Ten Gun Myths and Memes-- Shot Down

[bigrebnc1775]

Thank you for proving my point....

And you are wrong... even the far right wing robes Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito say you are wrong, in clear language even a pea brain should understand.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al. v. HELLER

Held:

2. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.

In Miller vs. U.S. it was ruled that in order for a firearm to be protected by the second amendment it must have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, in common use at the time, and supplied by the individual citizen. Any restriction such as magazine or ammo would hinder the preservation and efficiency of a well regulated militia.

AGAIN, the far right wing robes Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito say you are wrong, in clear language even a pea brain should understand.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al. v. HELLER

Held:

1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

Until Miller vs. U.S. is over turned you have nothing we already have precedence

 

[Bfgrn]

In Miller vs. U.S. it was ruled that in order for a firearm to be protected by the second amendment it must have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, in common use at the time, and supplied by the individual citizen. Any restriction such as magazine or ammo would hinder the preservation and efficiency of a well regulated militia.

AGAIN, the far right wing robes Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito say you are wrong, in clear language even a pea brain should understand.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al. v. HELLER

Held:

1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

Until Miller vs. U.S. is over turned you have nothing we already have precedence

OK pea brain...then unless you are a member of a well regulated militia, you have no right to own a firearm.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

AGAIN, the far right wing robes Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito say you are wrong, in clear language even a pea brain should understand.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al. v. HELLER

Held:

1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

Until Miller vs. U.S. is over turned you have nothing we already have precedence

OK pea brain...then unless you are a member of a well regulated militia, you have no right to own a firearm.

Well guess what I just happen to be that.

10 USC § 311 - Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Until Miller vs. U.S. is over turned you have nothing we already have precedence

OK pea brain...then unless you are a member of a well regulated militia, you have no right to own a firearm.

Well guess what I just happen to be that.

10 USC § 311 - Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

Once again Bfgrn runs away.

 

[Bfgrn]

Until Miller vs. U.S. is over turned you have nothing we already have precedence

OK pea brain...then unless you are a member of a well regulated militia, you have no right to own a firearm.

Well guess what I just happen to be that.

10 USC § 311 - Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

Ah, a pea brain trying to sound smart...what 'the unorganized militia' means is you are draft eligible. WHERE do our founding fathers grant the right to bear arms to an unorganized militia?

10 USC § 311 - Organized (Regulated) vs Unorganized (Unregulated) Militias
Under 10 USC § 311 the militia is defined by,
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

It is generally accepted that the unorganized federal militia represents all draft eligible individuals who can be called upon by the federal government to defend the country when necessary.

Under the modern definition of a regulated militia, there is nothing in the Second Amendment that explicitly allows people not in a federally regulated militia to keep and bear arms. If individual states allow locals to own guns it is not a “constitutional right”. It is a state granted privilege and therefore subject to both state and federal regulation through interstate commerce laws.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

There is NO need for any law abiding citizen to own that much instant firepower...NONE.

I'm not sure you grasp the concept

I do understand the 'concept'...

When you read the background writings of the Framers regarding the Second Amendment in full context you would know our Founding Fathers never imagined a well-armed citizenry to keep the American government itself in check. It was all about protecting the American government from both foreign and domestic threats.

Can you show me these background writings that EXCLUDE the main purpose of the Second Amendment? Yes, the 2nd Amendment is ALSO intended to protect the PEOPLE (not the government) from foreign and domestic threats. However, its primary function, like EVERY OTHER AMENDMENT IN THE BILL OF RIGHTS, is to protect the people from tyranny.

By all means, I dare you to produce ALL of the background writings on the Second Amendment, seriously JUST LOOK AT THE FIRST QUOTE IN MY SIGNATURE BY GEORGE MASON WHEN THEY RATIFIED THE SECOND AMENDMENT. That was the prevailing mindset.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

There is only ONE view of the Second Amendment:

Shall not be infringed

Any other view is a paradox, for it contradicts the very purpose of the Second Amendment in its entirety, the ultimate form of popular recourse against tyranny, thus no potential tyrants may restrict it, IT SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

Thank you for proving my point....

And you are wrong... even the far right wing robes Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito say you are wrong, in clear language even a pea brain should understand.

This is the same Supreme Court (same era of the Court) that Ruled in favor of Citizens United, and gave Bush the Presidency, destroying another key component of Federalism (state sovereignty over elections). This is the same Court that has silently rubber stamped the Patriot Act and the DHS justification for killing US citizens without even the slightest oversight. The same Court that has interpreted the Commerce Clause to give the Federal Government UNLIMITED power. The same Court that has legalized the Federal Reserve and keeps it legal.

Wake up Call: The Supreme Court has been hijacked.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Do these words sound like they come from man a that thinks government should have a monopoly on force?

You know what kid, I dare you to take to the modern field of asymmetric warfare and try and disarm the Patriots. I seriously dare you to come when the Federal Government drafts you for that cause, because more than half of the professional military will disobey those orders and defect to the Patriot Cause.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Ten Gun Myths Shot Down in a Hail of • • • bullets ​

• Myth #1: They're coming for your guns.
Fact-check: No one knows the exact number of guns in America, but it's clear there's no practical way to round them all up (never mind that no one in Washington is proposing this). Yet if you fantasize about rifle-toting citizens facing down the government, you'll rest easy knowing that America's roughly 80 million gun owners already have the feds and cops outgunned by a factor of around 79 to 1. (chart)

• Myth #2: Guns don't kill people—people kill people.
Fact-check: People with more guns tend to kill more people—with guns. The states with the highest gun ownership rates have a gun murder rate 114% higher than those with the lowest gun ownership rates...

Myth #3: An armed society is a polite society.
Fact-check: Drivers who carry guns are 44% more likely than unarmed drivers to make obscene gestures at other motorists, and 77% more likely to follow them aggressively.

• Among Texans convicted of serious crimes, those with concealed-handgun licenses were sentenced for threatening someone with a firearm 4.8 times more than those without...​

• Myth #4: More good guys with guns can stop rampaging bad guys.
Fact-check: Mass shootings stopped by armed civilians in the past 30 years: 0

• Chances that a shooting at an ER involves guns taken from guards: 1 in 5.​

• Myth #5: Keeping a gun at home makes you safer.
Fact-check: Owning a gun has been linked to higher risks of homicide, suicide, and accidental death by gun.

• For every time a gun is used in self-defense in the home, there are 7 assaults or murders, 11 suicide attempts, and 4 accidents involving guns in or around a home...​

• Myth #6: Carrying a gun for self-defense makes you safer.
Fact-check: In 2011, nearly 10 times more people were shot and killed in arguments than by civilians trying to stop a crime.

• In one survey, nearly 1% of Americans reported using guns to defend themselves or their property. However, a closer look at their claims found that more than 50% involved using guns in an aggressive manner, such as escalating an argument.
• A Philadelphia study found that the odds of an assault victim being shot were 4.5 times greater if he carried a gun. His odds of being killed were 4.2 times greater.​

• Myth #7: Guns make women safer.
Fact-check: In 2010, nearly 6 times more women were shot by husbands, boyfriends, and ex-partners than murdered by male strangers...

• Myth #8: "Vicious, violent video games" deserve more blame than guns.
Fact-check: So said NRA executive vice president Wayne LaPierre after Newtown. So what's up with Japan?
(chart/resource in link - wont behave here)

• Myth #9: More and more Americans are becoming gun owners.
Fact-check: More guns are being sold, but they're owned by a shrinking portion of the population...

• Around 80% of gun owners are men. On average they own 7.9 guns each...​

• Myth #10: We don't need more gun laws—we just need to enforce the ones we have.
Fact-check: Weak laws and loopholes backed by the gun lobby make it easier to get guns illegally.

• Around 40% of all legal gun sales involve private sellers and don't require background checks. 40% of prison inmates who used guns in their crimes got them this way.
• An investigation found 62% of online gun sellers were willing to sell to buyers who said they couldn't pass a background check...​

Links for substantiation of all points, charts, further point narratives at the article link here.

Here's one of them pertaining to Myth 2, particularly illustrative:

Also worth a look is this chart from one of the resources, listing the world's countries ranked by rate of gun ownership (i.e. how armed we are). Take a look at how far ahead we are.

Topic armed and dangerous, unlocked and loaded. Bring it on.

Sorry I didn't click on this thread before today.

Really excellent, factual post but I'm sure all these pages are full of nutter naysayers.

 

[Bfgrn]

I'm not sure you grasp the concept

I do understand the 'concept'...

When you read the background writings of the Framers regarding the Second Amendment in full context you would know our Founding Fathers never imagined a well-armed citizenry to keep the American government itself in check. It was all about protecting the American government from both foreign and domestic threats.

Can you show me these background writings that EXCLUDE the main purpose of the Second Amendment? Yes, the 2nd Amendment is ALSO intended to protect the PEOPLE (not the government) from foreign and domestic threats. However, its primary function, like EVERY OTHER AMENDMENT IN THE BILL OF RIGHTS, is to protect the people from tyranny.

By all means, I dare you to produce ALL of the background writings on the Second Amendment, seriously JUST LOOK AT THE FIRST QUOTE IN MY SIGNATURE BY GEORGE MASON WHEN THEY RATIFIED THE SECOND AMENDMENT. That was the prevailing mindset.

I just provided the background writings. Do you need a nanny to read them to you? George Mason was an anti-federalist. His paranoia was not the prevailing mindset of our most significant founding fathers. James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay who were the authors of the Federalist Papers basically made fun of the paranoid conservatives like Mason.

The well regulated militia was to protect the new nation and states and it was chosen over a standing army, which our founding fathers feared.

And when you read the Virginia Declaration of Rights George Mason was the principal author of for his home state, it is clear that even he believed a well regulated militia was to protect his state and country and that government should strictly regulate it.

Virginia_Declaration_of_Rights

XIII 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 be governed by, the civil power.

 

[Bfgrn]

There is only ONE view of the Second Amendment:



Any other view is a paradox, for it contradicts the very purpose of the Second Amendment in its entirety, the ultimate form of popular recourse against tyranny, thus no potential tyrants may restrict it, IT SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

Thank you for proving my point....

And you are wrong... even the far right wing robes Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito say you are wrong, in clear language even a pea brain should understand.

This is the same Supreme Court (same era of the Court) that Ruled in favor of Citizens United, and gave Bush the Presidency, destroying another key component of Federalism (state sovereignty over elections). This is the same Court that has silently rubber stamped the Patriot Act and the DHS justification for killing US citizens without even the slightest oversight. The same Court that has interpreted the Commerce Clause to give the Federal Government UNLIMITED power. The same Court that has legalized the Federal Reserve and keeps it legal.

Wake up Call: The Supreme Court has been hijacked.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Do these words sound like they come from man a that thinks government should have a monopoly on force?

You know what kid, I dare you to take to the modern field of asymmetric warfare and try and disarm the Patriots. I seriously dare you to come when the Federal Government drafts you for that cause, because more than half of the professional military will disobey those orders and defect to the Patriot Cause.

You are sounding more and more like a Timothy McVeigh.

I detest the Roberts Court, but NO ONE will ever accuse Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas and Alito of being gun grabbers.

Use your fucking head.

 

[varelse]

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Did they ever overturn Buck v. Bell?

No?


Don't ever quote SCOTUS like it means anything in these discussions.

 

[varelse]

Until SCOTUS decides to change its mind on it being legal to forcefully sterilize the citizenry, any appeal to SCOTUS to justify denying the rights or liberties of the People immediately disqualifies you intelligent discussion on the meaning of the rights protected by COTUS

 

[Bfgrn]

Until SCOTUS decides to change its mind on it being legal to forcefully sterilize the citizenry, any appeal to SCOTUS to justify denying the rights or liberties of the People immediately disqualifies you intelligent discussion on the meaning of the rights protected by COTUS

Were you born with a pea for a brain, or was it years of indoctrination?

I guess our founding fathers who wrote the Constitution, and set up three equal branches of government were just a bunch of retards. Everyone knows anarchy and self centered individualism is the way to go. Just ask Somalia.

"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government."
Thomas Jefferson to the Republican Citizens of Washington County, Maryland" (March 31, 1809).

 

[bigrebnc1775]

OK pea brain...then unless you are a member of a well regulated militia, you have no right to own a firearm.

Well guess what I just happen to be that.

10 USC § 311 - Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

Ah, a pea brain trying to sound smart...what 'the unorganized militia' means is you are draft eligible. WHERE do our founding fathers grant the right to bear arms to an unorganized militia?

10 USC § 311 - Organized (Regulated) vs Unorganized (Unregulated) Militias
Under 10 USC § 311 the militia is defined by,
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

It is generally accepted that the unorganized federal militia represents all draft eligible individuals who can be called upon by the federal government to defend the country when necessary.

Under the modern definition of a regulated militia, there is nothing in the Second Amendment that explicitly allows people not in a federally regulated militia to keep and bear arms. If individual states allow locals to own guns it is not a “constitutional right”. It is a state granted privilege and therefore subject to both state and federal regulation through interstate commerce laws.

Bull shit dumb ass

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

The unorganized militia doesn't answer too any federal or state authority, they answer too the people.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Ten Gun Myths Shot Down in a Hail of • • • bullets ​

• Myth #1: They're coming for your guns.
Fact-check: No one knows the exact number of guns in America, but it's clear there's no practical way to round them all up (never mind that no one in Washington is proposing this). Yet if you fantasize about rifle-toting citizens facing down the government, you'll rest easy knowing that America's roughly 80 million gun owners already have the feds and cops outgunned by a factor of around 79 to 1. (chart)

• Myth #2: Guns don't kill people—people kill people.
Fact-check: People with more guns tend to kill more people—with guns. The states with the highest gun ownership rates have a gun murder rate 114% higher than those with the lowest gun ownership rates...

Myth #3: An armed society is a polite society.
Fact-check: Drivers who carry guns are 44% more likely than unarmed drivers to make obscene gestures at other motorists, and 77% more likely to follow them aggressively.

• Among Texans convicted of serious crimes, those with concealed-handgun licenses were sentenced for threatening someone with a firearm 4.8 times more than those without...​

• Myth #4: More good guys with guns can stop rampaging bad guys.
Fact-check: Mass shootings stopped by armed civilians in the past 30 years: 0

• Chances that a shooting at an ER involves guns taken from guards: 1 in 5.​

• Myth #5: Keeping a gun at home makes you safer.
Fact-check: Owning a gun has been linked to higher risks of homicide, suicide, and accidental death by gun.

• For every time a gun is used in self-defense in the home, there are 7 assaults or murders, 11 suicide attempts, and 4 accidents involving guns in or around a home...​

• Myth #6: Carrying a gun for self-defense makes you safer.
Fact-check: In 2011, nearly 10 times more people were shot and killed in arguments than by civilians trying to stop a crime.

• In one survey, nearly 1% of Americans reported using guns to defend themselves or their property. However, a closer look at their claims found that more than 50% involved using guns in an aggressive manner, such as escalating an argument.
• A Philadelphia study found that the odds of an assault victim being shot were 4.5 times greater if he carried a gun. His odds of being killed were 4.2 times greater.​

• Myth #7: Guns make women safer.
Fact-check: In 2010, nearly 6 times more women were shot by husbands, boyfriends, and ex-partners than murdered by male strangers...

• Myth #8: "Vicious, violent video games" deserve more blame than guns.
Fact-check: So said NRA executive vice president Wayne LaPierre after Newtown. So what's up with Japan?
(chart/resource in link - wont behave here)

• Myth #9: More and more Americans are becoming gun owners.
Fact-check: More guns are being sold, but they're owned by a shrinking portion of the population...

• Around 80% of gun owners are men. On average they own 7.9 guns each...​

• Myth #10: We don't need more gun laws—we just need to enforce the ones we have.
Fact-check: Weak laws and loopholes backed by the gun lobby make it easier to get guns illegally.

• Around 40% of all legal gun sales involve private sellers and don't require background checks. 40% of prison inmates who used guns in their crimes got them this way.
• An investigation found 62% of online gun sellers were willing to sell to buyers who said they couldn't pass a background check...​

Links for substantiation of all points, charts, further point narratives at the article link here.

Here's one of them pertaining to Myth 2, particularly illustrative:

Also worth a look is this chart from one of the resources, listing the world's countries ranked by rate of gun ownership (i.e. how armed we are). Take a look at how far ahead we are.

Topic armed and dangerous, unlocked and loaded. Bring it on.

Sorry I didn't click on this thread before today.

Really excellent, factual post but I'm sure all these pages are full of nutter naysayers.

many lies in that OP

 

[Bfgrn]

Well guess what I just happen to be that.

10 USC § 311 - Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

Ah, a pea brain trying to sound smart...what 'the unorganized militia' means is you are draft eligible. WHERE do our founding fathers grant the right to bear arms to an unorganized militia?

10 USC § 311 - Organized (Regulated) vs Unorganized (Unregulated) Militias
Under 10 USC § 311 the militia is defined by,
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

It is generally accepted that the unorganized federal militia represents all draft eligible individuals who can be called upon by the federal government to defend the country when necessary.

Under the modern definition of a regulated militia, there is nothing in the Second Amendment that explicitly allows people not in a federally regulated militia to keep and bear arms. If individual states allow locals to own guns it is not a “constitutional right”. It is a state granted privilege and therefore subject to both state and federal regulation through interstate commerce laws.

Bull shit dumb ass

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

The unorganized militia doesn't answer too any federal or state authority, they answer too the people.

REALLY???

REGISTRATION INFORMATION

WHO MUST REGISTER

Almost all male U.S. citizens, and male aliens living in the U.S., who are 18 through 25, are required to register with Selective Service. It's important to know that even though he is registered, a man will not automatically be inducted into the military. In a crisis requiring a draft, men would be called in sequence determined by random lottery number and year of birth. Then, they would be examined for mental, physical and moral fitness by the military before being deferred or exempted from military service or inducted into the Armed Forces.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Ah, a pea brain trying to sound smart...what 'the unorganized militia' means is you are draft eligible. WHERE do our founding fathers grant the right to bear arms to an unorganized militia?

10 USC § 311 - Organized (Regulated) vs Unorganized (Unregulated) Militias
Under 10 USC § 311 the militia is defined by,
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

It is generally accepted that the unorganized federal militia represents all draft eligible individuals who can be called upon by the federal government to defend the country when necessary.

Under the modern definition of a regulated militia, there is nothing in the Second Amendment that explicitly allows people not in a federally regulated militia to keep and bear arms. If individual states allow locals to own guns it is not a “constitutional right”. It is a state granted privilege and therefore subject to both state and federal regulation through interstate commerce laws.

Bull shit dumb ass

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

The unorganized militia doesn't answer too any federal or state authority, they answer too the people.

REALLY???

REGISTRATION INFORMATION

WHO MUST REGISTER

Almost all male U.S. citizens, and male aliens living in the U.S., who are 18 through 25, are required to register with Selective Service. It's important to know that even though he is registered, a man will not automatically be inducted into the military. In a crisis requiring a draft, men would be called in sequence determined by random lottery number and year of birth. Then, they would be examined for mental, physical and moral fitness by the military before being deferred or exempted from military service or inducted into the Armed Forces.

Selective service dumb ass is not the militia Lokk at the fucking age requirement.

The militia
17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age
Selective service
18 through 25

Unorganized
Has no age limitaion.
Plus your weapon is supplied by you the citizen, you don't supply your weapon while in the nation guard of regular service military.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

When you read the background writings of the Framers regarding the Second Amendment in full context you would know our Founding Fathers never imagined a well-armed citizenry to keep the American government itself in check. It was all about protecting the American government from both foreign and domestic threats.

I'm going to take a longer look at this. However, I have already determined that is was EDITED by a very well known LIBERAL author.

I will update this in about 5 minutes.

EDIT:

From your own link:

The rights of conscience, of bearing arms, of changing the government, are declared to be inherent in the people. Freedom of the press too.

A Bill of rights well secured that we the people may know how far we may Proceade in Every Department then their will be no Dispute Between people and rulers in that may be secured the right to keep and bear arms for Common and Extraordinary Occasions such as to secure ourselves against the Wild Beast.

Standing armeys in a time of Peace they allway was first or last the downfall of all free Governments it was by their help Caesar made proud Rome Own a Tyrant and a Traytor for a Master.

A majority of the Senate for not allowing the militia arms & if two thirds had agreed it would have been an amendment to the Constitution. They are afraid that the Citizens will stop their full Career to Tyranny & Oppression.

Here's a potential tyrant who was definitely AFRAID of this power, there's a long quote by John Adams that also shows he was afraid of the Second Amendment:

This declaration of rights, I take it, is intended to secure the people against the mal-administration of the government; if we could suppose that in all cases the rights of the people would be attended to, the occasion for guards of this kind would be removed. Now, I am apprehensive, sir, that this clause would give an opportunity to the people in power to destroy the constitution itself.

I have an honest question, were you assuming that we weren't going to read your link, and just take your word for it? No one, including myself, is denying that the Second Amendment is ALSO designed to protect against foreign invasion and unjustified insurrections.

GENOCIDE REFRENCE

at least while it is the practice of nations to determine their contests by the slaughter of their citizens and subjects.

Keep in mind that the quotes and letters he choose in this link, were cherry-picked. He is a known anti-gun activist. And still, he failed, and you failed. By all means, dig up other letters and committee hearings on this issue, you'll be in for a shock. I think there's something in the FEDERALIST PAPERS too, either 26 or 28 that briefly touches this topic.

EDIT 2:

FEDERALIST number 28:

http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa28.htm

It discusses a long deal about the States being able to secure themselves against Federal usurpation, and is generally concurrent with the anti-tyranny view of the second amendment.

I just provided the background writings. Do you need a nanny to read them to you? George Mason was an anti-federalist. His paranoia was not the prevailing mindset of our most significant founding fathers. James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay who were the authors of the Federalist Papers basically made fun of the paranoid conservatives like Mason.

LOL, come on now, read Federalist number 28, be brave!

 

[Spoonman]

When you read the background writings of the Framers regarding the Second Amendment in full context you would know our Founding Fathers never imagined a well-armed citizenry to keep the American government itself in check. It was all about protecting the American government from both foreign and domestic threats.

I'm going to take a longer look at this. However, I have already determined that is was EDITED by a very well known LIBERAL author.

I will update this in about 5 minutes.

EDIT:

From your own link:

The rights of conscience, of bearing arms, of changing the government, are declared to be inherent in the people. Freedom of the press too.

More to come!

here is the bottom line on the second amendment.

who wrote it? James Madison

what were his views on gun ownership?

"Americans need never fear their government
because of the advantage of being armed,
which the Americans possess over the people
of almost every other nation."


All you have to do are read his writings in the federalist papers, annals of congress, journals of the continental congress and you can clearly see what he meant by it. it blows every liberal argument out of the water.

 

[Bfgrn]

Bull shit dumb ass

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

The unorganized militia doesn't answer too any federal or state authority, they answer too the people.

REALLY???

REGISTRATION INFORMATION

WHO MUST REGISTER

Almost all male U.S. citizens, and male aliens living in the U.S., who are 18 through 25, are required to register with Selective Service. It's important to know that even though he is registered, a man will not automatically be inducted into the military. In a crisis requiring a draft, men would be called in sequence determined by random lottery number and year of birth. Then, they would be examined for mental, physical and moral fitness by the military before being deferred or exempted from military service or inducted into the Armed Forces.

Selective service dumb ass is not the militia Lokk at the fucking age requirement.

The militia
17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age
Selective service
18 through 25

Unorganized
Has no age limitaion.
Plus your weapon is supplied by you the citizen, you don't supply your weapon while in the nation guard of regular service military.

Did you or did you not register with the Selective Service? That is 'answering too federal or state authority'

The 'unorganized militia' is the domain of the Timothy McVeighs of the world. I am not at all surprised a scum bag like you grazes in that herd.


Militia Mythology

With the rise of the "Militia Movement", a once-arcane topic of military structure has suddenly become a controversial subject. People are being told that they are members of a defense organization they've never heard about. Private quasi-armies are said to be as much a part of the Constitution as free speech or jury trials, and armed parading as much a right as having a parade. Unfortunately for the proponents of this cause, its tenets are utterly without support.

To start, I refer any "militia" supporters to the actual text of the Constitution, article I, section 8, which states:

The Congress shall have power: ...
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
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;
(emphasis added)

I do not know of any these "militia"s which recognizes the State's authority to appoint its officers and the authority of Congress with regard to *anything* affecting it. They are no militia in the Constitutional sense, and are much closer to the sort of "insurrections" that the real militia was designed to be called out against.

The resurrection of the concept of the militia in modern times has very little little to do with the defense duties in the original concept, and everything to do with the politics of gun control. It is not the purpose of this article to argue regarding an individual right of gun possession. That is far beyond the intended scope. What I say to the more level-headed people concerned with gun rights is to distance themselves from the Soldier-Of-Fortune fantasizers as much as possible. Such thugs have zero Constitutional justification, are real close to the legal line if not over it, and will do legitimate gun-rights far more harm than good by convincing people by abject demonstration that the debate is really about paramilitary gangs which accept no civilian authority but themselves.