gipper
Diamond Member
- Jan 8, 2011
- 72,812
- 39,454
- 2,605
I don‘t.Why do you hate a secure free state?
Why would you oppose regulating militias?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I don‘t.Why do you hate a secure free state?
Why would you oppose regulating militias?
Absolutely
We cannot have the security of a free state without well regulated militias
A bunch of rednecks running around with AR-15s is not well regulated
"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 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution
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.constitutioncenter.org
What is your definition of a "well regulated Militia"?
When are economy completely caves in let's see who survives shall we?? The urban brunch set or the rednecks with hunting guns
How is a militia in proper working order?
Well trained, command structure, well equipped, you know who is in it
All militias have been under government control either state or local
Why Government?Where does it say that command structure had to be the government? Nowhere.
You mean the militias where everyone brought their own guns and equipment?Why Government?
Because state and local Government had the money to fund local militias.
Didn‘t see many privately funded militias
You mean the militias where everyone brought their own guns and equipment?
It's irrelevant because "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" only means one thing."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 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution
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.constitutioncenter.org
What is your definition of a "well regulated Militia"?
They were funded by their local communities
Where was the "military wing" at that grocery store in Buffalo, NY?The states were fighting amongst themselves. Now we have the NG, the military wing to protect us.
But for those who did the Jan 6th they are traitors and should be treated as necessary, esp the congressmen.
Funded by does not mean controlled by. And like I said people brought their own weapons and gear to the fight it wasn't provided by the town. Maybe some foodstuffs or other minimal support but that's about it
There were no governmental employees in most towns so the commander of the militia was most likely NOT on any government payroll but was rather a common citizen
So they were not led by government employees like I saidDepending on the size of the community, militias were provided with uniforms, small artillery, ordinance
Many had a local arsenal of supplies
Militia leaders were normally well connected local citizens
And they aren't the militia. Never were intended to be. The right of the people to keep and bear arms is intended the give the people the ability to defend themselves.Absolutely
We cannot have the security of a free state without well regulated militias
A bunch of rednecks running around with AR-15s is not well regulated
So they were not led by government employees like I said
The Bill of Rights are the rights of the people, not rights of the government."A well regulated militia" doesn't mean much in the context of the 2A. It's a desire to have a militia that is well regulated, rather than saying it must be.
The Amendment is about the militia, about protecting the militia.
You protect the militia by protecting the arms (keep arms) and the personnel (bear arms).
It's not a difficult amendment to understand, what's difficult is that everyone's trying to get it to fit their own agenda.
The fuck it isn't...lolNational Guard is not led by Government employees
The second amendment never says thatAnd they aren't the militia. Never were intended to be. The right of the people to keep and bear arms is intended the give the people the ability to defend themselves.
It absolutely does. It makes a stark distinction between the militia and the people.The second amendment never says that
Why do you want to take away rights from Americans? Are you an authoritarian or a Fascist?The second amendment never says that