"A Well Regulated Militia" explained

[Sixties Fan]

if that works then fine,, but as we see thats not always going to work when you have two private organizations in control of the government,,

so I ask again,, if the people in government work outside their authority and start rounding people up for opposing their actions can the people rise up against them??

What private organizations are you talking about?

 

[progressive hunter]

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/section-8/clause-15–16

I dont see in that where only the government is responsible for arming the militia or where it restricts the people from arming themselves,,

so I would call your claim a fail,,

 

[marvin martian]

AGAIN:

YOU have the right to bear arms.

The Government is NOT infringing in any of your rights, NONE, to buy and keep your weapons.

You have the confederate flag because you think like a confederate. Backwards.

AGAIN: You and other Americans have the right to buy and keep weapons as per the 2nd Amendment.


I have not said ANYTHING different from that.

The confederate flag is a relic of the DemoKKKrat party.

 

[themirrorthief]

Do you agree or disagree? Why?

I love it when things are explained to me...its so helpful when someone demonstrates how stupid I am

 

[progressive hunter]

What private organizations are you talking about?

really?? you need that explained too??

what are you a fucking idiot

theyre called the democrat and republic parties,,

 

[meaner gene]

Only Congress can arm the Army or Militias.

Actually states can also fund their militia. Funding is not exclusive. Look to congress for how costs are shared between the federal and state governments.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The thread is just an hour old and already it's full of rightwing demagoguery and lies.

....shall not be infringed

 

[toobfreak]

Do you agree or disagree? Why?

Why do you waste our time with the incoherent babbling of some democrat pinhead? The Bill of Rights DID NOT create the 2nd Amendment simply to assert the government's right to assemble an Army when that power is already laid out in the Constitution!

Never mind that this idiot misses the obvious point that the 2A specifically directs the right TO THE PEOPLE the right to keep and bear arms. Not the government but the PEOPLE.

But why take my word for it, let's ask George Washington what HE thought:

 

[meaner gene]

What "guys like me" understand is that the Second Amendment is an individual right and has no connection to any membership in any organization. That understanding is backed up by three major Supreme Court cases that affirmed that right. That is the law of the land.

Granted that's what the radicalized supreme court has said, so enjoy your victory. But It's ironic that the courts from centuries closer to the constitutions writing interpreted it as a collective, and not individual right.

We appear to be in the "activist justice" era, who make law, instead of interpret it.

 

[Sixties Fan]

I dont see in that where only the government is responsible for arming the militia or where it restricts the people from arming themselves,,

so I would call your claim a fail,,

Anything else you do not wish to see?
It talks about one thing, and you insist that it is about something else.


Clauses 15 and 16. The Militia

Clause 15

Clause 15. The Congress shall have Power * * * To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.

Clause 16

Clause 16. The Congress shall have Power * * * To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Why do you waste our time with the incoherent babbling of some democrat pinhead? The Bill of Rights DID NOT create the 2nd Amendment simply to assert the government's right to assemble an Army when that power is already laid out in the Constitution!

Never mind that this idiot misses the obvious point that the 2A specifically directs the right TO THE PEOPLE the right to keep and bear arms. Not the government but the PEOPLE.

But why take my word for it, let's ask George Washington what HE thought:


View attachment 676077

Do you have link to that saying?

 

[progressive hunter]

Anything else you do not wish to see?
It talks about one thing, and you insist that it is about something else.


Clauses 15 and 16. The Militia

Clause 15

Clause 15. The Congress shall have Power * * * To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.

Clause 16

Clause 16. The Congress shall have Power * * * To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.

all you showed me was youre confusion on reality,, no where does it forbid the people from arming themselves,,,

 

[Sixties Fan]

all you showed me was youre confusion on reality,, no where does it forbid the people from arming themselves,,,

This thread is about Militias.

Not about any person in the US being legally allowed to buy and keep weapons.

 

[progressive hunter]

Do you have link to that saying?

 

[meaner gene]

if that works then fine,, but as we see thats not always going to work when you have two private organizations in control of the government,,

so I ask again,, if the people in government work outside their authority and start rounding people up for opposing their actions can the people rise up against them??

This is why there's separation of powers. If one branch of government oversteps their authority, the other two branches can exercise their powers to correct the situation. Which is the heart of the peoples power to petition the government for the redress of grievances.

Only where a government fails to function (see the declaration of independence for an example) can the people rising up in armed insurrection be supported.

 

[progressive hunter]

This thread is about Militias.

Not about any person in the US being legally allowed to buy and keep weapons.

you dont even know what your own thread is about,,,

 

[Sixties Fan]

Why do you waste our time with the incoherent babbling of some democrat pinhead? The Bill of Rights DID NOT create the 2nd Amendment simply to assert the government's right to assemble an Army when that power is already laid out in the Constitution!

Never mind that this idiot misses the obvious point that the 2A specifically directs the right TO THE PEOPLE the right to keep and bear arms. Not the government but the PEOPLE.

But why take my word for it, let's ask George Washington what HE thought:


View attachment 676077

Did Washington say that?​

But the plaque beneath it misrepresents Washington’s words on the Second Amendment.

According to the National Archives site Founder’s Online, during his Jan. 8, 1790, speech to Congress, Washington said: “A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.”

But the Washington quote on the plaque reads: “A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.”

Only the first 10 words of the Washington quote are accurate. The rest are false and misleading.

Fact check: George Washington didn't say citizens should arm themselves against government

A photo of a plaque that quotes George Washington suggesting citizens arm themselves to possibly fight the government is not entirely true.

www.usatoday.com

 

[progressive hunter]

This is why there's separation of powers. If one branch of government oversteps their authority, the other two branches can exercise their powers to correct the situation. Which is the heart of the peoples power to petition the government for the redress of grievances.

Only where a government fails to function (see the declaration of independence for an example) can the people rising up in armed insurrection be supported.

and if all 3 are compromised??

if youve been paying attention the government quit functioning legally a long time ago,,

 

[meaner gene]

Do you have link to that saying?

80% of statistics posted on the internet are made up.

 

[Sixties Fan]

you dont even know what your own thread is about,,,

You keep trying to make it about the the right of any individual to buy weapons, being taken by the government.

Not what the thread is about.