Do you think the Third Amendment is meant to protect you from Foreign Soldiers?

[The2ndAmendment]

Really, all you people that take great offense to the suggestion that the Second Amendment is meant to protect you against OUR OWN government, what do you think the THIRD AMENDMENT is meant to protect you from?

Do you think foreign soldiers/invaders would give a rat's ass about any Constitutional clause?


------
So the first response (Oldguy) was about Red Dawn, showing that he clearly missed the entire point of this thread lololololol

 

[Oldguy]

Red Dawn is not gonna happen.

Deal with it.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Red Dawn is not gonna happen.

Deal with it.

I don't know what Red Dawn is, nor am I going to look it up, since it's obviously off topic.

However, I assume that you have admitted that the Third Amendment is designed to protect us from our own government, correct?

------------------
EDIT:
So I looked up this move called Red Dawn, both the 1980's and 2012 version, it's about an invasion by North Korea, it has nothing to do with a military occupation of our cities/towns by our own government. So how is this relevant at all to the third amendment and the topic in the OP?

 

[The2ndAmendment]

So, the Gun Grabbers can't get around this? I love dropping bombs on your houses of cards.

 

[Avatar4321]

Has anyone argued that it doesnt apply to soldiers in our government? No

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Has anyone argued that it doesn't apply to soldiers in our government? No

But when we say that the Second Amendment is meant to protect us from our own government, you all act as if no piece of Law could ever exist.

Have you ever considered the fact that the Third Amendment can only be enforced by an armed citizenry?

 

[BreezeWood]

Has anyone argued that it doesn't apply to soldiers in our government? No

But when we say that the Second Amendment is meant to protect us from our own government, you all act as if no piece of Law could ever exist.

Have you ever considered the fact that the Third Amendment can only be enforced by an armed citizenry?

Amendment [III.]

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

... in time of peace


the Amendment off-handily is against either, an armed soldier (militia) or as an armed citizenry ... gun lovers not welcome.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Has anyone argued that it doesn't apply to soldiers in our government? No

But when we say that the Second Amendment is meant to protect us from our own government, you all act as if no piece of Law could ever exist.

Have you ever considered the fact that the Third Amendment can only be enforced by an armed citizenry?

Amendment [III.]

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

... in time of peace


the Amendment off-handily is against either, an armed soldier (militia) or as an armed citizenry ... gun lovers not welcome.

First:
This thread asks, do you think the Third Amendment protects against FOREIGN SOLDIERS, your response had nothing to do with that.


---------------------------

Do you know that

"In time of war"

Requires an official declaration of War, it would also assume that we are being invaded, not the attacker.

"To be prescribed by law" then assumes that local legislature sets the rules on how they are to quarter the Soldiers.

So 1) Congress (elected by the people) must declare War,

----2) It must be a defensive war (Congress can't just say we're in a global war on terror) according to all the ratification debates (otherwise why would you be quartering soldiers in our cities?)

----3) The local legislature sets the procedures and rules for the Soldiers and how they are quartered in their city/town (also agrees with ratification debates and the historical context)

 

[The2ndAmendment]

So I can assume that this is proof that even Progressives agree that the Third Amendment is meant to protect you from tyrannical government?

Can we evolve to the Second Amendment now, all on the same page?

 

[Rct_Tsoul]

The entire constitution is a fraud, as it was signed at gun point, this makes it null and void, it needs to be ejected and rewritten for modern times.

 

[bucs90]

Nope.

The 3rd amendment is clearly related to our own military. The Founders, in the spirit of their British peers, did not want troops living "amongst the citizens". That was the sole principle the British opposed, and the idea the Founders had. That troops lived in barracks, ON BASE, not amongst the people.

But, today, through off base housing allowance, you the taxpayer pays the rent for troops to live off base, amongst the citizens, which is obviously against what the Founders had in mind.

Are you ok with paying for the off base rent for troops to live amongst you??? Because you are doing it every April when you pay taxes. And the Founders were against that idea.