Right to Bear Arms: Canada vs. US

[JimBowie1958]

I've always been in favor of the right to bear arms. That being said....

Do you think it's just a "coincidence" that the crime rate is lower in Canada who does NOT have the Right to Bear Arms?

You've always been in favor of the Right to Bear Arms, but do you actually know what the Right to Bear Arms is?

Do I know exactly what it says in the Bill of Rights off the top of my head? No.
I actually didn't even know Canada did not have that in their Bill of Rights until yesterday (watching Who Wants To Be A Millionaire) - how's that for a confession!

So, you think it has nothing to do with crime rate? yes or no?

The Right to Bear Arms is the right to be in the militia. Nothing else.

"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."

The right was given to the people, not the militia.

"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."

The right was given to the people in the militia, as made clear in Art. I, sec. 8, clause 15 & 16. Only THE PEOPLE acting under the authority of the officers appointed by the State and trained in the discipline prescribed by The Congress.

Notwithstanding the biased opinion of Scalia, the NRA and its followers.

Total bullshit.

The people ARE the militia, unorganized militia. Neither the King nor elected government has the right to disarm the people.

 

[OldLady]

Or perhaps breeds or subspecies.

The differentiating factors that cause biologists to split the Spotted Owl from the Barred Owl are far less than the differences between Negroids, Caucasians and Mongoloids.

The thing is, we are still the same species over all and the variance within a race is much larger than the variance between races, and so race as a biological concept is of much less importance than race as a cultural construct..

Curious. One race has been proven scientifically to generally have lower IQs than other races. One race has been scientifically proven to have a higher percentage of the 'warrior gene' than other races. Funnily enough it is this race which is committing the vast majority of violent crimes based on percent of the population and is unable to learn the basic curriculum which was designed for students with average IQs around 115-120.
This has to be merely a coincidence seeing as how all races are basically the same.

Average IQ is more around 100. I have no idea why it's so important to you to knock blacks as a race, but I'll continue to go on the way I was taught: judge an individual on his character, not the color of his skin. That's from Martin Luther King, Jr., you know. If that makes me an evil democrat, so be it.

You need to check out the studies on IQ more carefully. Negro IQ average in the low eighties. White's average between 115-120.
The fact is globally negroes are a failing race compared to other races.
You claim I want to "knock" negroes.
Ironically those who insist on pretending "all races are the same" are the real racists.
The US has a major problem within the negro community.
What's the first thing we do to fix a problem? Honestly identify the problem.
Things will only get worse and NEVER get better for the negro race until the 'truth-tellers' stand up and honest people listen and then do something. When over 70% of negroes kids are being raised without a father in the home there is something extremely wrong that must be fixed if the negro race is even going to survive.
You're point about judging a man by his deeds and not his color everyone can agree with. No one should feel anything but admiration for people who have had to work extra hard to overcome their obstacles in life whatever their race.
So how do you 'judge' the negro thugs roaming the inner cities committing crimes against their own neighbors? You and I know what these thugs call each other.
The negroes who have made the choice to live peaceful honest hard working lives DO NOT use that word to describe other peaceful honest hard working folk like them. They call each other 'Brother and Sister.
They too call the thugs what they are......n888888.
BTW I was born in what was then called Cook County Hospital. I have lived in some of the worst of the worst negro on negro crimes infested parts of Chicago.
I know the difference between a 'Brother' and a n88888.

Danny, I'm basing my opinions on experience, as well. I've taught students of all races and some of them are dumb as rocks, some are impressively smart, most are average, but I've never noticed the variance had anything to do with race. And I would have noticed; I have a 'high' IQ. But you've actually taught me something I never learned in five years of teacher training. I Googled, and by golly, valid studies have shown a minor statistical difference. The studies also showed whites have lower IQ's than Asians. Is that why American students lag so behind the Japanese in their "grades"? Maybe we need to just give up on white kids' education; they can't help it, they were born with lower IQ's.


In short, it doesn't matter

If you've taught school and never noticed the difference in ability to learn in different races I wonder in what school?
If you have taught school you should be aware that the basic American school curriculum has been designed to enable students with IQs from 100 to 120 to learn the curriculum right? I mean there wasn't any point in designing school curriculum which only students with IQs of 160 could understand right?
It simple logic. Cars manufacturers WANT their customers to be able to drive vehicles safely and easily. They don't sell vehicles with Formula One steering wheels with a hundred electronic inputs on them do they?

I appreciate your honesty in agreeing that yes in fact some races do generally have higher IQs than other races according to valid studies.
Yes yes you were being facetious.
You just agreed that Asians in fact do generally have higher IQ's than Whites then you explain why.
Informed Whites aren't bitching about what science has proven. You may have noticed White students generally are doing just fine in the fields of higher science. Yes many Asians are that much smarter. Big fucking deal.
At least the Whites aren't in a constant state of childess denial like the negro apologists are.
In short it matters very much to the future of negroes in this country. The SC judge was right. Don't 'AA' negroes into universities too academically intense/advanced and then dishonestly question why they are failing at those institutions.

What I said was that valid studies have shown a minor statistical difference. As you said, "Big fucking deal." IMO, due to the social and economic factors that tend to produce inferior academic achievement in some neighborhoods, it is much more important to address those factors than to keep black kids (or any disadvantaged kids) out of the college of their choice. I've said what I have to say on this subject. See you elsewhere.

 

[dannyboys]

Curious. One race has been proven scientifically to generally have lower IQs than other races. One race has been scientifically proven to have a higher percentage of the 'warrior gene' than other races. Funnily enough it is this race which is committing the vast majority of violent crimes based on percent of the population and is unable to learn the basic curriculum which was designed for students with average IQs around 115-120.
This has to be merely a coincidence seeing as how all races are basically the same.

Average IQ is more around 100. I have no idea why it's so important to you to knock blacks as a race, but I'll continue to go on the way I was taught: judge an individual on his character, not the color of his skin. That's from Martin Luther King, Jr., you know. If that makes me an evil democrat, so be it.

You need to check out the studies on IQ more carefully. Negro IQ average in the low eighties. White's average between 115-120.
The fact is globally negroes are a failing race compared to other races.
You claim I want to "knock" negroes.
Ironically those who insist on pretending "all races are the same" are the real racists.
The US has a major problem within the negro community.
What's the first thing we do to fix a problem? Honestly identify the problem.
Things will only get worse and NEVER get better for the negro race until the 'truth-tellers' stand up and honest people listen and then do something. When over 70% of negroes kids are being raised without a father in the home there is something extremely wrong that must be fixed if the negro race is even going to survive.
You're point about judging a man by his deeds and not his color everyone can agree with. No one should feel anything but admiration for people who have had to work extra hard to overcome their obstacles in life whatever their race.
So how do you 'judge' the negro thugs roaming the inner cities committing crimes against their own neighbors? You and I know what these thugs call each other.
The negroes who have made the choice to live peaceful honest hard working lives DO NOT use that word to describe other peaceful honest hard working folk like them. They call each other 'Brother and Sister.
They too call the thugs what they are......n888888.
BTW I was born in what was then called Cook County Hospital. I have lived in some of the worst of the worst negro on negro crimes infested parts of Chicago.
I know the difference between a 'Brother' and a n88888.

Danny, I'm basing my opinions on experience, as well. I've taught students of all races and some of them are dumb as rocks, some are impressively smart, most are average, but I've never noticed the variance had anything to do with race. And I would have noticed; I have a 'high' IQ. But you've actually taught me something I never learned in five years of teacher training. I Googled, and by golly, valid studies have shown a minor statistical difference. The studies also showed whites have lower IQ's than Asians. Is that why American students lag so behind the Japanese in their "grades"? Maybe we need to just give up on white kids' education; they can't help it, they were born with lower IQ's.


In short, it doesn't matter

If you've taught school and never noticed the difference in ability to learn in different races I wonder in what school?
If you have taught school you should be aware that the basic American school curriculum has been designed to enable students with IQs from 100 to 120 to learn the curriculum right? I mean there wasn't any point in designing school curriculum which only students with IQs of 160 could understand right?
It simple logic. Cars manufacturers WANT their customers to be able to drive vehicles safely and easily. They don't sell vehicles with Formula One steering wheels with a hundred electronic inputs on them do they?

I appreciate your honesty in agreeing that yes in fact some races do generally have higher IQs than other races according to valid studies.
Yes yes you were being facetious.
You just agreed that Asians in fact do generally have higher IQ's than Whites then you explain why.
Informed Whites aren't bitching about what science has proven. You may have noticed White students generally are doing just fine in the fields of higher science. Yes many Asians are that much smarter. Big fucking deal.
At least the Whites aren't in a constant state of childess denial like the negro apologists are.
In short it matters very much to the future of negroes in this country. The SC judge was right. Don't 'AA' negroes into universities too academically intense/advanced and then dishonestly question why they are failing at those institutions.

What I said was that valid studies have shown a minor statistical difference. As you said, "Big fucking deal." IMO, due to the social and economic factors that tend to produce inferior academic achievement in some neighborhoods, it is much more important to address those factors than to keep black kids (or any disadvantaged kids) out of the college of their choice. I've said what I have to say on this subject. See you elsewhere.

I bet you have.
I just ate your lunch bitch.
NO kid has any right to attend the college of "their choice". Not on this planet.
You work hard and achieve what you are capable of in school. The admissions boards makes the decision whether you are qualified to attend the college.
I'm guessing the last time you were in any classroom was when you dropped out in ninth grade.
Every non-biased study comparing IQs between the races have determined there is much more than a "minor difference" between races. No study has ever disputed this fact.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You've always been in favor of the Right to Bear Arms, but do you actually know what the Right to Bear Arms is?

Do I know exactly what it says in the Bill of Rights off the top of my head? No.
I actually didn't even know Canada did not have that in their Bill of Rights until yesterday (watching Who Wants To Be A Millionaire) - how's that for a confession!

So, you think it has nothing to do with crime rate? yes or no?

The Right to Bear Arms is the right to be in the militia. Nothing else.

"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."

The right was given to the people, not the militia.

"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."

The right was given to the people in the militia, as made clear in Art. I, sec. 8, clause 15 & 16. Only THE PEOPLE acting under the authority of the officers appointed by the State and trained in the discipline prescribed by The Congress.

Notwithstanding the biased opinion of Scalia, the NRA and its followers.

Total bullshit.

The people ARE the militia, unorganized militia. Neither the King nor elected government has the right to disarm the people.

Read the COTUS, Art. I, sec. 8, clause 15 & 16. Then tell me how you can conclude the 2nd A. is violated; and where in the COTUS is the phrase "unorganized militia"?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Read the COTUS, Art. I, sec. 8, clause 15 & 16. Then tell me how you can conclude the 2nd A. is violated; and where in the COTUS is the phrase "unorganized militia"?

The militia is composed of both the organised and unorganised militia. So referencing the militia unmodified also mentions the unorganised militia as part of it.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Yeah, our forefathers organized and fought a Revolution against a Tyrannical King and Government just so they can give that same power BACK to a Tyrannical Government.

Right.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Read the COTUS, Art. I, sec. 8, clause 15 & 16. Then tell me how you can conclude the 2nd A. is violated; and where in the COTUS is the phrase "unorganized militia"?

The militia is composed of both the organised and unorganised militia. So referencing the militia unmodified also mentions the unorganised militia as part of it.

Yeah, that's an opinion, there is no mention of an unmodified or unorganized militia in the COTUS. In fact the only modifier to the word militia is that it be well regulated, which kind of blow the shit out of your opinion piece.

 

[hortysir]

I've always been in favor of the right to bear arms. That being said....

Do you think it's just a "coincidence" that the crime rate is lower in Canada who does NOT have the Right to Bear Arms?

You've always been in favor of the Right to Bear Arms, but do you actually know what the Right to Bear Arms is?

Do I know exactly what it says in the Bill of Rights off the top of my head? No.
I actually didn't even know Canada did not have that in their Bill of Rights until yesterday (watching Who Wants To Be A Millionaire) - how's that for a confession!

So, you think it has nothing to do with crime rate? yes or no?

The Right to Bear Arms is the right to be in the militia. Nothing else.

Another yokel that doesn't understand the function of a comma

Sent from my Y538 using Tapatalk

And what the hell does a comma have to do with this? I think you need to go read some of my later posts.

Amendment II: House of Representatives, Amendments to the Constitution

Read this too, you might learn something that doesn't appear in commas.

The comna is "and". You claim that the right is only for militia. It is for the militia AND the people

 

[Wry Catcher]

You've always been in favor of the Right to Bear Arms, but do you actually know what the Right to Bear Arms is?

Do I know exactly what it says in the Bill of Rights off the top of my head? No.
I actually didn't even know Canada did not have that in their Bill of Rights until yesterday (watching Who Wants To Be A Millionaire) - how's that for a confession!

So, you think it has nothing to do with crime rate? yes or no?

The Right to Bear Arms is the right to be in the militia. Nothing else.

Another yokel that doesn't understand the function of a comma

Sent from my Y538 using Tapatalk

And what the hell does a comma have to do with this? I think you need to go read some of my later posts.

Amendment II: House of Representatives, Amendments to the Constitution

Read this too, you might learn something that doesn't appear in commas.

The comna is "and". You claim that the right is only for militia. It is for the militia AND the people

Prove it. The "and" is missing in the 2nd A. You can't - even though you may try - add punctuation to fit your opinions; even than the grammar wouldn't be correct.

 

[eagle1462010]

The Founding Fathers on the Second Amendment

“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!”

George Mason, co-author of the Second Amendment



“I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” – Speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 14, 1778

“That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.” – Virginia Declaration of Rights, June 12, 1776

Richard Henry Lee, Anti-Federalist



“And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceable and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers or possessions.” – Debates of the Massachusetts Convention of February 6, 1788; Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 1788 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)

George Washington

 

[eagle1462010]

“If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual State. In a single State, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.” – Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28, Idea of Restraining the Legislative Authority in Regard to the Common Defense Considered (continued), Independent Journal, December 26, 1787; The Federalist (The Gideon Edition), (1818), Edited with an Introduction, Reader’s Guide, Constitutional Cross-reference, Index, and Glossary by George W. Carey and James McClellan (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2001)



“This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty …. The right of self defence is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction. In England, the people have been disarmed, generally, under the specious pretext of preserving the game: a never failing lure to bring over the landed aristocracy to support any measure, under that mask, though calculated for very different purposes. True it is, their bill of rights seems at first view to counteract this policy: but the right of bearing arms is confined to protestants, and the words suitable to their condition and degree, have been interpreted to authorize the prohibition of keeping a gun or other engine for the destruction of game, to any farmer, or inferior tradesman, or other person not qualified to kill game. So that not one man in five hundred can keep a gun in his house without being subject to a penalty.”
St. George Tucker

 

[eagle1462010]

Liberals want to change the true intent and meaning of the 2nd Amendment.....................The reason for it's creation is quoted by the Founding Fathers all over the place.................................unless you want to sweep their words under a rug.................which is what the Liberals are attempting to do in regards to the meaning of the 2nd...............



"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

 

[Wry Catcher]

The Founding Fathers on the Second Amendment

“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!”

George Mason, co-author of the Second Amendment



“I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” – Speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 14, 1778

“That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.” – Virginia Declaration of Rights, June 12, 1776

Richard Henry Lee, Anti-Federalist



“And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceable and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers or possessions.” – Debates of the Massachusetts Convention of February 6, 1788; Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 1788 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)

George Washington

Yeah, so what. The COTUS makes no mention of wolves and lambs; nor are we non paranoid Americans concerned of being enslaved. The rest of your posted quotes seem to support a well regulated militia and have nothing to do with the points I've raised.

 

[eagle1462010]

The Founding Fathers on the Second Amendment

“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!”

George Mason, co-author of the Second Amendment



“I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” – Speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 14, 1778

“That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.” – Virginia Declaration of Rights, June 12, 1776

Richard Henry Lee, Anti-Federalist



“And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceable and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers or possessions.” – Debates of the Massachusetts Convention of February 6, 1788; Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 1788 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)

George Washington

Yeah, so what. The COTUS makes no mention of wolves and lambs; nor are we non paranoid Americans concerned of being enslaved. The rest of your posted quotes seem to support a well regulated militia and have nothing to do with the issues I've raised.

Some of the quotes were from the ones who WROTE THE DAMNED THING.............

but a Wry Catcher knows more than the ones who wrote it.....................sucks to be you because they have quotes CLEAR AS A BELL on what their intent was back then WHEN IT WAS WRITTEN..............

Which is why you try to regulate through the back door................because you get bitch slapped through the front door.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The Founding Fathers on the Second Amendment

“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!”

George Mason, co-author of the Second Amendment



“I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” – Speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 14, 1778

“That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.” – Virginia Declaration of Rights, June 12, 1776

Richard Henry Lee, Anti-Federalist



“And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceable and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers or possessions.” – Debates of the Massachusetts Convention of February 6, 1788; Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 1788 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)

George Washington

Yeah, so what. The COTUS makes no mention of wolves and lambs; nor are we non paranoid Americans concerned of being enslaved. The rest of your posted quotes seem to support a well regulated militia and have nothing to do with the issues I've raised.

Some of the quotes were from the ones who WROTE THE DAMNED THING.............

but a Wry Catcher knows more than the ones who wrote it.....................sucks to be you because they have quotes CLEAR AS A BELL on what their intent was back then WHEN IT WAS WRITTEN..............

Which is why you try to regulate through the back door................because you get bitch slapped through the front door.

"Clear as a bell"? Not at all, and they were written over 200 years ago when doctors still drained the blood from ill patients.

 

[eagle1462010]

The Founding Fathers on the Second Amendment

“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!”

George Mason, co-author of the Second Amendment



“I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” – Speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 14, 1778

“That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.” – Virginia Declaration of Rights, June 12, 1776

Richard Henry Lee, Anti-Federalist



“And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceable and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers or possessions.” – Debates of the Massachusetts Convention of February 6, 1788; Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 1788 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)

George Washington

Yeah, so what. The COTUS makes no mention of wolves and lambs; nor are we non paranoid Americans concerned of being enslaved. The rest of your posted quotes seem to support a well regulated militia and have nothing to do with the issues I've raised.

Some of the quotes were from the ones who WROTE THE DAMNED THING.............

but a Wry Catcher knows more than the ones who wrote it.....................sucks to be you because they have quotes CLEAR AS A BELL on what their intent was back then WHEN IT WAS WRITTEN..............

Which is why you try to regulate through the back door................because you get bitch slapped through the front door.

"Clear as a bell"? Not at all, and they were written over 200 years ago when doctors still drained the blood from ill patients.

The 2nd Amendment hasn't been Amended............

Your side has challenged it many times.............

Your side has LOST many times..............

And people like you stamp your feet and cry like a baby when you don't get your way..........

We will oppose your goal forever...........

 

[JimBowie1958]

Yeah, that's an opinion, there is no mention of an unmodified or unorganized militia in the COTUS. In fact the only modifier to the word militia is that it be well regulated, which kind of blow the shit out of your opinion piece.

The militia is the civilian pool of recruits for organised duty, as in when we had militia units that fought in WW2, and we have the man pool of potential militia members that have not been drafted, recruited, trained, etc to be in a militia unit, but are still part of the militia by definition though they still remain UNORGANISED.

 

[hortysir]

The Founding Fathers on the Second Amendment

“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!”

George Mason, co-author of the Second Amendment



“I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” – Speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 14, 1778

“That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.” – Virginia Declaration of Rights, June 12, 1776

Richard Henry Lee, Anti-Federalist



“And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceable and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers or possessions.” – Debates of the Massachusetts Convention of February 6, 1788; Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 1788 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)

George Washington

Yeah, so what. The COTUS makes no mention of wolves and lambs; nor are we non paranoid Americans concerned of being enslaved. The rest of your posted quotes seem to support a well regulated militia and have nothing to do with the issues I've raised.

Some of the quotes were from the ones who WROTE THE DAMNED THING.............

but a Wry Catcher knows more than the ones who wrote it.....................sucks to be you because they have quotes CLEAR AS A BELL on what their intent was back then WHEN IT WAS WRITTEN..............

Which is why you try to regulate through the back door................because you get bitch slapped through the front door.

"Clear as a bell"? Not at all, and they were written over 200 years ago when doctors still drained the blood from ill patients.

Dies its age make the first amendment any less relevant?

 

[hortysir]

Do I know exactly what it says in the Bill of Rights off the top of my head? No.
I actually didn't even know Canada did not have that in their Bill of Rights until yesterday (watching Who Wants To Be A Millionaire) - how's that for a confession!

So, you think it has nothing to do with crime rate? yes or no?

The Right to Bear Arms is the right to be in the militia. Nothing else.

Another yokel that doesn't understand the function of a comma

Sent from my Y538 using Tapatalk

And what the hell does a comma have to do with this? I think you need to go read some of my later posts.

Amendment II: House of Representatives, Amendments to the Constitution

Read this too, you might learn something that doesn't appear in commas.

The comna is "and". You claim that the right is only for militia. It is for the militia AND the people

Prove it. The "and" is missing in the 2nd A. You can't - even though you may try - add punctuation to fit your opinions; even than the grammar wouldn't be correct.

Prove it? Prove what? That you can't read? This entire board already knows that

 

[frigidweirdo]

I've always been in favor of the right to bear arms. That being said....

Do you think it's just a "coincidence" that the crime rate is lower in Canada who does NOT have the Right to Bear Arms?

You've always been in favor of the Right to Bear Arms, but do you actually know what the Right to Bear Arms is?

Do I know exactly what it says in the Bill of Rights off the top of my head? No.
I actually didn't even know Canada did not have that in their Bill of Rights until yesterday (watching Who Wants To Be A Millionaire) - how's that for a confession!

So, you think it has nothing to do with crime rate? yes or no?

The Right to Bear Arms is the right to be in the militia. Nothing else.

"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."

The right was given to the people, not the militia.

"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."

The right was given to the people in the militia, as made clear in Art. I, sec. 8, clause 15 & 16. Only THE PEOPLE acting under the authority of the officers appointed by the State and trained in the discipline prescribed by The Congress.

Notwithstanding the biased opinion of Scalia, the NRA and its followers.

No, that's not true.

The right to keep arms is the right of individuals to own weapons so the militia has a ready supply of arms. The people don't need to be in the militia.
The right to bear arms is the right of individuals to be in the militia, so the militia has a ready supply of personnel to use those arms. The people clearly don't need to be in the militia to have the right to be in the militia, otherwise it'd be the worse right in the world. You only have the right when you are in the militia, so you stop people being in the militia and then they don't have the right to be in the militia. Eh?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Yeah, that's an opinion, there is no mention of an unmodified or unorganized militia in the COTUS. In fact the only modifier to the word militia is that it be well regulated, which kind of blow the shit out of your opinion piece.

The militia is the civilian pool of recruits for organised duty, as in when we had militia units that fought in WW2, and we have the man pool of potential militia members that have not been drafted, recruited, trained, etc to be in a militia unit, but are still part of the militia by definition though they still remain UNORGANISED.

If you refer to the selective service act of 1917, see:

Selective Draft Law Cases 245 U.S. 366 (1918)

Therein is no reference to the Unorganized Militia in this act, and nothing in the COTUS to support your opinion.