A well-regulated...

[M14 Shooter]

And in those time the citizen soldiers should have the right to posses their arm at home. It made sense back then. Not so much during the last century or so.

That's your opinion.

The idea of a militia maybe outdated but the idea that a person should be free to keep a weapon or carry it on their person for protection is more relevant now than ever.

We see over and over that the government law enforcement agencies cannot protect the citizenry.

So it comes down to where do you draw the line. Should I be able to buy, keep and carry around a .50 caliber machine gun for my protection?

It meets all the criteria for a weapon protected unde the 2nd, so yes.

 

[Skull Pilot]

And in those time the citizen soldiers should have the right to posses their arm at home. It made sense back then. Not so much during the last century or so.

That's your opinion.

The idea of a militia maybe outdated but the idea that a person should be free to keep a weapon or carry it on their person for protection is more relevant now than ever.

We see over and over that the government law enforcement agencies cannot protect the citizenry.

So it comes down to where do you draw the line. Should I be able to buy, keep and carry around a .50 caliber machine gun for my protection?

Hey if you want to lug around a gun like the M2 that weighs 85 lbs plus the ammo in my mind you're free to but you ain't gonna be protecting yourself with it very well.

I suppose you could have it in your home and then sit in a room with it and hope the bad guys walk in on you instead of another room.

Why are you being stupid on purpose?

 

[Darkwind]

When the states militia were called into service could they refuse?

I don't know but the government does have the right to conscript soldiers.

But the issue of government control is clearly limited to when the government calls them into service. There is no implied government control during times when militias are not in government service.

And in those time the citizen soldiers should have the right to posses their arm at home. It made sense back then. Not so much during the last century or so.

It makes perfect sense right now too.

Or are you only good with loony tunes owning guns when they have the full backing of the Federal Government?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

And in those time the citizen soldiers should have the right to posses their arm at home. It made sense back then. Not so much during the last century or so.

That's your opinion.

The idea of a militia maybe outdated but the idea that a person should be free to keep a weapon or carry it on their person for protection is more relevant now than ever.

We see over and over that the government law enforcement agencies cannot protect the citizenry.

So it comes down to where do you draw the line. Should I be able to buy, keep and carry around a .50 caliber machine gun for my protection?

Why not?

 

[Star]

There is nothing in federal law about militias?

10 USC § 311 - Militia: composition and classes | Title 10 - Armed Forces | U.S. Code | LII / Legal Information Institute

.
Are you making a silly, pathetic attempt at building a strawman, or do you have a reading comprehension problem?
.

You stated:

...the militia are not governed by federal law, they are creatures of state law

He proved you wrong.

.

Like I said, strawman or reading comprehension?


4.21 Doesn't the Tenth Amendment give individuals rights over the militia?

A. The Tenth Amendment reserves powers to the people that are not already delegated by the Constitution to the United States or the individual states. The Tenth Amendment states:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
​

Powers regarding the militia are delegated explicitly and fully in Article I, Section 8, paragraphs 15 and 16 between the United States and the individual states . In 1820, the U.S. Supreme Court stated in Houston v. Moore, 5 Wheaton 1,20 :

"It may be admitted, at once, that the militia belong to the states, respectively, in which they are enrolled, and that they are subject, both in their civil and military capacities, to the jurisdiction and laws of such state, except so far as those laws are controlled by acts of Congress constitutionally made."
​

Accordingly, however the militia are not governed by federal law, they are creatures of state law. To the extent that the 'unorganized militia' exists it is part of the militia and is governed by either state or federal law. Period. Communities and individuals have no authority at all over the militia save what the federal and state governments decide to give them.

4.22 The federal and state governments may control the organized militia, but not the "unorganized militia." The unorganized militia can be called up for duty, but until then what they do is their own business.

.

 

[Steelplate]

I don't know but the government does have the right to conscript soldiers.

But the issue of government control is clearly limited to when the government calls them into service. There is no implied government control during times when militias are not in government service.

And in those time the citizen soldiers should have the right to posses their arm at home. It made sense back then. Not so much during the last century or so.

That's your opinion.

The idea of a militia maybe outdated but the idea that a person should be free to keep a weapon or carry it on their person for protection is more relevant now than ever.

We see over and over that the government law enforcement agencies cannot protect the citizenry.

If that...and outdoor sports were the only issue, there wouldn't be an issue. But this paramilitary militia bullshit is way out of hand....

Besides....no one is denying your right to own firearms. Just to fill out a damned form.

Personally, as a gun owner...I'd rather have the successful completion of a background check be part of your driver's license or ID. That way you don't have to be checked with every purchase. One would have the check redone with.license renewal...if you screw up in the interim....the part of the license which indicates your eligibility to purchase firearms would be punched out with a paper punch.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

And in those time the citizen soldiers should have the right to posses their arm at home. It made sense back then. Not so much during the last century or so.

That's your opinion.

The idea of a militia maybe outdated but the idea that a person should be free to keep a weapon or carry it on their person for protection is more relevant now than ever.

We see over and over that the government law enforcement agencies cannot protect the citizenry.

If that...and outdoor sports were the only issue, there wouldn't be an issue. But this paramilitary militia bullshit is way out of hand....

Besides....no one is denying your right to own firearms. Just to fill out a damned form.

Personally, as a gun owner...I'd rather have the successful completion of a background check be part of your driver's license or ID. That way you don't have to be checked with every purchase. One would have the check redone with.license renewal...if you screw up in the interim....the part of the license which indicates your eligibility to purchase firearms would be punched out with a paper punch.

Why do you have to lie? There are plenty of people who are denying the right of individuals to own guns, which is why everyone always treats people who claim otherwise with total contempt.

 

[Star]

That's your opinion.

The idea of a militia maybe outdated but the idea that a person should be free to keep a weapon or carry it on their person for protection is more relevant now than ever.

We see over and over that the government law enforcement agencies cannot protect the citizenry.

If that...and outdoor sports were the only issue, there wouldn't be an issue. But this paramilitary militia bullshit is way out of hand....

Besides....no one is denying your right to own firearms. Just to fill out a damned form.

Personally, as a gun owner...I'd rather have the successful completion of a background check be part of your driver's license or ID. That way you don't have to be checked with every purchase. One would have the check redone with.license renewal...if you screw up in the interim....the part of the license which indicates your eligibility to purchase firearms would be punched out with a paper punch.

Why do you have to lie? There are plenty of people who are denying the right of individuals to own guns, which is why everyone always treats people who claim otherwise with total contempt.

.
Are you referencing conservaGod Ronald Reagan's support for the most restrictive gun control laws ever passed in the United States...


...Reagan said, “This level of violence must be stopped. Sarah and Jim Brady are working hard to do that, and I say more power to them.” It was a 180 degree turn from Reagan’s 1975 piece in Guns & Ammo magazine, when he said that gun control is pointless because murder cannot be prevented.

Three years later, Congress had passed the Brady Bill and was working on another piece of gun control legislation, a ban on assault weapons. Reagan joined former Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter in a letter published in the Boston Globe that called on Congress to pass a ban on assault weapons. Later, in a letter to Rep. Scott Klug, a Wisconsin Republican, Reagan said the limitations proposed by the Assault Weapon Ban “are absolutely necessary” and that it “must be passed.” Klug voted in favor of the ban.

.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If that...and outdoor sports were the only issue, there wouldn't be an issue. But this paramilitary militia bullshit is way out of hand....

Besides....no one is denying your right to own firearms. Just to fill out a damned form.

Personally, as a gun owner...I'd rather have the successful completion of a background check be part of your driver's license or ID. That way you don't have to be checked with every purchase. One would have the check redone with.license renewal...if you screw up in the interim....the part of the license which indicates your eligibility to purchase firearms would be punched out with a paper punch.

Why do you have to lie? There are plenty of people who are denying the right of individuals to own guns, which is why everyone always treats people who claim otherwise with total contempt.

.
Are you referencing conservaGod Ronald Reagan's support for the most restrictive gun control laws ever passed in the United States...


...Reagan said, “This level of violence must be stopped. Sarah and Jim Brady are working hard to do that, and I say more power to them.” It was a 180 degree turn from Reagan’s 1975 piece in Guns & Ammo magazine, when he said that gun control is pointless because murder cannot be prevented.

Three years later, Congress had passed the Brady Bill and was working on another piece of gun control legislation, a ban on assault weapons. Reagan joined former Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter in a letter published in the Boston Globe that called on Congress to pass a ban on assault weapons. Later, in a letter to Rep. Scott Klug, a Wisconsin Republican, Reagan said the limitations proposed by the Assault Weapon Ban “are absolutely necessary” and that it “must be passed.” Klug voted in favor of the ban.

.

Why do drooling idiots think that referencing Reagan will somehow win the debate for them? Is it because they don't think for themselves?

 

[Star]

Why do you have to lie? There are plenty of people who are denying the right of individuals to own guns, which is why everyone always treats people who claim otherwise with total contempt.

.
Are you referencing conservaGod Ronald Reagan's support for the most restrictive gun control laws ever passed in the United States...


...Reagan said, “This level of violence must be stopped. Sarah and Jim Brady are working hard to do that, and I say more power to them.” It was a 180 degree turn from Reagan’s 1975 piece in Guns & Ammo magazine, when he said that gun control is pointless because murder cannot be prevented.

Three years later, Congress had passed the Brady Bill and was working on another piece of gun control legislation, a ban on assault weapons. Reagan joined former Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter in a letter published in the Boston Globe that called on Congress to pass a ban on assault weapons. Later, in a letter to Rep. Scott Klug, a Wisconsin Republican, Reagan said the limitations proposed by the Assault Weapon Ban “are absolutely necessary” and that it “must be passed.” Klug voted in favor of the ban.

.

Why do drooling idiots think that referencing Reagan will somehow win the debate for them? Is it because they don't think for themselves?

.
Good question, why do y'all Republicans/drooling idiots continually reference that tax raisin', gun controllin' outlier to today's Republican party?

I wonder if Reagan would approve of a gun regulation that reads something like;

"Those who enter the citizen militia by virtue of possessing firearms acknowledge the authority of the state to regulate the associated activities. Otherwise there is no "militia," and indeed no "state.""

I'm guessing that after his gun control epiphany (somewhere around the mid 1980's) Reagan would've heartily approved with the above gun control regulation.
.

 

[M14 Shooter]

If that...and outdoor sports were the only issue, there wouldn't be an issue. But this paramilitary militia bullshit is way out of hand....

Besides....no one is denying your right to own firearms. Just to fill out a damned form.

Personally, as a gun owner...I'd rather have the successful completion of a background check be part of your driver's license or ID. That way you don't have to be checked with every purchase. One would have the check redone with.license renewal...if you screw up in the interim....the part of the license which indicates your eligibility to purchase firearms would be punched out with a paper punch.

Why do you have to lie? There are plenty of people who are denying the right of individuals to own guns, which is why everyone always treats people who claim otherwise with total contempt.

.
Are you referencing conservaGod Ronald Reagan's support for the most restrictive gun control laws ever passed in the United States...

Fallacy: appeal to authority.
A petty one at that.
Of course, given that your premise from the OP was shattered, you don't have much left.

Thank you for helping prove that the anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

 

[Steelplate]

That's your opinion.

The idea of a militia maybe outdated but the idea that a person should be free to keep a weapon or carry it on their person for protection is more relevant now than ever.

We see over and over that the government law enforcement agencies cannot protect the citizenry.

If that...and outdoor sports were the only issue, there wouldn't be an issue. But this paramilitary militia bullshit is way out of hand....

Besides....no one is denying your right to own firearms. Just to fill out a damned form.

Personally, as a gun owner...I'd rather have the successful completion of a background check be part of your driver's license or ID. That way you don't have to be checked with every purchase. One would have the check redone with.license renewal...if you screw up in the interim....the part of the license which indicates your eligibility to purchase firearms would be punched out with a paper punch.

Why do you have to lie? There are plenty of people who are denying the right of individuals to own guns, which is why everyone always treats people who claim otherwise with total contempt.

Yep...violent felons, mentally I'll, and perpetrators of Domestic Violence.

 

[editec]

And no license required to buy or own normal arms protected by the 2nd.

How so? If you are going to equate individual gun ownership with military ownership, in the military one must make it through boot camp (training) before they are issued a weapon.

The expertise of people who have never been in the military never ceases to amaze me.

FYI, you are issued a weapon at the beginning of boot camp, not the end.

Depends on which branch of the service, amigo.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

.
Are you referencing conservaGod Ronald Reagan's support for the most restrictive gun control laws ever passed in the United States...


...Reagan said, “This level of violence must be stopped. Sarah and Jim Brady are working hard to do that, and I say more power to them.” It was a 180 degree turn from Reagan’s 1975 piece in Guns & Ammo magazine, when he said that gun control is pointless because murder cannot be prevented.

Three years later, Congress had passed the Brady Bill and was working on another piece of gun control legislation, a ban on assault weapons. Reagan joined former Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter in a letter published in the Boston Globe that called on Congress to pass a ban on assault weapons. Later, in a letter to Rep. Scott Klug, a Wisconsin Republican, Reagan said the limitations proposed by the Assault Weapon Ban “are absolutely necessary” and that it “must be passed.” Klug voted in favor of the ban.

.

Why do drooling idiots think that referencing Reagan will somehow win the debate for them? Is it because they don't think for themselves?

.
Good question, why do y'all Republicans/drooling idiots continually reference that tax raisin', gun controllin' outlier to today's Republican party?

I wonder if Reagan would approve of a gun regulation that reads something like;

"Those who enter the citizen militia by virtue of possessing firearms acknowledge the authority of the state to regulate the associated activities. Otherwise there is no "militia," and indeed no "state.""

I'm guessing that after his gun control epiphany (somewhere around the mid 1980's) Reagan would've heartily approved with the above gun control regulation.
.

You are the one that had to resort to quoting someone else, not me.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If that...and outdoor sports were the only issue, there wouldn't be an issue. But this paramilitary militia bullshit is way out of hand....

Besides....no one is denying your right to own firearms. Just to fill out a damned form.

Personally, as a gun owner...I'd rather have the successful completion of a background check be part of your driver's license or ID. That way you don't have to be checked with every purchase. One would have the check redone with.license renewal...if you screw up in the interim....the part of the license which indicates your eligibility to purchase firearms would be punched out with a paper punch.

Why do you have to lie? There are plenty of people who are denying the right of individuals to own guns, which is why everyone always treats people who claim otherwise with total contempt.

Yep...violent felons, mentally I'll, and perpetrators of Domestic Violence.

Doubling down on you lies only makes my point.