What Do The Words "A Well Regulated Militia" Mean?

[thereisnospoon]

How are background checks an infringement on your rights?

By extension, how is presenting an ID before voting an infringement on the right to vote?

 

[Meister]

How are background checks an infringement on your rights?

By extension, how is presenting an ID before voting an infringement on the right to vote?

Ohhhh, you can't say that, old ladies can't vote.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Our nation depends on our gun owners to defend us. What will happen when our country is attacked and we depend on a bunch of unknown random gun owners to form an effective fighting force to defend the women and children?

We need to register all our gun owners so that we know who they are and how much guns and ammunition they own. How else can we form a well regulated militia to ensure our free state. We also need to make gun owners get off their fat asses, exercise, train and be prepared to defend us

How else are they "well regulated"?

Notwithstanding your comment re: well regulated militia, I think all prospective gun purchasers should at least have to take and pass some sort of gun safety course.
For comparison's sake, we all must take and pass an exam plus a road test in order to obtain a license to operate a motor vehicle.

do we shoot our guns on public highways and roads?

Nope...But an untrained operator can be every bit as deadly as someone shooting a gun into cars on a roadway.

 

[Contumacious]

How are background checks an infringement on your rights?

No Constitutional authority was granted to license or authorize gun owners was ever granted.

The Founding Fathers did not trust the federal government neither do most Americans.

.

.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

How are background checks an infringement on your rights?

By extension, how is presenting an ID before voting an infringement on the right to vote?

It’s not the ‘presenting’ but the requirement to obtain an ID after a voter has already proven he’s eligible to vote when he registered.

A voter presents a birth certificate or other suitable document when he registers to vote. As long as he votes every two years (or whatever the required frequency for his jurisdiction) his signature alone next to his name on the voter registration log is sufficient, even if it’s been 20 years since he last registered.

To require a voter to ‘prove’ at every election he’s eligible to vote when he already documented his eligibility at registration manifests an undue burden to the right to vote; it’s also likely a due process violation, to presume a voter is guilty and make him ‘prove’ he’s not attempting to commit fraud.

The same is true with regard to firearm licensing and registration requirements.

There’s nothing burdensome about a background check, but requiring a gun owner to have a license simply to own any type of firearm, or be required to register that firearm with the state, manifests an undue burden, if he’s otherwise not in the NICS database. It’s likely a due process violation as well, to presume all gun owners are ‘guilty.’

The state cannot presume that because one wishes to own a gun he might commit a crime, and compel the potential gun owner to obtain a license first. Just as the state cannot presume that a given voter might commit fraud, and compel the voter to prove whom he is at every election.

Whether exercising the right to vote or the right to own a firearm, the state may not restrict or preempt any right absent evidence the restricting measure is warranted.

There is no evidence licensing requirements will stop gun violence (because criminals don’t worry about licenses), and there’s no evidence requiring photo ID will prevent voter ‘fraud.’

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

How are background checks an infringement on your rights?

No Constitutional authority was granted to license or authorize gun owners was ever granted.

The Founding Fathers did not trust the federal government neither do most Americans.

.

.

Nonsense

It has nothing to do with ‘Constitutional authority.’

It has to do with the fact that the state cannot document that licensing and registration requirements have the desired effect of reducing gun violence, where such requirements are consequently unwarranted.

The state has the authority to enact any gun restriction measure it wants; whether that measure is invalidated by a court or not is another matter altogether.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Heller is incorporated.

 

[Contumacious]

How are background checks an infringement on your rights?

No Constitutional authority was granted to license or authorize gun owners was ever granted.

The Founding Fathers did not trust the federal government neither do most Americans.

.

.

Nonsense

It has nothing to do with ‘Constitutional authority.’

It has to do with the fact that the state cannot document that licensing and registration requirements have the desired effect of reducing gun violence, where such requirements are consequently unwarranted.

The state has the authority to enact any gun restriction measure it wants; whether that measure is invalidated by a court or not is another matter altogether.

Yo Vern, if "reducing" violence is REALLY the fucking issue why is your bosom buddy Menendez determined to provide the Syrian resistance with ASSAULT RIFLES, HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES AND NO NO NO BACKGROUND CHECKS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

.

 

[Little-Acorn]

How are background checks an infringement on your rights?

No Constitutional authority was granted to license or authorize gun owners was ever granted.

The Founding Fathers did not trust the federal government neither do most Americans.

.

.

It has nothing to do with ‘Constitutional authority.’

It has everything to do with Constitutional authority.

The 2nd amendment flatly bans all governments in the US - Federal, stat, and local - from taking away or restricting the right of ordinary people to carry guns and other such weapons.

IOW, the 2nd takes away ALL such authority for any of those governments to have ANY say in what guns etc. people can own and carry.

the state cannot document that licensing and registration requirements have the desired effect of reducing gun violence, where such requirements are consequently unwarranted.

That's true, too.

The state has the authority to enact any gun restriction measure it wants;

Flatly false. That hasn't been true since 1791. Unfortunately, the truth hasn't stopped some states from violating the 2nd amendment.

whether that measure is invalidated by a court or not is another matter altogether.

That's like saying bank robbers have the authority to take all the money they want out of a bank, whether it's theirs or not. Whether a policeman catches them and throws them in jail for it, is another matter altogether.

Ridiculous on its face.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

How are background checks an infringement on your rights?

We already HAVE background checks, you people amaze me. You are to stupid to even know the current laws.

 

[Spoonman]

Notwithstanding your comment re: well regulated militia, I think all prospective gun purchasers should at least have to take and pass some sort of gun safety course.
For comparison's sake, we all must take and pass an exam plus a road test in order to obtain a license to operate a motor vehicle.

do we shoot our guns on public highways and roads?

Nope...But an untrained operator can be every bit as deadly as someone shooting a gun into cars on a roadway.

ok, people are not shooting guns into roadways. personally I worry more about some idiot using his cellphone while driving or even half the idiots licensed and driving on the roads. you see, you come into contact with other drivers every day. you share the same roadways with them. how often do you come into contact with a gun? hardly ever. how many accidents have you had with a gun? how many close calls? but everyday you come into close contact with other drivers. If I have a gun it is not going to come into contact with anyone unless they try to break into my house. there is a big difference. If I own a gun for self defense, why do I need to go through a back ground check? you don't for a car. why do I need to register it? you don't have to register a car you will use on your own property. but a car you take on a public road. if I want to get a hunting license and use public lands, I have to take a hunter safety course.. If I want to get a carry permit, I have to take a state approved safety course.

 

[pix]

in australia, you know a wuss and a coward and a wanker because they're the ones with the guns. if you have a gun in aus., you dont have many friends.

 

[Meister]

in australia, you know a wuss and a coward and a wanker because they're the ones with the guns. if you have a gun in aus., you dont have many friends.

And?

 

[pix]

in australia, you know a wuss and a coward and a wanker because they're the ones with the guns. if you have a gun in aus., you dont have many friends.

And?

your only friend has to be prised from your cold dead hands. it must be a lonely life

 

[Spoonman]

in australia, you know a wuss and a coward and a wanker because they're the ones with the guns. if you have a gun in aus., you dont have many friends.

so?

 

[Spoonman]

in australia, you know a wuss and a coward and a wanker because they're the ones with the guns. if you have a gun in aus., you dont have many friends.

And?

your only friend has to be prised from your cold dead hands. it must be a lonely life

oh, you're talking about a fosters

 

[Synthaholic]

If you were told that your micro wanking were not to be infringed, what would you take that to mean? That it cannot be infringed or that it can be infringed. Why do liberals claim to be the smartest people in the room when they can't even understand simple concepts or words. How do you remember to breathe?

How would registration infringe when no one is stopping your purchase?

It is a willful act of government to violate the 4th Amendment.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Guess what My weapons falls under? I'll bet you don't even understand.

Nonsense.

If registration is the condition for purchase, you do not own it yet. Therefore, it's not part of your 'effects'.

 

[Synthaholic]

madison intended it to be protection against our own government

Really?

Then why didn't they put that into the Constitution?

I'm sure that J.K. Rowling had a few chapters of Harry Potter material that didn't make the cut into the books, also.

They did .

Tenth Amendment

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

.

The 10th has nothing to say about owning guns as a defense against the United States.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

How would registration infringe when no one is stopping your purchase?

It is a willful act of government to violate the 4th Amendment.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Guess what My weapons falls under? I'll bet you don't even understand.

Nonsense.

If registration is the condition for purchase, you do not own it yet. Therefore, it's not part of your 'effects'.

Shall not infringe means exactly that, registration is an infringement. It serves no purpose other then to give a list to the Government of whom to raid when they decide to violate the Constitution.

 

[pix]

well regulated militia means that you all need to amend that little constitutional flaw cause if the american moslems form a well regulated militia on american soil, youre fucked!