Biden on Gun Control

[OldLady]

Of course it is about the militia, or that clause would not precede the words you love to quote out of context.

Then why didn't they write the Right of the MILITIA to keep and bear arms, instead of the PEOPLE?

(Psst, they didn't, they gave that right to the people, not the militia)

Because the militia IS the people. There was no standing army or militia. God you're acting thick.

Because the militia IS the people.

only select portions of it, as you stated yourself.

Just think, if only militia were allowed firearms, the Burr/Hamilton duel would have never happened.

They were both over 45, too old to belong to a militia.


You've destroyed your own argument

Actually, you have pretty much ignored the entire point of my argument and morphed it into an asinine "what if."

I can read, pretty well, actually. I know what the Second Amendment says and the right of the people to be armed is directly attributable to the need for a civilian population trained, armed (with their own weapons) and ready to call upon at a moment's notice. That was the militia mentioned in the Second Amendment. That arrangement no longer exists and the Second Amendment is therefore no longer appropos. But I've already said that, so I quit trying to get through to you.

and does not negate they gave the right to bear arms to the people.

Since having the last word seems important to you, there you go.

 

[jillian]

the right of the people to keep and bear arms for the sake of a well regulated Militia.

You just stated it yourself.

"all able bodied men between 16 and 40-ish were required to come to regular training sessions and bring their own guns."

by YOUR logic, males under the age of 16, over the age of 40ish, and women were not allowed to own weapons.

the 2nd gave it to ALL

No, the LOGIC here is that the Founders did not want a standing army and they continued the civilian militia as it had been prior to the War. For that reason, to keep the "militia" armed, yes, they needed the right to keep and bear arms. For men of a certain age, it was required.

and the right was given to the PEOPLE, not the militia.

PEOPLE which consisted those not fit for the militia,

Women, males under 16 and over 45, not to mention the lame and halt that weren't fit for duty in a militia.

You already said that.

I've probably said it over 50 times since I came to this board.

and people STILL don't seem to understand.

The 2nd amendment is NOT about the militia, it's about giving the PEOPLE the right to keep and bear arms.

That is false or treason wouldn’t be the only crime set forth in the constitution.


That was always a BS decision and justices for over 200 years laughed at the notion of a private righr of gun ownership.

or do you wackjobs now think every decision of the court is a good one?

come on, paid shill

 

[jillian]

Then why didn't they write the Right of the MILITIA to keep and bear arms, instead of the PEOPLE?

(Psst, they didn't, they gave that right to the people, not the militia)

Because the militia IS the people. There was no standing army or militia. God you're acting thick.

Because the militia IS the people.

only select portions of it, as you stated yourself.

Just think, if only militia were allowed firearms, the Burr/Hamilton duel would have never happened.

They were both over 45, too old to belong to a militia.


You've destroyed your own argument

Actually, you have pretty much ignored the entire point of my argument and morphed it into an asinine "what if."

I can read, pretty well, actually. I know what the Second Amendment says and the right of the people to be armed is directly attributable to the need for a civilian population trained, armed (with their own weapons) and ready to call upon at a moment's notice. That was the militia mentioned in the Second Amendment. That arrangement no longer exists and the Second Amendment is therefore no longer appropos. But I've already said that, so I quit trying to get through to you.

and does not negate they gave the right to bear arms to the people.

Since having the last word seems important to you, there you go.

He isn’t that bright and likes mansplaining

 

[Auld Phart]

Because the militia IS the people. There was no standing army or militia. God you're acting thick.

Because the militia IS the people.

only select portions of it, as you stated yourself.

Just think, if only militia were allowed firearms, the Burr/Hamilton duel would have never happened.

They were both over 45, too old to belong to a militia.


You've destroyed your own argument

Actually, you have pretty much ignored the entire point of my argument and morphed it into an asinine "what if."

I can read, pretty well, actually. I know what the Second Amendment says and the right of the people to be armed is directly attributable to the need for a civilian population trained, armed (with their own weapons) and ready to call upon at a moment's notice. That was the militia mentioned in the Second Amendment. That arrangement no longer exists and the Second Amendment is therefore no longer appropos. But I've already said that, so I quit trying to get through to you.

and does not negate they gave the right to bear arms to the people.

Since having the last word seems important to you, there you go.

He isn’t that bright and likes mansplaining

apparently, I'm bright enough to read and understand the 2nd Amendment, unlike a couple of ladies here

 

[OldLady]

Because the militia IS the people. There was no standing army or militia. God you're acting thick.

Because the militia IS the people.

only select portions of it, as you stated yourself.

Just think, if only militia were allowed firearms, the Burr/Hamilton duel would have never happened.

They were both over 45, too old to belong to a militia.


You've destroyed your own argument

Actually, you have pretty much ignored the entire point of my argument and morphed it into an asinine "what if."

I can read, pretty well, actually. I know what the Second Amendment says and the right of the people to be armed is directly attributable to the need for a civilian population trained, armed (with their own weapons) and ready to call upon at a moment's notice. That was the militia mentioned in the Second Amendment. That arrangement no longer exists and the Second Amendment is therefore no longer appropos. But I've already said that, so I quit trying to get through to you.

and does not negate they gave the right to bear arms to the people.

Since having the last word seems important to you, there you go.

He isn’t that bright and likes mansplaining

mods shouldn't use the funny button to ridicule posters. It's not professional.

 

[Rambunctious]

Then Biden was overheard saying yeah I like his movies....

 

[Auld Phart]

only select portions of it, as you stated yourself.

Just think, if only militia were allowed firearms, the Burr/Hamilton duel would have never happened.

They were both over 45, too old to belong to a militia.


You've destroyed your own argument

Actually, you have pretty much ignored the entire point of my argument and morphed it into an asinine "what if."

I can read, pretty well, actually. I know what the Second Amendment says and the right of the people to be armed is directly attributable to the need for a civilian population trained, armed (with their own weapons) and ready to call upon at a moment's notice. That was the militia mentioned in the Second Amendment. That arrangement no longer exists and the Second Amendment is therefore no longer appropos. But I've already said that, so I quit trying to get through to you.

and does not negate they gave the right to bear arms to the people.

Since having the last word seems important to you, there you go.

He isn’t that bright and likes mansplaining

mods shouldn't use the funny button to ridicule posters. It's not professional.

I'm in this thread as a mod.

and I'll laugh my ass off every time I see stupidity like I've seen in this thread.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

how foo9lish of you.

only someone that has NO clue about firearms would call a bullet a 'shell'.

Even an $8,000 - $12,000 Barrett .50 caliber sniper rifle, about the biggest rifle anyone is likely to ever buy still fires ROUNDS.

Even a Mini Gun doesn't fire shells!


View attachment 310068


About the smallest shell I can think of is a 60mm bazooka shell.


View attachment 310069

Still, no magazine. But at least she didn't call it a clip.

shotgun shells?

I stand corrected, I only shot the M16 in the NG. But the constitution didn't tell you what kind of gun or rifle you might have nor did it tell you anything about what kind of accessories you might have, or anything about future laws.

The public safety overrides the individual rights.

the 2nd doesnt mention guns you ignorant twit,,,it was for any arms needed to resist any threat,,,

"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."
-------------------------------
your right, its says militias and arms, So since the NG has arms , no need for everyday citizens to have any guns, rifles or weapons which are considered arms.

The everyday citizen is the militia you stupid son of a b****

 

[progressive hunter]

You just stated it yourself.

"all able bodied men between 16 and 40-ish were required to come to regular training sessions and bring their own guns."

by YOUR logic, males under the age of 16, over the age of 40ish, and women were not allowed to own weapons.

the 2nd gave it to ALL

No, the LOGIC here is that the Founders did not want a standing army and they continued the civilian militia as it had been prior to the War. For that reason, to keep the "militia" armed, yes, they needed the right to keep and bear arms. For men of a certain age, it was required.

and the right was given to the PEOPLE, not the militia.

PEOPLE which consisted those not fit for the militia,

Women, males under 16 and over 45, not to mention the lame and halt that weren't fit for duty in a militia.

You already said that.

I've probably said it over 50 times since I came to this board.

and people STILL don't seem to understand.

The 2nd amendment is NOT about the militia, it's about giving the PEOPLE the right to keep and bear arms.

Of course it is about the militia, or that clause would not precede the words you love to quote out of context.

the only thing it says about a militia is that one os needed for a secure state,,which is why the peoples right to keep and bare shall not be infringed,,,

in english grammar its called a qualifier,,,

kinda useless having an unarmed militia,,,

 

[progressive hunter]

and the right was given to the PEOPLE, not the militia.

PEOPLE which consisted those not fit for the militia,

Women, males under 16 and over 45, not to mention the lame and halt that weren't fit for duty in a militia.

You already said that.

I've probably said it over 50 times since I came to this board.

and people STILL don't seem to understand.

The 2nd amendment is NOT about the militia, it's about giving the PEOPLE the right to keep and bear arms.

Of course it is about the militia, or that clause would not precede the words you love to quote out of context.

Then why didn't they write the Right of the MILITIA to keep and bear arms, instead of the PEOPLE?

(Psst, they didn't, they gave that right to the people, not the militia)

Because the militia IS the people. There was no standing army or militia. God you're acting thick.

NOOOO the people are the militia,,,

 

[Ame®icano]

Quit quoting half of the pertinent sentence. That is dishonest. Of course, we all know what the part says that you left out.

What part that is missing, makes it dishonest? If anything, it backs up his point.

"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."
Since we no longer have a militia and have no need for one, the right is no longer necessary either.

Actually you are wrong as usual...

National Guard along with Reservists are the Regulated Militia of today, so the Amendment words still hold.

I wish people would actually study what they are discussing before making asinine comments!

Ummm ...

They are called The NATIONAL Guard, not the STATE militia.

Grok?

No they're not called The National Guard. They have name of the state they're stationed in in their name, and they report to Governor of the state they reside in, unless called for war of natural disaster.

 

[progressive hunter]

"shall not be infringed" can't be any clearer and narrower.

Except when you are talking about fully automatic weapons.

With rare exceptions, Americans don't own fully automatic weapons.

Why do you think that is?

I am asking the same question. There is no reason why Americans shouldn't have fully automatic weapons.

By the way, with long bursts you're wasting the ammo.

Yet the supreme court as well as the NRA have both determined that it is constitutionally acceptable to regulate them that way.

we have over 100yrs of history proving both of them wrong,,,

 

[Penelope]

Even an $8,000 - $12,000 Barrett .50 caliber sniper rifle, about the biggest rifle anyone is likely to ever buy still fires ROUNDS.

Even a Mini Gun doesn't fire shells!


View attachment 310068


About the smallest shell I can think of is a 60mm bazooka shell.


View attachment 310069

Still, no magazine. But at least she didn't call it a clip.

shotgun shells?

I stand corrected, I only shot the M16 in the NG. But the constitution didn't tell you what kind of gun or rifle you might have nor did it tell you anything about what kind of accessories you might have, or anything about future laws.

The public safety overrides the individual rights.

the 2nd doesnt mention guns you ignorant twit,,,it was for any arms needed to resist any threat,,,

"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."
-------------------------------
your right, its says militias and arms, So since the NG has arms , no need for everyday citizens to have any guns, rifles or weapons which are considered arms.

The everyday citizen is the militia you stupid son of a b****

The militias keep the FBI up at night, they are the same as gangs.

 

[progressive hunter]

I've probably said it over 50 times since I came to this board.

and people STILL don't seem to understand.

The 2nd amendment is NOT about the militia, it's about giving the PEOPLE the right to keep and bear arms.

Of course it is about the militia, or that clause would not precede the words you love to quote out of context.

Then why didn't they write the Right of the MILITIA to keep and bear arms, instead of the PEOPLE?

(Psst, they didn't, they gave that right to the people, not the militia)

Because the militia IS the people. There was no standing army or militia. God you're acting thick.

Because the militia IS the people.

only select portions of it, as you stated yourself.

Just think, if only militia were allowed firearms, the Burr/Hamilton duel would have never happened.

They were both over 45, too old to belong to a militia.


You've destroyed your own argument

Actually, you have pretty much ignored the entire point of my argument and morphed it into an asinine "what if."

I can read, pretty well, actually. I know what the Second Amendment says and the right of the people to be armed is directly attributable to the need for a civilian population trained, armed (with their own weapons) and ready to call upon at a moment's notice. That was the militia mentioned in the Second Amendment. That arrangement no longer exists and the Second Amendment is therefore no longer appropos. But I've already said that, so I quit trying to get through to you.

if thats true then why doesnt it say that???

 

[progressive hunter]

shotgun shells?

I stand corrected, I only shot the M16 in the NG. But the constitution didn't tell you what kind of gun or rifle you might have nor did it tell you anything about what kind of accessories you might have, or anything about future laws.

The public safety overrides the individual rights.

the 2nd doesnt mention guns you ignorant twit,,,it was for any arms needed to resist any threat,,,

"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."
-------------------------------
your right, its says militias and arms, So since the NG has arms , no need for everyday citizens to have any guns, rifles or weapons which are considered arms.

The everyday citizen is the militia you stupid son of a b****

The militias keep the FBI up at night, they are the same as gangs.

thats a good thing,,,wouldnt want the government thinking they were in control,,,

 

[toobfreak]

shotgun shells?

I stand corrected, I only shot the M16 in the NG. But the constitution didn't tell you what kind of gun or rifle you might have nor did it tell you anything about what kind of accessories you might have, or anything about future laws.

The public safety overrides the individual rights.

the 2nd doesnt mention guns you ignorant twit,,,it was for any arms needed to resist any threat,,,

"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."
-------------------------------
your right, its says militias and arms, So since the NG has arms , no need for everyday citizens to have any guns, rifles or weapons which are considered arms.

The everyday citizen is the militia you stupid son of a b****

The militias keep the FBI up at night, they are the same as gangs.

Yep. THE LARGEST STANDING ARMY IN THE WORLD is the US Free Citizen. 96,000,000 gun owners, 300 million guns and about 1 trillion rounds of ammunition.

 

[Auld Phart]

I've probably said it over 50 times since I came to this board.

and people STILL don't seem to understand.

The 2nd amendment is NOT about the militia, it's about giving the PEOPLE the right to keep and bear arms.

Of course it is about the militia, or that clause would not precede the words you love to quote out of context.

Then why didn't they write the Right of the MILITIA to keep and bear arms, instead of the PEOPLE?

(Psst, they didn't, they gave that right to the people, not the militia)

Because the militia IS the people. There was no standing army or militia. God you're acting thick.

Because the militia IS the people.

only select portions of it, as you stated yourself.

Just think, if only militia were allowed firearms, the Burr/Hamilton duel would have never happened.

They were both over 45, too old to belong to a militia.


You've destroyed your own argument

Actually, you have pretty much ignored the entire point of my argument and morphed it into an asinine "what if."

I can read, pretty well, actually. I know what the Second Amendment says and the right of the people to be armed is directly attributable to the need for a civilian population trained, armed (with their own weapons) and ready to call upon at a moment's notice. That was the militia mentioned in the Second Amendment. That arrangement no longer exists and the Second Amendment is therefore no longer appropos. But I've already said that, so I quit trying to get through to you.

That was the militia mentioned in the Second Amendment.

Agreed

But they had restrictions on who could be in the militia.

That arrangement no longer exists and the Second Amendment is therefore no longer appropos.

No, because it gave the right to the people, women, men over the age of 45, etc.

as you yourself have stated.

 

[Ame®icano]

"shall not be infringed" can't be any clearer and narrower.

Except when you are talking about fully automatic weapons.

With rare exceptions, Americans don't own fully automatic weapons.

Why do you think that is?

I am asking the same question. There is no reason why Americans shouldn't have fully automatic weapons.

By the way, with long bursts you're wasting the ammo.

Yet the supreme court as well as the NRA have both determined that it is constitutionally acceptable to regulate them that way.

Supreme court? I think it was appeals court.

However, they upheld the ban on automatic weapons, that are considered assault weapons.

Semi-automatics are not assault weapons, therefore they're not included in the ban.

Leftist solution? Change the definition and call every weapon an "assault weapon" and banning will be constitutional.

 

[Penelope]

I stand corrected, I only shot the M16 in the NG. But the constitution didn't tell you what kind of gun or rifle you might have nor did it tell you anything about what kind of accessories you might have, or anything about future laws.

The public safety overrides the individual rights.

the 2nd doesnt mention guns you ignorant twit,,,it was for any arms needed to resist any threat,,,

"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."
-------------------------------
your right, its says militias and arms, So since the NG has arms , no need for everyday citizens to have any guns, rifles or weapons which are considered arms.

The everyday citizen is the militia you stupid son of a b****

The militias keep the FBI up at night, they are the same as gangs.

Yep. THE LARGEST STANDING ARMY IN THE WORLD is the US Free Citizen. 96,000,000 gun owners, 300 million guns and about 1 trillion rounds of ammunition.

And that keeps the fbi up at night. You freaks. Try and attack the government. See what happens, big men on the internet are usually pussies.

 

[progressive hunter]

the 2nd doesnt mention guns you ignorant twit,,,it was for any arms needed to resist any threat,,,

"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."
-------------------------------
your right, its says militias and arms, So since the NG has arms , no need for everyday citizens to have any guns, rifles or weapons which are considered arms.

The everyday citizen is the militia you stupid son of a b****

The militias keep the FBI up at night, they are the same as gangs.

Yep. THE LARGEST STANDING ARMY IN THE WORLD is the US Free Citizen. 96,000,000 gun owners, 300 million guns and about 1 trillion rounds of ammunition.

And that keeps the fbi up at night. You freaks.

as it should,,,let them know whos in control,,,