CDZ Second Amendment Rights Must be Complete and Uncondional!

[DudleySmith]

The rights to keep and bear arms is explicitly stated as belonging to THE PEOPLE, and the Second Amendment explicitly states that this right shall not be infringed.

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

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 whole 'Militia' fantasy went away pretty quickly; too many couldn't afford the equipment for one, and Jefferson as President had to resort to a standing Federal Army to enforce his embargoes in his second term.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

And the National Guard and Coast Guard were Federalized, so your point goes nowhere; the 'militia' stuff didn't last past Jefferson's Presidency, and was certainly dead by the end of the War of 1812, where its glaring weaknesses became painful obvious. But that has little to do with the fact that the states could decide their own laws re weapons and the like, and did so, same as they did with established religious sects and most everything else, including voting rights.

 

[otto105]

The rights to keep and bear arms is explicitly stated as belonging to THE PEOPLE, and the Second Amendment explicitly states that this right shall not be infringed.

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

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 whole 'Militia' fantasy went away pretty quickly; too many couldn't afford the equipment for one, and Jefferson as President had to resort to a standing Federal Army to enforce his embargoes in his second term.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

And the National Guard and Coast Guard were Federalized, so your point goes nowhere; the 'militia' stuff dodn't last past Jefferson's Presidency, and was certainly dead by the end of the War of 1812, where its glaring weaknesses became painful obvious. But that has little to do with the fact that the states could decide their own laws re weapons and the like, and did so, same as they did with established religious sects and most everything else, including voting rights.

I see Austin Texas was enjoying some of the 2nd amendment free fire zone this weekend.

 

[Colin norris]

There can be no restrictions on any person's right to buy or sell any guns or any number of guns they choose.
This could present risks to society in America but the risks need to be accepted as necessary for the upholding of the intent of the 2nd. amendment. If any American objects to the sacred rights as stated by the 2nd. amendment then they have the option of purchasing their own weapons with which to defend themselves from harm.

The extreme example: A person released from prison who has murdered with his gun has the right to walk straight across the street from the prison and purchase a gun or guns. The only thing stopping him would be a background check being required to purchase a gun.

On the surface it could seem to be counter-productive to a peaceful society. It might be but there is no legitimate means to stop him unless the 2nd. amendment's unconditional rights are infringed upon.

And so for those who are hesitant to accept the full and complete rights as spelled out by their 2nd. amendment, is there any possible law that could be enacted that could curtail the ex-criminal's rights?

I say there is none! The 2nd. amendment isn't open for compromise for any reason or for any socialist cause.

Opinions?

The right to own guns has nothing sacred about it. That's rubbish. God had notj o ng to do with the writing of the constitution but was included as mere references to appease th e godbotherers.

This government has not made one movement to restrict you r gun ownership. Another lie. They want tighter restrictions on who can own them and when I see this sort of crap written it indicates to me you should be on that list.

 

[otto105]

If a white christian god of mythology wanted everyone to have a gun....why is it not mentioned in the bible.

 

[DudleySmith]

The rights to keep and bear arms is explicitly stated as belonging to THE PEOPLE, and the Second Amendment explicitly states that this right shall not be infringed.

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

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 whole 'Militia' fantasy went away pretty quickly; too many couldn't afford the equipment for one, and Jefferson as President had to resort to a standing Federal Army to enforce his embargoes in his second term.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

And the National Guard and Coast Guard were Federalized, so your point goes nowhere; the 'militia' stuff dodn't last past Jefferson's Presidency, and was certainly dead by the end of the War of 1812, where its glaring weaknesses became painful obvious. But that has little to do with the fact that the states could decide their own laws re weapons and the like, and did so, same as they did with established religious sects and most everything else, including voting rights.

I see Austin Texas was enjoying some of the 2nd amendment free fire zone this weekend.

Austin is a 'Sanctuary city' dominated by trust fund hippies and the UT professors, so naturally it is also a game preserve for certain wildlife herds. Few pay any attention to Austin here in Texas, and don't care if they all die or not.

 

[otto105]

The rights to keep and bear arms is explicitly stated as belonging to THE PEOPLE, and the Second Amendment explicitly states that this right shall not be infringed.

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

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 whole 'Militia' fantasy went away pretty quickly; too many couldn't afford the equipment for one, and Jefferson as President had to resort to a standing Federal Army to enforce his embargoes in his second term.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

And the National Guard and Coast Guard were Federalized, so your point goes nowhere; the 'militia' stuff dodn't last past Jefferson's Presidency, and was certainly dead by the end of the War of 1812, where its glaring weaknesses became painful obvious. But that has little to do with the fact that the states could decide their own laws re weapons and the like, and did so, same as they did with established religious sects and most everything else, including voting rights.

I see Austin Texas was enjoying some of the 2nd amendment free fire zone this weekend.

Austin is a 'Sanctuary city' dominated by trust fund hippies and the UT professors, so naturally it is also a game preserve for certain wildlife herds. Few pay any attention to Austin here in Texas, and don't care if they all die or not.

Yeah, sure.

people are expendable in order for have a free fire zone.

 

[DudleySmith]

The rights to keep and bear arms is explicitly stated as belonging to THE PEOPLE, and the Second Amendment explicitly states that this right shall not be infringed.

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

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 whole 'Militia' fantasy went away pretty quickly; too many couldn't afford the equipment for one, and Jefferson as President had to resort to a standing Federal Army to enforce his embargoes in his second term.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

And the National Guard and Coast Guard were Federalized, so your point goes nowhere; the 'militia' stuff dodn't last past Jefferson's Presidency, and was certainly dead by the end of the War of 1812, where its glaring weaknesses became painful obvious. But that has little to do with the fact that the states could decide their own laws re weapons and the like, and did so, same as they did with established religious sects and most everything else, including voting rights.

I see Austin Texas was enjoying some of the 2nd amendment free fire zone this weekend.

Austin is a 'Sanctuary city' dominated by trust fund hippies and the UT professors, so naturally it is also a game preserve for certain wildlife herds. Few pay any attention to Austin here in Texas, and don't care if they all die or not.

Yeah, sure.

people are expendable in order for have a free fire zone.

Yes, that's exactly the case with commies letting so many blacks die in the hoods and latinos in the barrios. If firearms laws were a lot tougher on 'minorities' that would be a real contribution re black lives mattering. but left wingers rely on the violence for their agendas, so practical efforts aren't options for you race baiters and social justice frauds.

 

[otto105]

The rights to keep and bear arms is explicitly stated as belonging to THE PEOPLE, and the Second Amendment explicitly states that this right shall not be infringed.

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

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 whole 'Militia' fantasy went away pretty quickly; too many couldn't afford the equipment for one, and Jefferson as President had to resort to a standing Federal Army to enforce his embargoes in his second term.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

And the National Guard and Coast Guard were Federalized, so your point goes nowhere; the 'militia' stuff dodn't last past Jefferson's Presidency, and was certainly dead by the end of the War of 1812, where its glaring weaknesses became painful obvious. But that has little to do with the fact that the states could decide their own laws re weapons and the like, and did so, same as they did with established religious sects and most everything else, including voting rights.

I see Austin Texas was enjoying some of the 2nd amendment free fire zone this weekend.

Austin is a 'Sanctuary city' dominated by trust fund hippies and the UT professors, so naturally it is also a game preserve for certain wildlife herds. Few pay any attention to Austin here in Texas, and don't care if they all die or not.

Yeah, sure.

people are expendable in order for have a free fire zone.

Yes, that's exactly the case with commies letting so many blacks die in the hoods and latinos in the barrios. If firearms laws were a lot tougher on 'minorities' that would be a real contribution re black lives mattering. but left wingers rely on the violence for their agendas, so practical efforts aren't options for you race baiters and social justice frauds.

So, you want different laws and policies for “minorities”?

So much for equality in a Merica.

 

[danielpalos]

We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems in our free States. Don't grab guns, grab gun lovers and regulate them well!

 

[DudleySmith]

The rights to keep and bear arms is explicitly stated as belonging to THE PEOPLE, and the Second Amendment explicitly states that this right shall not be infringed.

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

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 whole 'Militia' fantasy went away pretty quickly; too many couldn't afford the equipment for one, and Jefferson as President had to resort to a standing Federal Army to enforce his embargoes in his second term.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

And the National Guard and Coast Guard were Federalized, so your point goes nowhere; the 'militia' stuff dodn't last past Jefferson's Presidency, and was certainly dead by the end of the War of 1812, where its glaring weaknesses became painful obvious. But that has little to do with the fact that the states could decide their own laws re weapons and the like, and did so, same as they did with established religious sects and most everything else, including voting rights.

I see Austin Texas was enjoying some of the 2nd amendment free fire zone this weekend.

Austin is a 'Sanctuary city' dominated by trust fund hippies and the UT professors, so naturally it is also a game preserve for certain wildlife herds. Few pay any attention to Austin here in Texas, and don't care if they all die or not.

Yeah, sure.

people are expendable in order for have a free fire zone.

Yes, that's exactly the case with commies letting so many blacks die in the hoods and latinos in the barrios. If firearms laws were a lot tougher on 'minorities' that would be a real contribution re black lives mattering. but left wingers rely on the violence for their agendas, so practical efforts aren't options for you race baiters and social justice frauds.

So, you want different laws and policies for “minorities”?

So much for equality in a Merica.

Go snivel about it to your Red Chinese masters; they have no problems with racism, same as you Democrats. Your entire agenda is about different laws based on skin color, dumbass.

 

[otto105]

The rights to keep and bear arms is explicitly stated as belonging to THE PEOPLE, and the Second Amendment explicitly states that this right shall not be infringed.

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

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 whole 'Militia' fantasy went away pretty quickly; too many couldn't afford the equipment for one, and Jefferson as President had to resort to a standing Federal Army to enforce his embargoes in his second term.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

And the National Guard and Coast Guard were Federalized, so your point goes nowhere; the 'militia' stuff dodn't last past Jefferson's Presidency, and was certainly dead by the end of the War of 1812, where its glaring weaknesses became painful obvious. But that has little to do with the fact that the states could decide their own laws re weapons and the like, and did so, same as they did with established religious sects and most everything else, including voting rights.

I see Austin Texas was enjoying some of the 2nd amendment free fire zone this weekend.

Austin is a 'Sanctuary city' dominated by trust fund hippies and the UT professors, so naturally it is also a game preserve for certain wildlife herds. Few pay any attention to Austin here in Texas, and don't care if they all die or not.

Yeah, sure.

people are expendable in order for have a free fire zone.

Yes, that's exactly the case with commies letting so many blacks die in the hoods and latinos in the barrios. If firearms laws were a lot tougher on 'minorities' that would be a real contribution re black lives mattering. but left wingers rely on the violence for their agendas, so practical efforts aren't options for you race baiters and social justice frauds.

So, you want different laws and policies for “minorities”?

So much for equality in a Merica.

Go snivel about it to your Red Chinese masters; they have no problems with racism, same as you Democrats. Your entire agenda is about different laws based on skin color, dumbass.

I'm not concerned about your sniveling dude. Don't even care to know what the stupid point is that your post is trying and failing to convey.

You post that commies and Democrats don't care about race, but our entire agenda is based on race....

 

[DudleySmith]

The rights to keep and bear arms is explicitly stated as belonging to THE PEOPLE, and the Second Amendment explicitly states that this right shall not be infringed.

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

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 whole 'Militia' fantasy went away pretty quickly; too many couldn't afford the equipment for one, and Jefferson as President had to resort to a standing Federal Army to enforce his embargoes in his second term.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

And the National Guard and Coast Guard were Federalized, so your point goes nowhere; the 'militia' stuff dodn't last past Jefferson's Presidency, and was certainly dead by the end of the War of 1812, where its glaring weaknesses became painful obvious. But that has little to do with the fact that the states could decide their own laws re weapons and the like, and did so, same as they did with established religious sects and most everything else, including voting rights.

I see Austin Texas was enjoying some of the 2nd amendment free fire zone this weekend.

Austin is a 'Sanctuary city' dominated by trust fund hippies and the UT professors, so naturally it is also a game preserve for certain wildlife herds. Few pay any attention to Austin here in Texas, and don't care if they all die or not.

Yeah, sure.

people are expendable in order for have a free fire zone.

Yes, that's exactly the case with commies letting so many blacks die in the hoods and latinos in the barrios. If firearms laws were a lot tougher on 'minorities' that would be a real contribution re black lives mattering. but left wingers rely on the violence for their agendas, so practical efforts aren't options for you race baiters and social justice frauds.

So, you want different laws and policies for “minorities”?

So much for equality in a Merica.

Go snivel about it to your Red Chinese masters; they have no problems with racism, same as you Democrats. Your entire agenda is about different laws based on skin color, dumbass.

I'm not concerned about your sniveling dude. Don't even care to know what the stupid point is that your post is trying and failing to convey.

You post that commies and Democrats don't care about race, but our entire agenda is based on race....

You're too stupid to even lie well about what I said, dumbass. You commies don't care about black lives and in fact encourage them to commit violence so you can cry fake tears over their deaths, like the phony low life pieces of shit you all are, every last one of you.

 

[frigidweirdo]

There can be no restrictions on any person's right to buy or sell any guns or any number of guns they choose.
This could present risks to society in America but the risks need to be accepted as necessary for the upholding of the intent of the 2nd. amendment. If any American objects to the sacred rights as stated by the 2nd. amendment then they have the option of purchasing their own weapons with which to defend themselves from harm.

The extreme example: A person released from prison who has murdered with his gun has the right to walk straight across the street from the prison and purchase a gun or guns. The only thing stopping him would be a background check being required to purchase a gun.

On the surface it could seem to be counter-productive to a peaceful society. It might be but there is no legitimate means to stop him unless the 2nd. amendment's unconditional rights are infringed upon.

And so for those who are hesitant to accept the full and complete rights as spelled out by their 2nd. amendment, is there any possible law that could be enacted that could curtail the ex-criminal's rights?

I say there is none! The 2nd. amendment isn't open for compromise for any reason or for any socialist cause.

Opinions?

So, the insane should be able to get guns?
Those in prison should be able to get guns?

 

[DudleySmith]

There can be no restrictions on any person's right to buy or sell any guns or any number of guns they choose.
This could present risks to society in America but the risks need to be accepted as necessary for the upholding of the intent of the 2nd. amendment. If any American objects to the sacred rights as stated by the 2nd. amendment then they have the option of purchasing their own weapons with which to defend themselves from harm.

The extreme example: A person released from prison who has murdered with his gun has the right to walk straight across the street from the prison and purchase a gun or guns. The only thing stopping him would be a background check being required to purchase a gun.

On the surface it could seem to be counter-productive to a peaceful society. It might be but there is no legitimate means to stop him unless the 2nd. amendment's unconditional rights are infringed upon.

And so for those who are hesitant to accept the full and complete rights as spelled out by their 2nd. amendment, is there any possible law that could be enacted that could curtail the ex-criminal's rights?

I say there is none! The 2nd. amendment isn't open for compromise for any reason or for any socialist cause.

Opinions?

So, the insane should be able to get guns?
Those in prison should be able to get guns?

They already do, thanks to Democrat policies that encourage gun sales to minorities.

 

[otto105]

The rights to keep and bear arms is explicitly stated as belonging to THE PEOPLE, and the Second Amendment explicitly states that this right shall not be infringed.

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

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 whole 'Militia' fantasy went away pretty quickly; too many couldn't afford the equipment for one, and Jefferson as President had to resort to a standing Federal Army to enforce his embargoes in his second term.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

And the National Guard and Coast Guard were Federalized, so your point goes nowhere; the 'militia' stuff dodn't last past Jefferson's Presidency, and was certainly dead by the end of the War of 1812, where its glaring weaknesses became painful obvious. But that has little to do with the fact that the states could decide their own laws re weapons and the like, and did so, same as they did with established religious sects and most everything else, including voting rights.

I see Austin Texas was enjoying some of the 2nd amendment free fire zone this weekend.

Austin is a 'Sanctuary city' dominated by trust fund hippies and the UT professors, so naturally it is also a game preserve for certain wildlife herds. Few pay any attention to Austin here in Texas, and don't care if they all die or not.

Yeah, sure.

people are expendable in order for have a free fire zone.

Yes, that's exactly the case with commies letting so many blacks die in the hoods and latinos in the barrios. If firearms laws were a lot tougher on 'minorities' that would be a real contribution re black lives mattering. but left wingers rely on the violence for their agendas, so practical efforts aren't options for you race baiters and social justice frauds.

So, you want different laws and policies for “minorities”?

So much for equality in a Merica.

Go snivel about it to your Red Chinese masters; they have no problems with racism, same as you Democrats. Your entire agenda is about different laws based on skin color, dumbass.

I'm not concerned about your sniveling dude. Don't even care to know what the stupid point is that your post is trying and failing to convey.

You post that commies and Democrats don't care about race, but our entire agenda is based on race....

You're too stupid to even lie well about what I said, dumbass. You commies don't care about black lives and in fact encourage them to commit violence so you can cry fake tears over their deaths, like the phony low life pieces of shit you all are, every last one of you.

What is your fascination with commies? Do you need a leader that rides a horse with his shirt off?

Democrats are working social justice for our minority neighbors, you advocate the jack booted thugs from our historical policing methods for these communities.

 

[DudleySmith]

The rights to keep and bear arms is explicitly stated as belonging to THE PEOPLE, and the Second Amendment explicitly states that this right shall not be infringed.

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

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 whole 'Militia' fantasy went away pretty quickly; too many couldn't afford the equipment for one, and Jefferson as President had to resort to a standing Federal Army to enforce his embargoes in his second term.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

And the National Guard and Coast Guard were Federalized, so your point goes nowhere; the 'militia' stuff dodn't last past Jefferson's Presidency, and was certainly dead by the end of the War of 1812, where its glaring weaknesses became painful obvious. But that has little to do with the fact that the states could decide their own laws re weapons and the like, and did so, same as they did with established religious sects and most everything else, including voting rights.

I see Austin Texas was enjoying some of the 2nd amendment free fire zone this weekend.

Austin is a 'Sanctuary city' dominated by trust fund hippies and the UT professors, so naturally it is also a game preserve for certain wildlife herds. Few pay any attention to Austin here in Texas, and don't care if they all die or not.

Yeah, sure.

people are expendable in order for have a free fire zone.

Yes, that's exactly the case with commies letting so many blacks die in the hoods and latinos in the barrios. If firearms laws were a lot tougher on 'minorities' that would be a real contribution re black lives mattering. but left wingers rely on the violence for their agendas, so practical efforts aren't options for you race baiters and social justice frauds.

So, you want different laws and policies for “minorities”?

So much for equality in a Merica.

Go snivel about it to your Red Chinese masters; they have no problems with racism, same as you Democrats. Your entire agenda is about different laws based on skin color, dumbass.

I'm not concerned about your sniveling dude. Don't even care to know what the stupid point is that your post is trying and failing to convey.

You post that commies and Democrats don't care about race, but our entire agenda is based on race....

You're too stupid to even lie well about what I said, dumbass. You commies don't care about black lives and in fact encourage them to commit violence so you can cry fake tears over their deaths, like the phony low life pieces of shit you all are, every last one of you.

What is your fascination with commies? Do you need a leader that rides a horse with his shirt off?

Democrats are working social justice for our minority neighbors, you advocate the jack booted thugs from our historical policing methods for these communities.

Why are you ashamed of who you work for? If you have to try and deny it so often why not just stay in your echo chambers so you can feel safe? Don't worry, it won't be long before your Heroes sell you to some middle class Chinese Cadre family as a house pet for their kids.

 

[otto105]

The rights to keep and bear arms is explicitly stated as belonging to THE PEOPLE, and the Second Amendment explicitly states that this right shall not be infringed.

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

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 whole 'Militia' fantasy went away pretty quickly; too many couldn't afford the equipment for one, and Jefferson as President had to resort to a standing Federal Army to enforce his embargoes in his second term.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

And the National Guard and Coast Guard were Federalized, so your point goes nowhere; the 'militia' stuff dodn't last past Jefferson's Presidency, and was certainly dead by the end of the War of 1812, where its glaring weaknesses became painful obvious. But that has little to do with the fact that the states could decide their own laws re weapons and the like, and did so, same as they did with established religious sects and most everything else, including voting rights.

I see Austin Texas was enjoying some of the 2nd amendment free fire zone this weekend.

Austin is a 'Sanctuary city' dominated by trust fund hippies and the UT professors, so naturally it is also a game preserve for certain wildlife herds. Few pay any attention to Austin here in Texas, and don't care if they all die or not.

Yeah, sure.

people are expendable in order for have a free fire zone.

Yes, that's exactly the case with commies letting so many blacks die in the hoods and latinos in the barrios. If firearms laws were a lot tougher on 'minorities' that would be a real contribution re black lives mattering. but left wingers rely on the violence for their agendas, so practical efforts aren't options for you race baiters and social justice frauds.

So, you want different laws and policies for “minorities”?

So much for equality in a Merica.

Go snivel about it to your Red Chinese masters; they have no problems with racism, same as you Democrats. Your entire agenda is about different laws based on skin color, dumbass.

I'm not concerned about your sniveling dude. Don't even care to know what the stupid point is that your post is trying and failing to convey.

You post that commies and Democrats don't care about race, but our entire agenda is based on race....

You're too stupid to even lie well about what I said, dumbass. You commies don't care about black lives and in fact encourage them to commit violence so you can cry fake tears over their deaths, like the phony low life pieces of shit you all are, every last one of you.

What is your fascination with commies? Do you need a leader that rides a horse with his shirt off?

Democrats are working social justice for our minority neighbors, you advocate the jack booted thugs from our historical policing methods for these communities.

Why are you ashamed of who you work for? If you have to try and deny it so often why not just stay in your echo chambers so you can feel safe?

I work for a private company and have no problems with the owner.

What are these echo chambers that your clearly yelling from.

 

[DudleySmith]

The rights to keep and bear arms is explicitly stated as belonging to THE PEOPLE, and the Second Amendment explicitly states that this right shall not be infringed.

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

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 whole 'Militia' fantasy went away pretty quickly; too many couldn't afford the equipment for one, and Jefferson as President had to resort to a standing Federal Army to enforce his embargoes in his second term.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

And the National Guard and Coast Guard were Federalized, so your point goes nowhere; the 'militia' stuff dodn't last past Jefferson's Presidency, and was certainly dead by the end of the War of 1812, where its glaring weaknesses became painful obvious. But that has little to do with the fact that the states could decide their own laws re weapons and the like, and did so, same as they did with established religious sects and most everything else, including voting rights.

I see Austin Texas was enjoying some of the 2nd amendment free fire zone this weekend.

Austin is a 'Sanctuary city' dominated by trust fund hippies and the UT professors, so naturally it is also a game preserve for certain wildlife herds. Few pay any attention to Austin here in Texas, and don't care if they all die or not.

Yeah, sure.

people are expendable in order for have a free fire zone.

Yes, that's exactly the case with commies letting so many blacks die in the hoods and latinos in the barrios. If firearms laws were a lot tougher on 'minorities' that would be a real contribution re black lives mattering. but left wingers rely on the violence for their agendas, so practical efforts aren't options for you race baiters and social justice frauds.

So, you want different laws and policies for “minorities”?

So much for equality in a Merica.

Go snivel about it to your Red Chinese masters; they have no problems with racism, same as you Democrats. Your entire agenda is about different laws based on skin color, dumbass.

I'm not concerned about your sniveling dude. Don't even care to know what the stupid point is that your post is trying and failing to convey.

You post that commies and Democrats don't care about race, but our entire agenda is based on race....

You're too stupid to even lie well about what I said, dumbass. You commies don't care about black lives and in fact encourage them to commit violence so you can cry fake tears over their deaths, like the phony low life pieces of shit you all are, every last one of you.

What is your fascination with commies? Do you need a leader that rides a horse with his shirt off?

Democrats are working social justice for our minority neighbors, you advocate the jack booted thugs from our historical policing methods for these communities.

Why are you ashamed of who you work for? If you have to try and deny it so often why not just stay in your echo chambers so you can feel safe?

I work for a private company and have no problems with the owner.

What are these echo chambers that your clearly yelling from.

Ah, can't come up with any real points, as usual. lol typical for those who can't function outside of their Hive.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Which also means trained, so do you find it a violation of the Second Amendment to demand people have a permit to carry proving their shooting skills are "in good condition" and "well kept?"

Yes. It makes it much too easy to de facto ban concealed carry by making the "test" like the "literacy test" for voting.

 

[Jarlaxle]

You're about as ignorant on the meaning of conditions here on this thread as you've proven to be in the 'religion' section.

What's to stop the gun murderer from walking into a gun shop and buying a truckload of AR-15's?

His skin colour?

The fact it's much easier to talk to the right guys in a city and get anything he wants-up to and including full auto-for cash.