What is a “well-regulated militia” and why are we so sure it refers to everyone?

[Billy000]

NO!!! The Founders wanted to guarantee the right to own and bear arms in order to be able to form a militias!!! The reason is obvious, they fought the Revolutionary War with militias. You are really confused. Have you studied American history?

Lol none of this explains why they wanted militias to form. Why would them being around militias justify more AFTER the government was formed?

 

[Billy000]

If 'people' have 'nefarious intentions' we will be armed to thwart them. Define 'wrong people'......Do you mean people that would defend freedom?

Oh so the founders were trying to make sure a civil war would need to happen under the right circumstance. Who would win? The wrong people could. Doesn’t matter I guess lol

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Well this is a terrible plan because if anyone can form the militia, the very wrong people could. People with nefarious intentions.

THey already do. They're called street gangs.

Your ilk lets them get away with murder.

 

[Leo123]

Oh so the founders were trying to make sure a civil war would need to happen under the right circumstance. Who would win? The wrong people could. Doesn’t matter I guess lol

We already had a Civil War. What's your point?

 

[Leo123]

Lol none of this explains why they wanted militias to form. Why would them being around militias justify more AFTER the government was formed?

Because the Founders realized that ANY government can become tyrannical. Even theirs.

 

[Billy000]

We already had a Civil War. What's your point?

Why would us having a civil war matter?

 

[Billy000]

Because the Founders realized that ANY government can become tyrannical. Even theirs.

Well again it’s a stupid plan. Imagine how you would feel if communists took over the government. From their perspective they might find capitalism tyrannical. It’s all pretty subjective.

 

[Leo123]

Well again it’s a stupid plan. Imagine how you would feel if communists took over the government. From their perspective they might find capitalism tyrannical. It’s all pretty subjective.

Communists would plan to disarm the public first by claiming the 2nd amendment is no longer needed or should be defined a different way.

 

[Leo123]

Why would us having a civil war matter?

I was wondering why you even brought it up in the first place.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Lol none of this explains why they wanted militias to form. Why would them being around militias justify more AFTER the government was formed?

Why don't you tell us what you think the is the reason th efounders wanted militias to form?

 

[Billy000]

Communists would plan to disarm the public first by claiming the 2nd amendment is no longer needed or should be defined a different way.

It doesn’t matter what they would do with the 2 amendment in this hypothetical. They still took over.

 

[Billy000]

Why don't you tell us why you think the founders wanted militias to form?

I don’t know it’s a mystery. It’s a very vague amendment as I have said from the beginning.

You’re welcome.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Why would us having a civil war matter?

Can you explain why a civil war has to do with this topic?

 

[Leo123]

Why don't you tell us what you think the is the reason th efounders wanted militias to form?

Can't wait to see what rock Billy tries to hide behind on this one!!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

But why can we be sure the context of the right to bear arms applies to any context outside of a well regulated militia?

Because it says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed".
It doesn't say "the right of the militia to keep and bear arms".

 

[Leo123]

I don’t know it’s a mystery. It’s a very vague amendment as I have said from the beginning.

You’re welcome.

Oh I see....Now that you've been thwarted at every turn, suddenly the document is to blame!!!

 

[Leo123]

It doesn’t matter what they would do with the 2 amendment in this hypothetical. They still took over.

Then they would have already disarmed the public. There are groups trying to do that right now. There are groups that are trying to tell US that the 2nd doesn't mean we have the right to own and bear arms. Communists would certainly endeavor to do that. I they had already taken over then we did not defend our Republic. It would mean we just lay down and roll over to gun control.

 

[Billy000]

Can you explain why a civil war has to do with this topic?

He talked about opposing militias so naturally I brought up civil war. Who the fuck even cares? Lol you idiots run with anything you can get huh?

 

[Billy000]

Then they would have already disarmed the public. There are groups trying to do that right now. There are groups that are trying to tell US that the 2nd doesn't mean we have the right to own and bear arms. Communists would certainly endeavor to do that. I they had already taken over then we did not defend our Republic. It would mean we just lay down and roll over to gun control.

Lol what point are you even trying to make? The point is, the government allowing militias without any specification of who is involved would obviously be problematic.

 

[Leo123]

He talked about opposing militias so naturally I brought up civil war. Who the fuck even cares? Lol you idiots run with anything you can get huh?

The 2nd amendment has nothing to do with militias other than the right to own and bear arms is required in order to form a militia. You're still thinking backwards.