Bundy Terrorists

[Yurt]

again, here is starkey's original claim:

The militia were not under the control of government, thus they were bandits.

his claim is that solely because they were not under government control, they were illegal or bandits. scotus says he is wrong, so liarfakey moves the goals posts and claims now it is because of their actions, not just because they are under government control.

saved for another jake lie

Saved for another Yurt misdirection: in fact, the militia were opposing law enforcement

that is not what you claimed liar. you simply said, that because they were not under the control of government, that alone, made them bandits. you did not mention a word about their opposing law enforcement.

once again, the fucking liar lies his ass off after being shown to be a tool. like when you claimed the 1st amendment applied ONLY to political speech and then you edited your post that showed you said that and then you claimed i altered your post, only to later admit you did in fact edited it.

seriously, why do constantly lie? just admit you're wrong. are you that much of a sissy you can't admit when you're wrong? you have to lie your way out and look even dumber....

 

[Yurt]

nutz obviously doesn't get out much....ruby ridge...waco....hey nutz....educate yourself

Educate myself about what? The mistakes made at ruby ridge and waco?

sure didn't stop the government did it....if these guys were truly breaking the law and being an imminent threat...you're a moron if you think they would just simply leave and let them be....that would call in the national guard etc....

 

[PredFan]

Any minute now the lawful righteous US Government will march in and arrest those evil terrorists for so heinously breaking our just and beneficent laws. That would be right, it would be justice for such an awful crime.

Any minute now......

Any minute now.......

 

[PredFan]

Fakey is a joke. An "unorganized" militia indeed. They certainly looked organized to me.

The joke is on you, dear. To be organized they must be subject to government control. Instead they were opposing it, criminally.

my good lord, heller says they do not have to be subject to government control....citizen's militia...for fuck sake you even quoted the same part of the case after i did.

how in the hell can you claim citizen militia's are subject to government control?

Funny isn't it?

 

[Yurt]

again, here is starkey's original claim:

The militia were not under the control of government, thus they were bandits.

his claim is that solely because they were not under government control, they were illegal or bandits. scotus says he is wrong, so liarfakey moves the goals posts and claims now it is because of their actions, not just because they are under government control.

saved for another jake lie

Saved for another Yurt misdirection: in fact, the militia were opposing law enforcement

that is not what you claimed liar. you simply said, that because they were not under the control of government, that alone, made them bandits. you did not mention a word about their opposing law enforcement.

once again, the fucking liar lies his ass off after being shown to be a tool. like when you claimed the 1st amendment applied ONLY to political speech and then you edited your post that showed you said that and then you claimed i altered your post, only to later admit you did in fact edited it.

seriously, why do constantly lie? just admit you're wrong. are you that much of a sissy you can't admit when you're wrong? you have to lie your way out and look even dumber....

jake?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The militia were not under the control of government, thus they were bandits.

The militia were not called out by the government, they were not officered by the government, and they were opposing the government.

Yes, they were breaking the law, and you are an accessory after the fact because you are defending outlawery.

 

[Yurt]

The militia were not under the control of government, thus they were bandits.

The militia were not called out by the government, they were not officered by the government, and they were opposing the government.

Yes, they were breaking the law, and you are an accessory after the fact because you are defending outlawery.

1. scotus said that there are two types of militia, government and NON government. you said that the ONLY legal militias were those under the control of the government. scotus says you are wrong. your opinion is irrelevant.

2. accessory after the fact must mean that i helped after the fact to aid in breaking the law. i did no such thing here and you again show your profound ignorance.

 

[S.J.]

The militia were not under the control of government, thus they were bandits.

The militia were not called out by the government, they were not officered by the government, and they were opposing the government.

Yes, they were breaking the law, and you are an accessory after the fact because you are defending outlawery.

Where does it say that the government has to do the regulating?

 

[R.C. Christian]

The U.S. government believes it got rid of the militia issue when they nationalized them into the guard.

 

[Katzndogz]

Can a bandit be a bandit if they not only did not steal anything but prevented theft from taking place?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The militia were not under the control of government, thus they were bandits.

The militia were not called out by the government, they were not officered by the government, and they were opposing the government.

Yes, they were breaking the law, and you are an accessory after the fact because you are defending outlawery.

1. scotus said that there are two types of militia, government and NON government. you said that the ONLY legal militias were those under the control of the government. scotus says you are wrong. your opinion is irrelevant.

2. accessory after the fact must mean that i helped after the fact to aid in breaking the law. i did no such thing here and you again show your profound ignorance.

The militia were not under the control of government, thus they were bandits.

I posted the constitutional part that governs militias.

Militias are legal. Only the government can appoint officers and call them out. The militia, so called, at Bunkerville were led by non-appointed government officers and were not called by the government. Thus they were opposing the government forces, thus they were illegal.

You defend the illegality of their actions: yes, you are an accessory after the fact.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Can a bandit be a bandit if they not only did not steal anything but prevented theft from taking place?

The militia were not officered by and not called out by government to train: so, no.

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....

ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, CLAUSE 16

 

[JakeStarkey]

The militia were not under the control of government, thus they were bandits.

The militia were not called out by the government, they were not officered by the government, and they were opposing the government.

Yes, they were breaking the law, and you are an accessory after the fact because you are defending outlawery.

Where does it say that the government has to do the regulating?

The militia were not officered by and not called out by government to train: so, no.

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....

ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, CLAUSE 16

 

[JakeStarkey]

Far right reactionaries, including Yurt and Katzndogz, show us the authority by which the Bunkerville were operating IAW the Constitution.

We wait with bated breath.

 

[S.J.]

The militia were not under the control of government, thus they were bandits.

The militia were not called out by the government, they were not officered by the government, and they were opposing the government.

Yes, they were breaking the law, and you are an accessory after the fact because you are defending outlawery.

Where does it say that the government has to do the regulating?

The militia were not officered by and not called out by government to train: so, no.

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....

ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, CLAUSE 16

That's fine for the National Guard but that doesn't apply to "The People", and "The People's right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". You can't get past that.

 

[R.C. Christian]

LOL, militias are not illegal. It's just a group of dudes with guns and a proper political view.