolt action rifles and .45 acp pistols. That is all the recognition you need.

Calling your group of wanna-bes a militia doesn't make you recognized in any way by law enforcement or the govt. Calling your group a "militia" doesn't make you a militia, nor does it make you a Constitutional Militia like you claim your group to be.

 

[Humorme]

Each of you have a Right to keep and bear Arms as an individual. The United States Supreme Court has ruled:

"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."

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

The Second Amendment is not about protecting the militia; it is about protecting the Right of the people and you have the United States Supreme Court's bottom line holding on that issue.

You do not have to be in the militia in order to keep and bear Arms.

According to Wikipedia:

"In People v. Aguilar (2013), the Illinois Supreme Court summed up the central Second Amendment findings in McDonald:

Two years later, in McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. ___, ___, 130 S. Ct. 3020, 3050 (2010), the Supreme Court held that the second amendment right recognized in Heller is fully applicable to the states through the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment. In so holding, the Court reiterated that “the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense” (id. at ___, 130 S. Ct. at 3026); that “individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right” (emphasis in original) (id. at ___, 130 S. Ct. at 3036 (quoting Heller, 554 U.S. at 599)); and that “elf-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day” (id. at ___, 130 S. Ct. at 3036)"

McDonald v. City of Chicago - Wikipedia

So, in other words, the current law is that the Second Amendment protects an individual Right to keep and bear Arms and that, not this idiotic and irrelevant argument about it being about protecting a militia right.

From here on out, nobody should be confused as to what the courts have ruled: individual self defense is the central component of the Second Amendment.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The laws you quote only say only pertain to private militia carrying weapons and training in public. It says nothing of training on private lands.

And if it was, as you say, illegal in all states to be in a private militia then no one could call any old club a militia without breaking the law

I quoted your link. :SHRUG:

Private militias are not recognized by the govt, state or federal.
By having a group and calling it/claiming it to be a militia, whether on private/public land, doesn't matter.

So what if they are not recognized? They don't need to be recognized.

They are not illegal in every state as you claim are they?

Calling your group/club meetings a militia is hilarious, when all they are is a group of wanna-bes, doesn't make them a militia, or a Constitutional Militia as Humorme likes to call his defunct group, the Militia of Georgia. :SHRUG:

Think whatever you want but you are completely wrong abut private militias being illegal in all states as you claim.

 

[Liquid Reigns]

Think whatever you want but you are completely wrong abut private militias being illegal in all states as you claim.

Just because you call your little club or group a militia, it does not make you a militia. Putting the word militia in your clubs name doesn't mean you are in fact a militia.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Think whatever you want but you are completely wrong abut private militias being illegal in all states as you claim.

Just because you call your little club or group a militia, it does not make you a militia. Putting the word militia in your clubs name doesn't mean you are in fact a militia.

FYI I am not in a militia.

But private militias are not illegal in all states as you claim they are just admit you are wrong and move on