Tell Me if I'm Wrong

[CWayne]

Even if state governments are allowed to form a militia as well as a National Guard, the right belongs to the state. Private citizens form what is known as a gang.

They already do have militia good God how many times my I tell you that.

What militia? You have said absolutely nothing, but trip out on your fantasy.

The right belongs to the state government to call up the National Guard if necessary. The National Guard members have proper identification. BTW: no private citizen has any authority over another citizen. These "militia" thugs appear to be pretending that they have a right to exert authority over other citizens and also local and state governments, but no such authority exists as it has not been delegated. If anyone is stopped on the street, s/he has a perfect right to tell this person to get lost.

Moreover, how does the public know what training one of these "militia" has? What kind of character? Anything? You can't just run around wild in the streets. We don't stop for thugs.

We haven't been invaded since 1812.

Until the mass hysteria of the world this year, we were being invaded every year for the past 150 years.

This thread is not about illegal immigration.

Since I was addressing a specific person and not the thread...........

 

[Lysistrata]

Even if state governments are allowed to form a militia as well as a National Guard, the right belongs to the state. Private citizens form what is known as a gang.

They already do have militia good God how many times my I tell you that.

What militia? You have said absolutely nothing, but trip out on your fantasy.

The right belongs to the state government to call up the National Guard if necessary. The National Guard members have proper identification. BTW: no private citizen has any authority over another citizen. These "militia" thugs appear to be pretending that they have a right to exert authority over other citizens and also local and state governments, but no such authority exists as it has not been delegated. If anyone is stopped on the street, s/he has a perfect right to tell this person to get lost.

Moreover, how does the public know what training one of these "militia" has? What kind of character? Anything? You can't just run around wild in the streets. We don't stop for thugs.

We haven't been invaded since 1812.

Until the mass hysteria of the world this year, we were being invaded every year for the past 150 years.

No we weren't. We haven't been invaded since Pearl Harbor. Speaking about "mass hysteria." Why do people practice it? "Oh, invasion!" "Gun grabbers!" "I've got a stupid beard and not much in the way of personal equipment!"

 

[Unkotare]

.... We haven't been invaded since Pearl Harbor. ...

The attack on the US naval base at Pearl Harbor was not an invasion.

 

[Levant]

Tell us again about....My cold, dead hands

And Katrina... Not a cold-dead-fingers to be found - at least not from defending the right to keep and bear arms.

 

[rightwinger]

Tell us again about....My cold, dead hands

And Katrina... Not a cold-dead-fingers to be found - at least not from defending the right to keep and bear arms.

Poor, poor Katrina

 

[CWayne]

Even if state governments are allowed to form a militia as well as a National Guard, the right belongs to the state. Private citizens form what is known as a gang.

They already do have militia good God how many times my I tell you that.

What militia? You have said absolutely nothing, but trip out on your fantasy.

The right belongs to the state government to call up the National Guard if necessary. The National Guard members have proper identification. BTW: no private citizen has any authority over another citizen. These "militia" thugs appear to be pretending that they have a right to exert authority over other citizens and also local and state governments, but no such authority exists as it has not been delegated. If anyone is stopped on the street, s/he has a perfect right to tell this person to get lost.

Moreover, how does the public know what training one of these "militia" has? What kind of character? Anything? You can't just run around wild in the streets. We don't stop for thugs.

We haven't been invaded since 1812.

Until the mass hysteria of the world this year, we were being invaded every year for the past 150 years.

No we weren't. We haven't been invaded since Pearl Harbor. Speaking about "mass hysteria." Why do people practice it? "Oh, invasion!" "Gun grabbers!" "I've got a stupid beard and not much in the way of personal equipment!"

Pull your head out.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The last time I read one of my kids text book it said the Second Amendment was no longer used since the forming of the National Guard. Another says the Second Amendment gives the state the right to form a militia. Of course we no longer have to worry because today all their text books are on their computers and we no longer can read them except through the schools who teach this treason.

The Dick Act of, I think 1913 spelled out in plain English what the military was. Regular Troops, Reserve Troops, the National Guard and the militia, every able man. If called up by the president the militia will show up with a modern military rifle and the rounds to power it. If they fail to show they will be tried the same as a regular troop.

This brings my first question. If we were invaded by way of the Left Coast or the other Left Coast where is the militia? Will New Yorkers and Californians be behind every blade of grass with their modern military rifle? Or will they be saluting a white flag flying over Sacramento? It's bad enough we have allowed states to break Federal Law now they destroy our nation's defense. One has flooded their state with the invaders and supports them with things Americans only dream of.

Again stop me if I'm wrong. The Constitution is the law of the land. Every elected and most all appointed political officials swear an oath to the Constitution. If we the people held them to this oath we might have a couple not setting in prison, or swinging from a rope.

For the last 15 years violent crime has been on the down fall. Even in these democrat ran shit holes as....PICK ONE. With their high poverty, no jobs, massive gun laws disarming the good, the honest, and the helpless. A drug and crime infested, gun free utopia. The weapons the tyrants scream about were used to murder less than knifes and even one's hands. Those semi automatics, a shell of what we should have, are only a threat to enemies from within, tyrants like the ones that soil their oath and never had any honor to begin with.

Don't try to fool your self, the Second Amendment allows us to retain all the rest of them. A lot of citizens in states have given up their right to protect them self. What they come for next is the Fourth Amendment. With all the crime ya got to suspend the Fourth to protect the disarmed surfs. Just look at any democrat ran area weather a town, city, or state. All shit holes Disarmed and the Fourth just a faint memory you live out the rest of your life as a subject to the crown of the ones that disarmed you.

As for this idiocy:

“If we were invaded by way of the Left Coast or the other Left Coast where is the militia? Will New Yorkers and Californians be behind every blade of grass with their modern military rifle? Or will they be saluting a white flag flying over Sacramento? It's bad enough we have allowed states to break Federal Law now they destroy our nation's defense. One has flooded their state with the invaders and supports them with things Americans only dream of.”

There is ample military defense – both Federal and state – to defend the Pacific Coast states from ‘invasion.’

He has some bizarre idea that the Left Coast and "the other Left Coast" (whatever that means) aren't chock full of Americans when the population of the coasts on both sides of the country is far greater than the states in the middle of the country. It's funny that he doesn't mention the Gulf Coast at all. Why would any Americans be saluting a white flag of surrender? And to whom? Some people are just plain crazy.

True – and desperate for attention.

“ Why would any Americans be saluting a white flag of surrender?”

No American would – or will.

Much of the OP’s idiocy is predicated in the wrongheaded rightwing notion that armed private citizens would somehow act as a ‘deterrent’ to foreign invasion.

The ‘rifle behind every blade of grass’ misquote by Isoroku Yamamoto is typical of ignorant conservatives; the Admiral never said it, and it is our standing military that deters foreign invasion, not armed private citizens.

‘Advocates of gun rights often argue that in World War II Japan was deterred from invading the U.S. mainland by a fear of American citizens with guns in their closets. They frequently quote Japan’s Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto as saying: "You cannot invade mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass."

But this quote is unsubstantiated and almost certainly bogus, even though it has been repeated thousands of times in various Internet postings. There is no record of the commander in chief of Japan’s wartime fleet ever saying it.’

Misquoting Yamamoto - FactCheck.org

Advocates of gun rights often argue that in World War II Japan was deterred from invading the U.S. mainland by a fear of American citizens with guns in their closets. They frequently quote Japan’s Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto as saying: "You cannot invade mainland United States. There would be a...

www.factcheck.org

 

[Gdjjr]

The Constitution is not law- it's the rules to keep the miscreants in DC in check for writing laws.
Laws are to punish for criminal (illegal) activity. There is no punishment for not following their oath, which does say, "to the best of my ability" which is a "legal" out.

Succinctly, without a complete History lesson and the federalist/anti-federalist papers discussion the below is what the constitution is-

That they, the miscreants in the District of Criminals ignore the rules the laws they write (for lobbyist) is sometimes questioned, but not punished- the question(s) sometimes asked winds up at the SC, who are lawyers, which means we have to bear in mind they paid others to teach them to lie, albeit legally- so, then the law is "fixed" by the SC. Most recently changing a fine to a tax- which was NOT the original intent for SC judges- it was to determine IF a law abided by the spirit of the constitution and our founding DOI- regional local judges were to *apply* law. Not invent it at their discretion.

The constitution was the dividing of power of the federal gov't. laid out for easy comprehension, which does require reading more than the Bill of Rights, which was an addition which is why they are called amendments.

The Power of each entity is explained- legislative, judicial and executive. That's it.

The Bill of Rights are lines to not be crossed by the legislative branch (law writers). There is but one caveat and it's in the 4th amendment "just cause" is interpreted to fit the situation but abandons the spirit of the US founding when intentionally ignored. The Do Not Cross lines are in simple, easy to understand, English.

As far as the 2nd amendment is concerned the declarative says- shall not be infringed. Pseudo intellectuals like to pretend (to make the simple complicated) that reading simple English is an esoteric venture- I will cede getting people to read what is written is an endeavor and challenging, but that doesn't change the words.

The 2nd amendment arguments wind up at the SC because of pseudo intellectuals pretending to be smarter than everyone else- they ain't. The SC then is obligated (sometimes depending on the mood at the time) to set the record straight (lines not to be crossed)- shall not be infringed- it is what it is, no matter how you dress it up.

Basically, the constitution gives authority for legislators to regulate, per the divisions of power; commerce and trade, coin money and set its value, implement apportioned taxes and offer the process of elections to determine who gets elected, Declare War and write letters of marque and reprisal-

The miscreants were all educated by the same indoctrination- they are better and more fit to determine the future for an Individual and have the *power* they assumed, not granted in the constitution, to absolve responsibility-

It helps us pretend we're a country under the rule of law- more to the point is we're a country operating to the edict of man under the color of law- not the same as rule of law.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

We feel safe here in Texas. But I can't imagine what it feels like to think like a normal person and be stuck in a marxist shithole like commiefornia. That's a foreign concept to me.... pun intended.

Stay in Texas. It suits you.

It appears to suite a lot of yankees as well or you wouldnt be moving here in droves.

 

[miketx]

The last time I read one of my kids text book it said the Second Amendment was no longer used since the forming of the National Guard. Another says the Second Amendment gives the state the right to form a militia. Of course we no longer have to worry because today all their text books are on their computers and we no longer can read them except through the schools who teach this treason.

The Dick Act of, I think 1913 spelled out in plain English what the military was. Regular Troops, Reserve Troops, the National Guard and the militia, every able man. If called up by the president the militia will show up with a modern military rifle and the rounds to power it. If they fail to show they will be tried the same as a regular troop.

This brings my first question. If we were invaded by way of the Left Coast or the other Left Coast where is the militia? Will New Yorkers and Californians be behind every blade of grass with their modern military rifle? Or will they be saluting a white flag flying over Sacramento? It's bad enough we have allowed states to break Federal Law now they destroy our nation's defense. One has flooded their state with the invaders and supports them with things Americans only dream of.

Again stop me if I'm wrong. The Constitution is the law of the land. Every elected and most all appointed political officials swear an oath to the Constitution. If we the people held them to this oath we might have a couple not setting in prison, or swinging from a rope.

For the last 15 years violent crime has been on the down fall. Even in these democrat ran shit holes as....PICK ONE. With their high poverty, no jobs, massive gun laws disarming the good, the honest, and the helpless. A drug and crime infested, gun free utopia. The weapons the tyrants scream about were used to murder less than knifes and even one's hands. Those semi automatics, a shell of what we should have, are only a threat to enemies from within, tyrants like the ones that soil their oath and never had any honor to begin with.

Don't try to fool your self, the Second Amendment allows us to retain all the rest of them. A lot of citizens in states have given up their right to protect them self. What they come for next is the Fourth Amendment. With all the crime ya got to suspend the Fourth to protect the disarmed surfs. Just look at any democrat ran area weather a town, city, or state. All shit holes Disarmed and the Fourth just a faint memory you live out the rest of your life as a subject to the crown of the ones that disarmed you.

Telling the modern Mussolini's and Hitlers their acts are unconstitutional is like telling an armed criminal he's in a gun free zone.

 

[Overtime Paycheck]

I don't know what you're getting on about but haven't you ever noticed that when politicians talk about "small business" they are alluding to the personal and privacy rights of "the working class", so, when they say things like "oh its so sad for small business and we're doin' everything we can for 'em" what they really mean under this pretext is "oh its so sad we the government is up your ass and we're doing everything we can to not monitor your phone calls, hack your emails and mix your prescriptions up." like they really mean it. Watch close and you'll see what I mean.

 

[Care4all]

two words

Justice Scalia

the Supreme court changed the once interpretation of the 2nd amendment.....

 

[Gdjjr]

the Supreme court changed the once interpretation of the 2nd amendment.....

How?

That said, the word you use it at the root of the problems we face- left, right, demopublican and republicrat.

The word? Interpretation. That is not an enumerated power, nor does the SC have the authority to.
The SC job is to determine if a law falls within constitutional restraints- enumerated powers. Those don't require "interpretation" (until legal liars get involved and start their CYA double speak trying to be relevant [think judges]. Simple English is NOT an esoteric venture or endeavor although the lawyers working the halls of congress in the District of Criminals want we, the "stinky tourist" [ala that senate lawyer Harry Reid] to believe it is and subscribe to the education system which keeps them in power).

Interpretation ceases to exist without word definition. e.g. a fine is not a tax. Is is is- it IS self explanatory.

present tense third-person singular of be

dialectal present tense first-person and third-person singular of be

dialectal present tense plural of be

even that unnecessarily complicates the simple, which is what pseudo intellectuals do-




Lawyers (of which judges were) pay others to teach them to lie (intentionally misinterpret), albeit legally.

Lawyers all receive the same indoctrination classes and if they succeed at the conformity (pass the tests) they are awarded a sheep skin declaring they are better than others and somehow special. They ain't. I guar on tee they bleed red when cut and will bust their stinking asses IF they try to put their pants on both legs at the same time.