Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-04-2019, 05:46 AM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,059,937 times
Reputation: 17865

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by CALGUY View Post
I would like you and all others to read the quote you posted as to what Washington said.
In all the things I have read pro and con, concerning the 2nd amendment, that particular quote backs up what I have said for years, that being, when the right to bear arms was written into the constitution, it was meant that the people of the militia be regulated, and armed, not the general public, and this quote by Washington backs up that claim.

Bob.

Well Bob here is how it was written in the PA Constitution in 1776 which of course predates the US Constitution.

Quote:
That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; And that the military should be kept under strict subordination, to, and governed by, the civil power.
This was amended in 1790 splitting it into two sections, it's the current version:
Quote:
§ 21. Right to bear arms.

The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.

§ 22. Standing army; military subordinate to civil power.

No standing army shall, in time of peace, be kept up without the consent of the Legislature, and the military shall in all cases and at all times be in strict subordination to the civil power.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-04-2019, 07:55 AM
 
Location: San Diego
50,315 posts, read 47,056,299 times
Reputation: 34087
Quote:
Originally Posted by atltechdude View Post
I wasn't referencing the Constitution, I was referencing basic logic.

Also the Constitution does not specify an age of majority other than 18 for voting.

Your hostility to weed or alcohol use combined with your fetish for guns are absolutely irrelevant political positions for this discussion. The question is a basic one, at what age do you gains the rights of adults to do adult things.
Basic logic, is that like "common sense". I see that thrown around a lot.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:45 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top