The Right To Bear Arms

[emilynghiem]

It’s not ‘my’ point.

It’s a settled, accepted fact of Constitutional law and Second Amendment jurisprudence: private citizens cannot just ‘declare’ themselves a ‘militia.’

The Second Amendment does not authorize armed private citizens who subjectively and incorrectly perceive the government to have become ‘tyrannical’ to ‘take up arms’ against a lawfully elected government – to do so would be criminal rebellion and treason.

The Second Amendment safeguards the individual right to possess a firearm for lawful self-defense, not to check the power of the state or oppose government ‘tyranny.’

No one claims that the Second Amendment protects the rights of the states – whatever that’s supposed to mean; the Second Amendment is an individual right, not a collective right, having nothing to do with militia service.

I think we are pretty close to saying very similar.

There is a lawful process of using arms for defense.

I think where we disagree:
What happens when govt abuses force to oppress politically where it's NOT lawfully following and defending the laws

If we can define the process for addressing such conflicts BEFORE arms are taken up by either govt officials or the civilians arguing the govt is committing criminal oppressive abuses, then we can prevent abuse of force by either side.

I agree that it's in the very relationship between the 2A and the rest of the Bill of Rights that violating due process, rights to life liberty property and other laws is NOT an option or purpose.

I think you are relying on Pressler to clarify that, but other people see it as problematic to rely on courts/govt to establish that interpretation.

Neither govt nor citizens should abuse arms or authority to violate civil and Constitutional rights.

Let's start the conversation there.

Then we can hash out how Conservatives use and teach laws to promote that standards. And how Liberals teach it using court rulings or whatever they need to come to the same conclusions.

I don't quite get why people need Judges to rule on laws for them, but some people rely on that just like some people use the Catholic priests and Pope to establish uniform interpretation collectively while others work through independent groups and don't rely on a central middleman but treat people as equal authority to reach consensus that way.

And?

The Supreme Court determines what the Constitution means – including the Second Amendment.

The Constitution exists solely in the context of its caselaw, as determined by the Supreme Court – and that was the case at the founding of the Republic and ratification of the Constitution; see Article VI of the Constitution.

And according to the Constitution, per the original intent of the Framers, only a state government or the Federal government may authorize and recognize a militia.

Armed private citizens alone do not constitute a militia nor are they part of a lawfully recognized militia.

Armed private citizens cannot by their own accord declare themselves a ‘militia.’

Laws that prohibit armed private citizens from declaring themselves a ‘militia’ are Constitutional.

Citizens have the right to possess firearms for lawful self-defense, not to belong to a ‘militia,’ not to check the authority of the state, and not to guard against ‘tyranny.’

 

[emilynghiem]

And?

The Supreme Court determines what the Constitution means – including the Second Amendment.

The Constitution exists solely in the context of its caselaw, as determined by the Supreme Court – and that was the case at the founding of the Republic and ratification of the Constitution; see Article VI of the Constitution.

And according to the Constitution, per the original intent of the Framers, only a state government or the Federal government may authorize and recognize a militia.

Armed private citizens alone do not constitute a militia nor are they part of a lawfully recognized militia.

Armed private citizens cannot by their own accord declare themselves a ‘militia.’

Laws that prohibit armed private citizens from declaring themselves a ‘militia’ are Constitutional.

Citizens have the right to possess firearms for lawful self-defense, not to belong to a ‘militia,’ not to check the authority of the state, and not to guard against ‘tyranny.’

Hi C_Clayton_Jones:

Would you consider it "illegal" for Korean property owners to band together armed with AR 15's to defend their shops from looting and arson when the LAPD quit responding to 9-1-1 calls and left citizens in their own, at the mercy of mobs until the rioting died down. Does this constitute an illegal militia?

26 Years Ago, Roof Koreans appeared: The Guns of the ’92 L.A. Riots - AR15.COM

 

[Uncensored2008]

How about letting districts and states pass ordinances where residents can require their community members to take the same screening, training and oath to uphold laws and due process as any other police or military veterans if they want to use arms to enforce laws. And make sure everyone is screened and trained NOT to abuse force for committing crimes or violations of rights and laws.

www.isocracytx.net/hp-org/hpdmissn.gif

And require any who want to vote to pass the bar.

Or better yet, leave civil rights alone.

 

[bripat9643]

No idea what ‘history’ you’re studying.

Here’s the history you should be studying:

Presser v. Illinois (1886)

The Presser Court held that private armed citizens could not unilaterally declare themselves a ‘militia’ – that only a state government or the Federal government could establish and recognize a militia.

The Court further held that laws prohibiting private armed citizens from forming ‘militias’ absent government authorization were Constitutional.

There is nothing in the history, text, or caselaw of the Second Amendment that endorses insurrectionist dogma, it is lawless treason for private armed citizens to attempt to ‘overthrow’ a government they perceive to have become ‘tyrannical.’

What "insurrectionist dogma" are you referring to?

 

[Uncensored2008]

What "insurrectionist dogma" are you referring to?

The United States Constitution.


C Clayton Saul Goodman demands that any found possessing, reading, or distributing that document be imprisoned for life.

 

[bripat9643]

The United States Constitution.


C Clayton Saul Goodman demands that any found possessing, reading, or distributing that document be imprisoned for life.

They especially mean the First Amendment. Saying what you think is what you hate speech.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Lakhota]

 

[bripat9643]

View attachment 731926

Democrat Mayors.

 

[sartre play]

Not the guns fault, untrained & angry people thinking violence will solve problems.

 

[Rigby5]

You clearly have this backwards.
All the real threats, murders, crimes, etc., come from corrupt governments, like slavery, Manifest Destiny, illegal wars, the Holocaust, etc.
So the truth is anyone who does not arm themselves in case of government abuse, is essentially a traitor.
Government gun control is inherently illegal and corrupt.
The only guns that should be controlled are the ones in the hands of the government.

 

[Rigby5]

View attachment 731926

The US does not have the highest per capita in guns by any means.
And over half the guns in the US actually are owned by collectors.
Countries that value freedom, like Switzerland and Israel, have much higher guns per capita than the US really.
And safety is dependent upon the causes of crime, not just deterrent retaliation ability.
And the US has the highest causes of crime, such as poverty, injustice, lack of opportunity, etc.
The US is unsafe because we have one of the most corrupt governments in the whole world.
We do not even have public health care like the rest of the world has.

 

[bripat9643]

Not the guns fault, untrained & angry people thinking violence will solve problems.

So there's no reason to send $50 billion worth of arms to Ukraine?

 

[LilOlLady]

A militia is necessary. Everyone is a member. Therefore, everyone needs all bearable weapons for service in a militia, including machine guns.

So are you ready to repeal the NFA?

MILITIA:

1. a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.
   "creating a militia was no answer to the army's manpower problem"
   • a military force that engages in rebel or terrorist activities in opposition to a regular army.
   • all able-bodied civilians eligible by law for military service.

If one civilian has a machine gun, every civilian must have one.

 

[Lakhota]

Interesting...

 

[hadit]

Interesting...

Big, black and scary looking, that's what gets them going every time.

 

[Lakhota]

Big, black and scary looking, that's what gets them going every time.

No, it's the weapon of choice for mass murderers - regardless of what color it is! BTW, they come in all colors!

 

[2aguy]

Interesting...

Fascism.

 

[2aguy]

No, it's the weapon of choice for mass murderers - regardless of what color it is! BTW, they come in all colors!

No, it isnt. Handguns are you twit. And the inly reson the AR-15 is popuoqr with killers is you guys....giving it more and more mystique. If you idiots would stop covering these shootings 24/7 these rare idiots would loae interest in doing them