CDZ Can you vote democrat and support the 2nd Amendment?

[Skull Pilot]

Bans of large capacity magazines
Background checks
Registration


All comply with the second amendment

No, such does NOT comply with the Second Amendment

Look ...

Everyone knows a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state
You can't have a well regulated militia without knowing who has guns and what their background is

Of course you can

You obviously have no concept of well regulated

Well regulated in the vernacular of the 18th century meant in working order, disciplined.

The government need not be involved at all. The people are perfectly capable of organizing and training themselves

 

[Humorme]

There is a reason we no longer rely on the general population to offer up potential solutions.

Most of the people we're talking about have ADD / ADHD, autism, drug dependencies, and many suffer from schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, hallucinations, delusional behavior, and worse.

I don't think that putting those people into the military OR prison is a solution to anything. I do, however think, that rehabilitation followed up by appropriate treatments will save us money and lives in the long run.

Quantify most.

What possible difference does that make? Once you eliminate the sociopaths, psychopaths, criminally insane, along with those with ADD / ADHD, autism, drug dependencies, schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, hallucinations, delusional behavior; once you take out those on SSRIs and the political jihadists... you don't have much of a base left that will potentially harm their fellow man.

And it does matter. Is most to you 10%, 40%, 51% or 99% and give me a real number not just your opinion

But I see you're just another one of those "Its not their fault" people.

Tell me why is it that the US has the most ADHD diagnoses? It's a made up "disease". Drug dependency is a choice like all addictions and not a "disease".

ADD and ADHD are not diseases. They are issues where the parents feed their children junk food and keep them housed where they don't get the requisite sunshine and exercise.

You ask me questions and then presume to categorize me into a category that I'm probably not a part of. What's up with that?

An older study put the problem of prisoners into perspective:

"Of the 2.3 million inmates crowding our nations prisons and jails, 1.5 million meet the DSM-IV medical criteria for substance abuse or addiction, and another 458,000, while not meeting the strict DSM-IV criteria, had histories of substance abuse; were under the influence of alcohol or other drugs at the time of their crime; committed their offense to get money to buy drugs; were incarcerated for an alcohol or drug law violation; or shared some combination of these characteristics, according to Behind Bars II: Substance Abuse and America’s Prison Population. Combined these two groups constitute 85% of the U.S. prison population."

New CASA* Report Finds: 65% of All U.S. Inmates Meet Medical Criteria for Substance Abuse Addiction, Only 11% Receive Any Treatment

With respect to mass shooters virtually ALL of them are on a schedule of drugs called SSRIs and / or political jihadists.

All told, between those who were influenced by "legal" drugs, illegal drugs, alcohol, and political extremism approximately 88 percent of gun violence is related and a factor to that.

You want to paint as some category of people, but my forefathers warned me about people like you - those who would sell out my Liberty on the installment plan:

“But a constitution of government once changed from freedom can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.

...Arms in the hands of individual citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defence of the country, the over-throw of tyranny, or in private self-defense.” John Adams

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined." Patrick Henry

You can argue with people and the medical community, but when people screw up and we get involved (via the legal process) we should not send people back into society that could pose a danger and you can't fix everything with a long prison sentence. If you could, the recidivism rate would not be over 65 percent in every jurisdiction in America.

In the case of mass shooters, if we got the doctors away from the notion that everybody needs some freaking mind altering drug - and IF they do, the doctor is to be held accountable for his patients while on these drugs, it would go a long way into reducing gun violence across the board.

I could say much more, but while you may like the idea of a government so big it can give you what you want, you forget the old proverbial counter: The government that can give you all you want is big enough to take all you have.

And I already told you that we waste too much prison space on nonviolent offenders and those who commit victim-less crimes.

Prison should be reserved for violent offenders

All that is irrelevant. We should have an alternative to prison for those who are mentally unable to cope. You either rehabilitate them, put them in protective custody or turn them loose on the streets.

If you put them back into the streets needing help, they will ultimately become criminals; many will use a firearm to solve their problem and we'll be back here arguing over the just powers of government.

Bottom line kid, the United States Supreme Court had this to say:


The right there specified is that of "bearing arms for a lawful purpose." This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. United States v. Cruikshank 92 US 542 (1875)

1) The Constitution did not grant you the Right

2) The Right exists with or without the Constitution since it is not dependent upon it for its existence.

It is important to note that the Cruikshank upheld state court rulings. One of those rulings that came a few years before Cruikshank held:

"The right of a citizen to bear arms in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the high powers delegated directly to the citizen, and is excepted out of the general powers of government. A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power."

-Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394 (1859)

States do NOT grant you the Right; it is above the law; the Right exists without the Constitution. The LAST thing any of us need is a government telling us who qualifies for Rights and who does not. We don't need (nor do they pass constitutional muster) things like gun bans, background checks, "prohibited" classes of citizens (next you'll be telling them what religion they can belong to or what books they can read... or what they can say to their elected leaders) and / or restrictions on what kinds of guns we can own.

 

[rightwinger]

Bans of large capacity magazines
Background checks
Registration


All comply with the second amendment

There is no reason to ban any semiautomatic rifle or any magazine

And there is absolutely no need for registration unless of course you want registration in order to practice any of your protected constitutional rights.

There is plenty of justification based on semiautomatics being modified for automatic type firing rates and large capacity magazines being used in mass killings

Registration is essential to a well regulated militia

 

[rightwinger]

Bans of large capacity magazines
Background checks
Registration


All comply with the second amendment

No, such does NOT comply with the Second Amendment

Look ...

Everyone knows a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state
You can't have a well regulated militia without knowing who has guns and what their background is

Of course you can

You obviously have no concept of well regulated

Well regulated in the vernacular of the 18th century meant in working order, disciplined.

The government need not be involved at all. The people are perfectly capable of organizing and training themselves

A militia where nobody knows who is in it or what weapons are available to defend the security of our free state is not ordered or disciplined

 

[Skull Pilot]

Quantify most.

What possible difference does that make? Once you eliminate the sociopaths, psychopaths, criminally insane, along with those with ADD / ADHD, autism, drug dependencies, schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, hallucinations, delusional behavior; once you take out those on SSRIs and the political jihadists... you don't have much of a base left that will potentially harm their fellow man.

And it does matter. Is most to you 10%, 40%, 51% or 99% and give me a real number not just your opinion

But I see you're just another one of those "Its not their fault" people.

Tell me why is it that the US has the most ADHD diagnoses? It's a made up "disease". Drug dependency is a choice like all addictions and not a "disease".

ADD and ADHD are not diseases. They are issues where the parents feed their children junk food and keep them housed where they don't get the requisite sunshine and exercise.

You ask me questions and then presume to categorize me into a category that I'm probably not a part of. What's up with that?

An older study put the problem of prisoners into perspective:

"Of the 2.3 million inmates crowding our nations prisons and jails, 1.5 million meet the DSM-IV medical criteria for substance abuse or addiction, and another 458,000, while not meeting the strict DSM-IV criteria, had histories of substance abuse; were under the influence of alcohol or other drugs at the time of their crime; committed their offense to get money to buy drugs; were incarcerated for an alcohol or drug law violation; or shared some combination of these characteristics, according to Behind Bars II: Substance Abuse and America’s Prison Population. Combined these two groups constitute 85% of the U.S. prison population."

New CASA* Report Finds: 65% of All U.S. Inmates Meet Medical Criteria for Substance Abuse Addiction, Only 11% Receive Any Treatment

With respect to mass shooters virtually ALL of them are on a schedule of drugs called SSRIs and / or political jihadists.

All told, between those who were influenced by "legal" drugs, illegal drugs, alcohol, and political extremism approximately 88 percent of gun violence is related and a factor to that.

You want to paint as some category of people, but my forefathers warned me about people like you - those who would sell out my Liberty on the installment plan:

“But a constitution of government once changed from freedom can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.

...Arms in the hands of individual citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defence of the country, the over-throw of tyranny, or in private self-defense.” John Adams

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined." Patrick Henry

You can argue with people and the medical community, but when people screw up and we get involved (via the legal process) we should not send people back into society that could pose a danger and you can't fix everything with a long prison sentence. If you could, the recidivism rate would not be over 65 percent in every jurisdiction in America.

In the case of mass shooters, if we got the doctors away from the notion that everybody needs some freaking mind altering drug - and IF they do, the doctor is to be held accountable for his patients while on these drugs, it would go a long way into reducing gun violence across the board.

I could say much more, but while you may like the idea of a government so big it can give you what you want, you forget the old proverbial counter: The government that can give you all you want is big enough to take all you have.

And I already told you that we waste too much prison space on nonviolent offenders and those who commit victim-less crimes.

Prison should be reserved for violent offenders

All that is irrelevant. We should have an alternative to prison for those who are mentally unable to cope. You either rehabilitate them, put them in protective custody or turn them loose on the streets.

If you put them back into the streets needing help, they will ultimately become criminals; many will use a firearm to solve their problem and we'll be back here arguing over the just powers of government.

Bottom line kid, the United States Supreme Court had this to say:


The right there specified is that of "bearing arms for a lawful purpose." This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. United States v. Cruikshank 92 US 542 (1875)

1) The Constitution did not grant you the Right

2) The Right exists with or without the Constitution since it is not dependent upon it for its existence.

It is important to note that the Cruikshank upheld state court rulings. One of those rulings that came a few years before Cruikshank held:

"The right of a citizen to bear arms in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the high powers delegated directly to the citizen, and is excepted out of the general powers of government. A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power."

-Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394 (1859)

States do NOT grant you the Right; it is above the law; the Right exists without the Constitution. The LAST thing any of us need is a government telling us who qualifies for Rights and who does not. We don't need (nor do they pass constitutional muster) things like gun bans, background checks, "prohibited" classes of citizens (next you'll be telling them what religion they can belong to or what books they can read... or what they can say to their elected leaders) and / or restrictions on what kinds of guns we can own.

Mentally unable to cope?

Really?

You can't even quantify how many of those people who are "mentally unable to cope" are in our prison system now

And I understand perfectly well the concept of inalienable rights. But I also understand that people who choose to commit crimes and violate the rights of others do not belong in this society

 

[Skull Pilot]

No, such does NOT comply with the Second Amendment

Look ...

Everyone knows a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state
You can't have a well regulated militia without knowing who has guns and what their background is

Of course you can

You obviously have no concept of well regulated

Well regulated in the vernacular of the 18th century meant in working order, disciplined.

The government need not be involved at all. The people are perfectly capable of organizing and training themselves

A militia where nobody knows who is in it or what weapons are available to defend the security of our free state is not ordered or disciplined

I guess it's a good thing the colonists didn't subscribe to your thinking. They all just showed up with the weapons trained and fought together and it worked pretty well.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Bans of large capacity magazines
Background checks
Registration


All comply with the second amendment

There is no reason to ban any semiautomatic rifle or any magazine

And there is absolutely no need for registration unless of course you want registration in order to practice any of your protected constitutional rights.

There is plenty of justification based on semiautomatics being modified for automatic type firing rates and large capacity magazines being used in mass killings

Registration is essential to a well regulated militia

Modifying the firing mechanism of a semiautomatic rifle in order to achieve automatic fore is illegal and the vast majority of people who own semiautomatics do not illegally modify them.

The flaw with your registration and militia thinking is that the right to keep and bear arms is not contingent on belonging to a militia.

 

[evenflow1969]

Many Dems want their guns, just won’t vocalize it.

Here is a dem that wants my guns and am willing to vocalize it. I alos want my pre 911 rights back. I also support freedom of gthe press and all of the other rights garenteed by the constitution. Such as no unreasonable search and seziure.

 

[rightwinger]

Look ...

Everyone knows a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state
You can't have a well regulated militia without knowing who has guns and what their background is

Of course you can

You obviously have no concept of well regulated

Well regulated in the vernacular of the 18th century meant in working order, disciplined.

The government need not be involved at all. The people are perfectly capable of organizing and training themselves

A militia where nobody knows who is in it or what weapons are available to defend the security of our free state is not ordered or disciplined

I guess it's a good thing the colonists didn't subscribe to your thinking. They all just showed up with the weapons trained and fought together and it worked pretty well.

You kinda slept when they taught about the Revolutionary War didn't you?

Minute Men trained, they were known in their community, they had an organized military structure
They did not just randomly show up if they felt like it

 

[Skull Pilot]

Of course you can

You obviously have no concept of well regulated

Well regulated in the vernacular of the 18th century meant in working order, disciplined.

The government need not be involved at all. The people are perfectly capable of organizing and training themselves

A militia where nobody knows who is in it or what weapons are available to defend the security of our free state is not ordered or disciplined

I guess it's a good thing the colonists didn't subscribe to your thinking. They all just showed up with the weapons trained and fought together and it worked pretty well.

You kinda slept when they taught about the Revolutionary War didn't you?

Minute Men trained, they were known in their community, they had an organized military structure
They did not just randomly show up if they felt like it

And their weapons were not registered. They showed up with anything they had

 

[rightwinger]

You obviously have no concept of well regulated

Well regulated in the vernacular of the 18th century meant in working order, disciplined.

The government need not be involved at all. The people are perfectly capable of organizing and training themselves

A militia where nobody knows who is in it or what weapons are available to defend the security of our free state is not ordered or disciplined

I guess it's a good thing the colonists didn't subscribe to your thinking. They all just showed up with the weapons trained and fought together and it worked pretty well.

You kinda slept when they taught about the Revolutionary War didn't you?

Minute Men trained, they were known in their community, they had an organized military structure
They did not just randomly show up if they felt like it

And their weapons were not registered. They showed up with anything they had

Local militias kept records of who belonged, rank and their weapons
Type of weapon was needed for logistics and supply

 

[Skull Pilot]

Well regulated in the vernacular of the 18th century meant in working order, disciplined.

The government need not be involved at all. The people are perfectly capable of organizing and training themselves

A militia where nobody knows who is in it or what weapons are available to defend the security of our free state is not ordered or disciplined

I guess it's a good thing the colonists didn't subscribe to your thinking. They all just showed up with the weapons trained and fought together and it worked pretty well.

You kinda slept when they taught about the Revolutionary War didn't you?

Minute Men trained, they were known in their community, they had an organized military structure
They did not just randomly show up if they felt like it

And their weapons were not registered. They showed up with anything they had

Local militias kept records of who belonged, rank and their weapons
Type of weapon was needed for logistics and supply

Link ?

And the Minute Men were civilian colonists who independently organized to form well-prepared militia companies self-trained in weaponry, tactics, and military strategies

There was no government registration of weapons.



As I said the right to keep and bear arms exists without the contingency of belonging to a militia

 

[Humorme]

Of course you can

You obviously have no concept of well regulated

Well regulated in the vernacular of the 18th century meant in working order, disciplined.

The government need not be involved at all. The people are perfectly capable of organizing and training themselves

A militia where nobody knows who is in it or what weapons are available to defend the security of our free state is not ordered or disciplined

I guess it's a good thing the colonists didn't subscribe to your thinking. They all just showed up with the weapons trained and fought together and it worked pretty well.

You kinda slept when they taught about the Revolutionary War didn't you?

Minute Men trained, they were known in their community, they had an organized military structure
They did not just randomly show up if they felt like it

No, they did not always train together. Let me quote something for you that illustrates a better perspective on how people got recruited into the militia:

"One of the most colorful examples is what happened in a staid Lutheran church in the Shenandoah valley of Virginia, one Sunday morning in 1775. The thirty year old pastor, Peter Muhlenberg, delivered a stirring sermon on the text, "For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven." (Ecclesiastes 3 : 1)

He reached the end of his sermon and said in a solemn prayer - and then continued to speak, "In the language of the Holy Writ, there is a time for all things. There is a time to preach and a time to fight." He paused, and then threw off his pulpit robe to reveal to the startled congregation the uniform of a Colonel in the Continental Army. "And now is the time to fight!" he thundered and then he called out, Roll the drums for recruits!" The drums rolled, and that same afternoon he marched off at the head of a column of three hundred men."

- an excerpt from the book The Light and the Glory by Peter Marshall and David Manuel p. 291

Guess YOU must have been sleeping. I have several history books with similar accounts from all over the colonies. Your posts are way out of context. Lists of weapons and men were made AFTER the volunteers entered service and the government kept track of the government's weapons, but not those of volunteers until they were in the field.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

The Democrats are SUPPOSED to embrace and include diversity.
Why not diversity of political beliefs?

LIBERALS are supposed to do that as an even larger group than Democrats, ALL liberals.
If and when we FAIL to do that, we are FAILED LIBERALS.
If we yell and scream and demand censorship of all diverse political beliefs to the exclusion of our own narrow or even singular view, we have loosed an "inner fascist" which is the sure sign of being a failed liberal.
It is very difficult to BE a liberal.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

The government need not be involved at all. The people are perfectly capable of organizing and training themselves

Particularly when a well regulated fascist militia organizes and trains an armed cadre of unsanctioned paramilitary thugs to practice genocide on a minority, or even later, on the majority, and later, on the world at large.
The entire world has ten thousand years of experience with that, and in fact as recently as eighty years ago the entire world had to organize and focus on one particular group who had used such domestic terrorism to seize the levers of government power. It is often referred to as "by legal means" however that blunt and clumsy assertion fails to take into account the underlying manufactured crises set in motion BY said "armed cadre of unsanctioned paramilitary thugs" which kettled the now hysterical population into granting power to a madman.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

There was no government registration of weapons.

And yet despite absence of said federal registration there was indeed plenty of local registration of weapons, by municipalities, by local law enforcement, by counties.
The Constitution actually granted the federal government considerable power over the state militias, such as power to arm and discipline them and to call them into federal service to repel invasions or suppress insurrections. During the Revolutionary war militias played a steadily decreasing role due to their unreliability, and thus the Continental Army had to be created in order to win the war.
We almost lost the War of 1812 because we again seemed doomed to repeat the mistakes of dependence on state militias.
State militias are there to defend states, not overthrow them.
In reading the entire thread I get the impression that all this fear actually borders on hysteria.
I give the NRA full credit for most of that.
Look at all the references to communism.
As if universal background checks or gun permits will usher in some kind of dictatorship.
Is Switzerland a communist dictatorship? Nearly all Swiss households are mandated to keep and bear arms but all of them are registered, too.

The imperfection does not lie in either our 2A or in the drive to register weapons. The imperfection lies in our current inability to sway ourselves from purist dogma on all sides, and seek healthy compromise, not only through reasoned debate but also through the system of checks and balances enshrined in our representative democracy.

Distortion of all the above comes from extremist positions, not from the center.
If the center cannot hold, then the falcon cannot hear the falconer.

 

[rightwinger]

You obviously have no concept of well regulated

Well regulated in the vernacular of the 18th century meant in working order, disciplined.

The government need not be involved at all. The people are perfectly capable of organizing and training themselves

A militia where nobody knows who is in it or what weapons are available to defend the security of our free state is not ordered or disciplined

I guess it's a good thing the colonists didn't subscribe to your thinking. They all just showed up with the weapons trained and fought together and it worked pretty well.

You kinda slept when they taught about the Revolutionary War didn't you?

Minute Men trained, they were known in their community, they had an organized military structure
They did not just randomly show up if they felt like it

No, they did not always train together. Let me quote something for you that illustrates a better perspective on how people got recruited into the militia:

"One of the most colorful examples is what happened in a staid Lutheran church in the Shenandoah valley of Virginia, one Sunday morning in 1775. The thirty year old pastor, Peter Muhlenberg, delivered a stirring sermon on the text, "For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven." (Ecclesiastes 3 : 1)

He reached the end of his sermon and said in a solemn prayer - and then continued to speak, "In the language of the Holy Writ, there is a time for all things. There is a time to preach and a time to fight." He paused, and then threw off his pulpit robe to reveal to the startled congregation the uniform of a Colonel in the Continental Army. "And now is the time to fight!" he thundered and then he called out, Roll the drums for recruits!" The drums rolled, and that same afternoon he marched off at the head of a column of three hundred men."

- an excerpt from the book The Light and the Glory by Peter Marshall and David Manuel p. 291

Guess YOU must have been sleeping. I have several history books with similar accounts from all over the colonies. Your posts are way out of context. Lists of weapons and men were made AFTER the volunteers entered service and the government kept track of the government's weapons, but not those of volunteers until they were in the field.

Militia and Continentals - Journal of the American Revolution

All able-bodied men between sixteen and sixty were required to serve. Each had to keep a musket, bullets and powder ready to repel an attack by the French or Indians. The militia was a kind of standing home army that met on training days to stay acquainted with handling guns and performing military maneuvers.

The minutemen were an elite group of militiamen who met and trained hard in the sixteen months between the Boston Tea Party and the battles of Lexington and Concord on April 19, 1775. Many people, including members of the Continental Congress, have confused them with ordinary militiamen. The latter never approached the minutemen’s state of battle readiness. As a result the militia performed disastrously in the opening years of the Revolution

 

[Humorme]

Well regulated in the vernacular of the 18th century meant in working order, disciplined.

The government need not be involved at all. The people are perfectly capable of organizing and training themselves

A militia where nobody knows who is in it or what weapons are available to defend the security of our free state is not ordered or disciplined

I guess it's a good thing the colonists didn't subscribe to your thinking. They all just showed up with the weapons trained and fought together and it worked pretty well.

You kinda slept when they taught about the Revolutionary War didn't you?

Minute Men trained, they were known in their community, they had an organized military structure
They did not just randomly show up if they felt like it

No, they did not always train together. Let me quote something for you that illustrates a better perspective on how people got recruited into the militia:

"One of the most colorful examples is what happened in a staid Lutheran church in the Shenandoah valley of Virginia, one Sunday morning in 1775. The thirty year old pastor, Peter Muhlenberg, delivered a stirring sermon on the text, "For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven." (Ecclesiastes 3 : 1)

He reached the end of his sermon and said in a solemn prayer - and then continued to speak, "In the language of the Holy Writ, there is a time for all things. There is a time to preach and a time to fight." He paused, and then threw off his pulpit robe to reveal to the startled congregation the uniform of a Colonel in the Continental Army. "And now is the time to fight!" he thundered and then he called out, Roll the drums for recruits!" The drums rolled, and that same afternoon he marched off at the head of a column of three hundred men."

- an excerpt from the book The Light and the Glory by Peter Marshall and David Manuel p. 291

Guess YOU must have been sleeping. I have several history books with similar accounts from all over the colonies. Your posts are way out of context. Lists of weapons and men were made AFTER the volunteers entered service and the government kept track of the government's weapons, but not those of volunteers until they were in the field.

Militia and Continentals - Journal of the American Revolution

All able-bodied men between sixteen and sixty were required to serve. Each had to keep a musket, bullets and powder ready to repel an attack by the French or Indians. The militia was a kind of standing home army that met on training days to stay acquainted with handling guns and performing military maneuvers.

The minutemen were an elite group of militiamen who met and trained hard in the sixteen months between the Boston Tea Party and the battles of Lexington and Concord on April 19, 1775. Many people, including members of the Continental Congress, have confused them with ordinary militiamen. The latter never approached the minutemen’s state of battle readiness. As a result the militia performed disastrously in the opening years of the Revolution

Be that as it may, the regular militia would ideally train, but rarely did; they had their own personal weapons (which is what is at the heart of this back and forth.) In the grand scheme of things, people did not train unless they were professional soldiers - much to the chagrin of those founders who envisioned a militia made up of all able bodied men.

 

[jillian]

Gun Registration is encouraged in the Second Amendment

--LOL

no it is not

--LOL

the idea behind the second is you never know who has a firearm or where they are at

after brits came for the armories and powder houses

A well organized militia, being necessary for the security of a free state....

How can our nation be secure if we don't know who has guns, what types and how many?
A well regulated militia depends on it

And that is how every Justice of the Supreme Court saw the 2nd amendment until Scalia.

 

[Humorme]

Gun Registration is encouraged in the Second Amendment

--LOL

no it is not

--LOL

the idea behind the second is you never know who has a firearm or where they are at

after brits came for the armories and powder houses

A well organized militia, being necessary for the security of a free state....

How can our nation be secure if we don't know who has guns, what types and how many?
A well regulated militia depends on it

And that is how every Justice of the Supreme Court saw the 2nd amendment until Scalia.

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers and will generally even if these are successful the first instance enable the people to resist and triumph over them."

Chief Justice Joseph Story (appointed by founding father James Madison, second president of the United States)