The Right To Bear Arms

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The idiocy in your comment is in your belief that the militia no longer exists or that it is no longer necessary. You're wrong in both counts.

A militia is necessary. Everyone is a member. Therefore, everyone needs all bearable weapons for service in a militia, including machine guns.

So are you ready to repeal the NFA?

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

View attachment 651466

Did

not

happen

 

[Lakhota]

Go Canada!

 

[Lakhota]

Amen!

 

[woodwork201]

Democeats in Congress have no interest in passing gun control, as they know it will cost them both houses.

After 1994, that has been true up to now. For those too young or who don't remember, the Democrats took a shellacking after passing the Assault Weapons Ban that year.

The problem is, this isn't 1994 and even if we remember, I don't think the Democrats and the socialists remember and the anti-gun lobby doesn't care; they keep their jobs even if their puppets in DC go home.

And I don't think the Democrats, and many Republicans as well, in Congress remember 1994. Remember how many Republicans voted to impeach a Republican president on blatantly false charges.

I hope you're right, M14, but I'm not counting on it.

 

[woodwork201]

A militia is necessary. Everyone is a member. Therefore, everyone needs all bearable weapons for service in a militia, including machine guns.

So are you ready to repeal the NFA?

You might be the first one besides me in this long divergence to get it right (sorry if I forgot or missed anyone else). The Constitution says that the militia is necessary. Congress can't make it unnecessary. The President cannot make it unnecessary and governors can't make it unnecessary. It is necessary. Strategically it will always be necessary even if ignored. Constitutionally, it is necessary unless and until the Constitution is changed to take those words out of the Constitution. Being necessary, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed whether or not they are currently in a militia and whether or not the government chooses to include militias in their military planning or whether or not the sky is blue or grass is green.

Just because the Congress has made the false claim that the National Guard is the militia, and even if it were (which it is not), the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed.

Yes, of course, I am ready to repeal the NFA. I'm ready to repeal GCA, FOPA, the Lautenberg Amendment, and any other law that infringes on the right to keep and bear arms. Every one of them is unconstitutional.

There are a lot of faux-conservatives in the world, including on these forums, those who pretend to believe in and support the right to keep and bear arms, and, to a point they do. But they don't support the 2nd Amendment protection that the right cannot be infringed. They support what they and the left agree to call, "reasonable restrictions". In fact, they don't support the Constitution. They believe in ideas like "strict scrutiny" or "compelling state interest", ideas that the Government and the courts use to violate the Constitution. Once they accept that the Government can violate the absolute, literal, original intent definitions of the Constitution in any one thing then they accept that the Government has the power to violate the Constitution. All that's left is to argue over what, when, and how. And the Government gets to make those calls so we know how that will turn out.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

It was the Framers’ original intent that the sanctioned and recognized state militia be the first line of defense against invasion or insurrection, not armed private citizens – the right to bear arms was solely for the benefit of official state militia.

There is of course no rational or factual basis for such a claim.

The first line of defense was always a citizen militia which can mobilize in minutes to hours.

It can take days or weeks to mobilize a state or national force.

 

[Kosh]

“Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary”​

― Karl Marx

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Billy000]

View attachment 651523

Amen!

Lol so true.

 

[Flash]

View attachment 730133

Burger was an idiot to say that. Just like you are an idiot to think posting that garbage means anything.

The Supremes after him set it right.

 

[dudmuck]

View attachment 730133

 

[Leo123]

Yeah, that was stupid.

 

[Polishprince]

View attachment 730133

Chief Justice Burger wasn't "conservative" in any sense of the word, if you'll remember his vote in the Far Left Roe v Wade decision of 1973.

In any event, I'm not a lawyer. But I do know an armed society is a polite society, and nothing is worse than not allowing Law Abiders to defend themselves.

 

[jc456]

View attachment 730133

He was wrong

 

[Yarddog]

View attachment 730133

Problem with that is that.... the Bill of rights, those amendments were intended to secure rights to the PEOPLE.... not the state. The language needs to be seen in that context.

 

[jc456]

Problem with that is that.... the Bill of rights, those amendments were intended to secure rights to the PEOPLE.... not the state. The language needs to be seen in that context.

It didn’t say state it says people

 

[DukeU]

Lol so true.

So, let's rely on Barney for our protection.

Only he should have guns...........

 

[westwall]

View attachment 730133

He is, and was wrong. He wasn't a conservative at all. Government HAS no RIGHTS.

Government takes RIGHTS away.

DURRRRRR