Idiots On Display

Billy_Kinetta

Paladin of the Lost Hour
Mar 4, 2013
52,766
22,196
2,320
Of course, The Post columnist thinks that this is all marvy.

"David Beddow, a lawyer who lives in Potomac, Md., referred to the police as 'our well-regulated militia. There is no need for civilians to have military-style weapons. But the police are trained to use guns, and they are here to support us. They don’t want people to get hurt. I’m glad they are here.' ”

Perspective | More armed police or fewer guns? How to fix our nation’s gun violence issues.
 
Ah, so we had police departments in 1791, and they comprised the citizens' army.

Interesting.
Actually that isn’t really correct. All were told to take up arms, after the Brits started confiscating guns before our independence. That is why it is our 2nd amendment. They knew an unarmed populous could lead to tyranny, as the Brits attempted, and did succeed in a few cities before the American Revolution. The Brits knew we were getting tired of living under their onerous rule.
 
And the reason for pilgrimages from England to begin with, were to get out from under British rules.
 
Of course, The Post columnist thinks that this is all marvy.

"David Beddow, a lawyer who lives in Potomac, Md., referred to the police as 'our well-regulated militia. There is no need for civilians to have military-style weapons. But the police are trained to use guns, and they are here to support us. They don’t want people to get hurt. I’m glad they are here.' ”

Perspective | More armed police or fewer guns? How to fix our nation’s gun violence issues.

Nope, the police are government actors.

Same as the National Guard, and since most of them are also part of the Army Reserve, they have a federal tag, which makes them not even satisfy the first part of the 2nd amendment, i.e. an indpendent state militia.
 
Of course, The Post columnist thinks that this is all marvy.

"David Beddow, a lawyer who lives in Potomac, Md., referred to the police as 'our well-regulated militia. There is no need for civilians to have military-style weapons. But the police are trained to use guns, and they are here to support us. They don’t want people to get hurt. I’m glad they are here.' ”

Perspective | More armed police or fewer guns? How to fix our nation’s gun violence issues.

Beddow is an idiot. Someone should tell him that the Supreme Court ruled that the police have "no constitutional duty" to protect anyone from harm.
 
The soviets and red chinese had armed police and unarmed civilians.

100 million people would attest to the folly of that if they weren't wiped out by "progressive" despots.

I am under no illusions that our own "progressive" bed wetters are concerned at all with "public safety".

 
Of course, The Post columnist thinks that this is all marvy.

"David Beddow, a lawyer who lives in Potomac, Md., referred to the police as 'our well-regulated militia. There is no need for civilians to have military-style weapons. But the police are trained to use guns, and they are here to support us. They don’t want people to get hurt. I’m glad they are here.' ”

Perspective | More armed police or fewer guns? How to fix our nation’s gun violence issues.

Beddow is an idiot. Someone should tell him that the Supreme Court ruled that the police have "no constitutional duty" to protect anyone from harm.

Here's the thing. When there are lawyers like Beddow, there are likely judges to match, and that's a real problem.
 
Just like the KGB protects Russian citizens....
The very definition of militia says he's wrong. The army and the militia are two separate entities.

Militia >a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.
 
Last edited:
My only thing to say regarding the massive amount of media fed idiots we have today is that I hope they all find out the hard way just how stupid they are.
 
Ah, so we had police departments in 1791, and they comprised the citizens' army.

Interesting.
Actually that isn’t really correct. All were told to take up arms, after the Brits started confiscating guns before our independence. That is why it is our 2nd amendment. They knew an unarmed populous could lead to tyranny, as the Brits attempted, and did succeed in a few cities before the American Revolution. The Brits knew we were getting tired of living under their onerous rule.
it is the amendment that makes us different than any other country in the world.
 
Actually that isn’t really correct. All were told to take up arms, after the Brits started confiscating guns before our independence. That is why it is our 2nd amendment. They knew an unarmed populous could lead to tyranny, as the Brits attempted, and did succeed in a few cities before the American Revolution. The Brits knew we were getting tired of living under their onerous rule.

And why the Third says government soldiers can't be quartered in private homes to spy on possible rebels...the Founders found that to be very important and thus made it 3rd.
 
Of course, The Post columnist thinks that this is all marvy.

"David Beddow, a lawyer who lives in Potomac, Md., referred to the police as 'our well-regulated militia. There is no need for civilians to have military-style weapons. But the police are trained to use guns, and they are here to support us. They don’t want people to get hurt. I’m glad they are here.' ”

Perspective | More armed police or fewer guns? How to fix our nation’s gun violence issues.

While students were being gunned down in the school the Parkland sheriff ordered his men to stay outside where it was safe.

In Maryland a young man walked into a school, fired several times, wounded several students, and in less than a minute an armed employee at the school withdrew his weapon and killed the attacked before he could hurt anyone else.

If you surrender your safety to others, what happens when others refuse to come / refuse to protect you?
- 'Parkland'.
 

Forum List

Back
Top