Were the Founding Fathers ...today....to write the Bill of Rights...

[Auld Phart]

What's 'puzzling', is you focusing on the word militia, and ignoring the rest of the Amendment.

What part of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms," do you not understand?

Well, **** head.....can you explain WHY the FF didn't just state "everyone" should own a gun rather than including that pesky term "militia"???

Personally, I think the FF wrote it fuzzy because there was as much heated debate about it then as there is today. They kicked that can down the road, as well.

nothing 'fuzzy' about it.

 

[Anathema]

I can't believe I'm actually having this discussion with people who seem to be otherwise sensible. None of you actually believe an armed uprising against our government would be successful? As someone hinted, only if the unrest were so overwhelming that the military turned against the sitting government as well.
We had a Civil War once, with one side backed by gentlemen who believed they were right but didn't have the manufacturing and financial ability to combat the standing government. Look up who won.

The side that won the Civil War had a citizenry behind it thst was willing to fight. This time, the citizens backing thst Government would be the draft dodgers, pacifists, and snowflakes. You know, the people who cost us the defeat in Vietnam.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The founders laid down a good foundation, it's leftists that have perverted parts of it, every time.

And yet it is the Right that has been consistently wrong at every turn of history. Slavery, environmental exploitation, labor rib, women's rights, Gay rights, civil rights.

Whenhas the Right been right?

Depends upon whether you read history or the Left's attempted rewrites.

Most recently with the marvelous electoral stomping of Hillary Clinton and the Forces of Evil by Donald Trump, and his inexorably proceeding disassembly of Obama's legacy.

It's almost gone!

 

[OldLady]

You can't beat the US military with nothing but semi automatics. Would you all PLEASE wake up and smell the coffee?

The Cong did a fair job, and ISIS hasn't been beaten yet.

The Cong were supported by communist USSR. Who, I wonder, will get behind you revolutionaries? It would be interesting to see who backs the destruction of the first democracy in the modern world.

Very,very interesting,OldLady . After the cold war was over an American General was supposed to have asked a Russian General if the Russians ever thought of invading the U.S. The Russian's answer was, "We considered it because we could have beaten your Army. However, we dismissed the idea because we could not have beaten the millions of your citizens with their guns."

My questions is this: What is the reason that Liberal Progressive Democrat Pukes continuously demand we turn in our guns and have strict gun control? Any logical reason?

Your turn to come back with an idiotically stupid reason, Go for it!

It is simply to slow down the high rate with which civilians are murdering other civilians with guns.

Why doesn't the left protest against Chicago's death rate or the other murder cities, all protected by the left? Your illogical rage is against law abiding gun owners and not against the murderers.

I'm not going to turn the thread by getting into that part of it.
It is not the left, however, that is ignoring the gang wars. It is the right that is busy cutting funding to programs to combat it.

 

[OldLady]

What's 'puzzling', is you focusing on the word militia, and ignoring the rest of the Amendment.

What part of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms," do you not understand?

Well, **** head.....can you explain WHY the FF didn't just state "everyone" should own a gun rather than including that pesky term "militia"???

Personally, I think the FF wrote it fuzzy because there was as much heated debate about it then as there is today. They kicked that can down the road, as well.

nothing 'fuzzy' about it.

Right. That's why we've been arguing about its meaning for decades.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

What's 'puzzling', is you focusing on the word militia, and ignoring the rest of the Amendment.

What part of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms," do you not understand?

Well, **** head.....can you explain WHY the FF didn't just state "everyone" should own a gun rather than including that pesky term "militia"???

Because at that time the rule was why use five words when you can use fifty? Brevity is a fairly modern invention.

 

[OldLady]

What's 'puzzling', is you focusing on the word militia, and ignoring the rest of the Amendment.

What part of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms," do you not understand?

Well, **** head.....can you explain WHY the FF didn't just state "everyone" should own a gun rather than including that pesky term "militia"???

Because at that time the rule was why use five words when you can use fifty? Brevity is a fairly modern invention.

I'm teaching the Constitution, Declaration and Bill of Rights right now. That's a great quip.

 

[Hossfly]

Yes they would, and geres why... the Foundung Fathers would ve utterly disgusted with the Government we have today and would be seeking its overthrow just like they did in 1775. You need guns for thst.

You can't beat the US military with nothing but semi automatics. Would you all PLEASE wake up and smell the coffee?

The Cong did a fair job, and ISIS hasn't been beaten yet.

The Cong were supported by communist USSR. Who, I wonder, will get behind you revolutionaries? It would be interesting to see who backs the destruction of the first democracy in the modern world.

Very,very interesting,OldLady . After the cold war was over an American General was supposed to have asked a Russian General if the Russians ever thought of invading the U.S. The Russian's answer was, "We considered it because we could have beaten your Army. However, we dismissed the idea because we could not have beaten the millions of your citizens with their guns."

My questions is this: What is the reason that Liberal Progressive Democrat Pukes continuously demand we turn in our guns and have strict gun control? Any logical reason?

Your turn to come back with an idiotically stupid reason, Go for it!

^^^^^
Does anybody besides OldLady have any responses to this?

 

[Auld Phart]

What's 'puzzling', is you focusing on the word militia, and ignoring the rest of the Amendment.

What part of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms," do you not understand?

Well, **** head.....can you explain WHY the FF didn't just state "everyone" should own a gun rather than including that pesky term "militia"???

Personally, I think the FF wrote it fuzzy because there was as much heated debate about it then as there is today. They kicked that can down the road, as well.

nothing 'fuzzy' about it.

Right. That's why we've been arguing about its meaning for decades.

and yet, they can't seem to get it removed, even figuratively, in court.

Tell the Left, or a Liberal, what it means, and you get...

 

[Nosmo King]

The founders laid down a good foundation, it's leftists that have perverted parts of it, every time.

And yet it is the Right that has been consistently wrong at every turn of history. Slavery, environmental exploitation, labor rib, women's rights, Gay rights, civil rights.

Whenhas the Right been right?

Depends upon whether you read history or the Left's attempted rewrites.

Most recently with the marvelous electoral stomping of Hillary Clinton and the Forces of Evil by Donald Trump, and his inexorably proceeding disassembly of Obama's legacy.

It's almost gone!

Relying on a Russian thumb on the electoral scale then rolling back protections for the children of immigrants, the environment, homosexuals and the transgendered are not accomplishments that amount to "winning".

 

[toobfreak]

You can't beat the US military with nothing but semi automatics. Would you all PLEASE wake up and smell the coffee?

A). You assume that our Vets and soldiers would follow an order to attack their own homeland and people! For one thing, it would be an ILLEGAL act under Posse Comitatus.
B). Any battle with the homeland would have to be door to door, hand to hand, and the weapons that many Americans have would not only do quite well against what the Army uses, but there are how many millions of people in this country armed to the teeth? Just how many battalions would it take to equal our strength?
C). During WWII, the emperor of Japan wanted to attack our homeland and his generals stopped him. They told him it was an unwinnable fight because there would be a rifle behind every tree, every rock. Push come to show, the American people would have a lot more to fight for than any troops. They are merely following a directive; civilians would be fighting for their life.
That is what keeps us free. If not for that, the leftist factions would swoop in here tomorrow and just take our guns! But they realize it is a war THEY CANNOT WIN. A few years ago, NY State passed a law requiring registration or something of all weapons, and BY AND LARGE, NY States OWN POLICE FORCES along with most New Yorkers GAVE THEM THE FINGER. Not even the police would follow such a law and technically, thousands of police in New York are in violation of the law! If the government ever tried to take our guns by force, they would find such a rebellion and disaffection amongst the troops themselves plus so many would join the cause to defend, that it would end in a battle that would make the Civil War look like a tea party, and in the end, the citizens of this country would overthrow the government under the terms of the Declaration of Independence.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

When the Constitution was written, much of it was debated until debate just wore out. They knew, at the very moment the Constitution was adopted that not only was it flawed, but that it could not and would not last forever. Not because the Constitution was no longer useful, but because the people in the country would change until they frankly didn't deserve the Constitution any longer.

John Adams put it this way: "The Constitution was written for a moral and religious people, it is wholly inadequate for the governing of any other."

We are no longer a moral and religious people. Now the Constitution is inadequate because we have failed in the ideals.

Benjamin Franklin explained himself better. In the debate as to whether or not the Constitution should even be adopted, Franklin put it this way in his address:

" Sir, I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other."
Speech of Benjamin Franklin - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

We have reached that point where we, as a corrupted people, deserve only despotism being incapable of anything else.

If you are teaching the Constitution, it is a good thing to include the debate as to the adoption of the Constitution.

We could return to Constitutional principles and again become that moral and religious people that John Adams mentioned, or follow liberalism to despotism.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yes they would, and geres why... the Foundung Fathers would ve utterly disgusted with the Government we have today and would be seeking its overthrow just like they did in 1775. You need guns for thst.

You can't beat the US military with nothing but semi automatics. Would you all PLEASE wake up and smell the coffee?

The US Military isnt your SS, they will fight domestic enemies

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Yes they would, and geres why... the Foundung Fathers would ve utterly disgusted with the Government we have today and would be seeking its overthrow just like they did in 1775. You need guns for thst.

You can't beat the US military with nothing but semi automatics. Would you all PLEASE wake up and smell the coffee?

The Cong did a fair job, and ISIS hasn't been beaten yet.

The Cong were supported by communist USSR. Who, I wonder, will get behind you revolutionaries? It would be interesting to see who backs the destruction of the first democracy in the modern world.

Very,very interesting,OldLady . After the cold war was over an American General was supposed to have asked a Russian General if the Russians ever thought of invading the U.S. The Russian's answer was, "We considered it because we could have beaten your Army. However, we dismissed the idea because we could not have beaten the millions of your citizens with their guns."

My questions is this: What is the reason that Liberal Progressive Democrat Pukes continuously demand we turn in our guns and have strict gun control? Any logical reason?

Your turn to come back with an idiotically stupid reason, Go for it!

^^^^^
Does anybody besides OldLady have any responses to this?

The reason is that disarming the citizens leaves a malevolent government completely unopposed. That is the reason.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Actually it was well written and and the FF had just finished fighting a tooth and nail war against the most powerful nation on earth that had tried to take away their guns at Lexington and Concord. I think they knew exactly what they were talking about.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The founders laid down a good foundation, it's leftists that have perverted parts of it, every time.

And yet it is the Right that has been consistently wrong at every turn of history. Slavery, environmental exploitation, labor rib, women's rights, Gay rights, civil rights.

Whenhas the Right been right?

Depends upon whether you read history or the Left's attempted rewrites.

Most recently with the marvelous electoral stomping of Hillary Clinton and the Forces of Evil by Donald Trump, and his inexorably proceeding disassembly of Obama's legacy.

It's almost gone!

Relying on a Russian thumb on the electoral scale then rolling back protections for the children of immigrants, the environment, homosexuals and the transgendered are not accomplishments that amount to "winning".

Stop being ridiculous. The Russians did not change one vote. The rest are matters of opinion.

 

[Nosmo King]

The constitution was born of the art of compromise. Sadly we have forgotten how to apply that art to our politics today.

The founding fathers were not clad in chalked togas. They did not descend a holy mountain bearing law. They were flawed men as all men are. It is important to realize that an 18th century man could not conceive of what the future would bring. They built means to amend and adapt the constitution to fit the times. They could not conceive of automatic weapons, thermonuclear warheads atop intercontinental ballistic missiles, sewage treatment plants, hydroelectric dams, Oregon or cotton candy.

 

[Nosmo King]

The founders laid down a good foundation, it's leftists that have perverted parts of it, every time.

And yet it is the Right that has been consistently wrong at every turn of history. Slavery, environmental exploitation, labor rib, women's rights, Gay rights, civil rights.

Whenhas the Right been right?

Depends upon whether you read history or the Left's attempted rewrites.

Most recently with the marvelous electoral stomping of Hillary Clinton and the Forces of Evil by Donald Trump, and his inexorably proceeding disassembly of Obama's legacy.

It's almost gone!

Relying on a Russian thumb on the electoral scale then rolling back protections for the children of immigrants, the environment, homosexuals and the transgendered are not accomplishments that amount to "winning".

Stop being ridiculous. The Russians did not change one vote. The rest are matters of opinion.

Do campaigns change votes? If not, what do campaigns do? They change votes by influencing the voter.

 

[Anathema]

...They built means to amend and adapt the constitution to fit the times...

Yes. Means that the Left chooses to ignore to favor of unconstitutional legislation and Executive Orders rather thsn the long and difficult Amendment process.

 

[Hossfly]

The constitution was born of the art of compromise. Sadly we have forgotten how to apply that art to our politics today.

The founding fathers were not clad in chalked togas. They did not descend a holy mountain bearing law. They were flawed men as all men are. It is important to realize that an 18th century man could not conceive of what the future would bring. They built means to amend and adapt the constitution to fit the times. They could not conceive of automatic weapons, thermonuclear warheads atop intercontinental ballistic missiles, sewage treatment plants, hydroelectric dams, Oregon or cotton candy.

Somewhat true but they wrote about bearing arms. And even if they didn't consider advancement of weaponry and we were still armed with those same old muskets, our firepower would still be lethal.