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.
Hey Progressives.. Why don't you start by going into the inner hoods of Chicago, Baltimore , St Louis and NOLA and confiscating the Illegal guns of all the Gang Bangers?
You'll stop many more killings that way. What you don't have the nerve to do the police raids for these Criminals but you would for Law Abiding citizens.
Over 50 Shootings in Chicago this weekend. How about Police raids through neighborhoods looking for illegal weapons.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
A militia is a type of reserve force like that found in Swtzerland where the Home Guard take their guns home and are committed to defending the country, it is very well regulated and is a world away from modern day America.
I suggest the meaning of Militia was this -
The obligation to serve in the militia in England derives from a common law tradition, and dates back to Anglo-Saxon times. The tradition was that all able-bodied males were liable to be called out to serve in one of two organisations. These were the posse comitatus, an ad hoc assembly called together by a law officer to apprehend lawbreakers, and the fyrd a military body intended to preserve internal order or defend the locality against an invader. The latter developed into the militia, and was usually embodied by a royal warrant. Service in each organisation involved different levels of preparednes
So the US is basically using something developed from Anglo Saxon times to justify it's gun laws, indeed it's so ridiculous you couldn't make it up.
I would suggest that you provide some historical examples of the Founders enforcing your interpretation of "Militia" and the 2nd amendment .
Got any historical references of arms being confiscated from every day citizens because they weren't part of a "militia"?
Hey Progressives.. Why don't you start by going into the inner hoods of Chicago, Baltimore , St Louis and NOLA and confiscating the Illegal guns of all the Gang Bangers?
I am pretty sure the police in those cities do confiscate illegal firearms. Why do you think they don't?
Nearly 10 000 illegal firearms were confiscated in Chicago last year. Murder rate in Chicago is down about 50% since its peak.
I understand that some folks want to have a gun for protection, especially in their own home, in a car etc. But.....
When we have a chaotic mass shooting like the ones we had on the week end, I find it interesting that 'responsible' gun owners believe in their heart of hearts that they would be able to have the composure, skill and ability to 'save' themselves and others with their gun.
Time after time we have heard stories of police and soldiers that have been injured in friendly fire. Under duress, under pressure, in chaos, stray bullets from friendly fire are a huge risk.
Let's not pretend that if we all were carrying that it would solve the issue. As others have pointed out - these mass shooters usually have some kind of suicide motive and so being shot at isn't going to be a deterrent.....so knowing others have a gun may do little. It may just end up with random folks shooting at what they think is the problem.
I'm not saying folks shouldn't be allowed to carry for protection....not having that debate here....just commenting that I think it is a wee bit naive to think having a gun will protect or save in these situations.
I also did here that one Dad who has a carry permit say he would be more worried about his kids and getting them to safety and that it would be unlikely he would have the time, and opportunity to deal with the shooter.
One of my friends in my area is a young police officer...she proudly stated that's why she carries her gun to Walmart.....that kind of statement makes me concerned for what kind of officer she is. She seems to think she somehow would have been the hero and been able to act with composure, etc.....
Hey Progressives.. Why don't you start by going into the inner hoods of Chicago, Baltimore , St Louis and NOLA and confiscating the Illegal guns of all the Gang Bangers?
You'll stop many more killings that way. What you don't have the nerve to do the police raids for these Criminals but you would for Law Abiding citizens.
Over 50 Shootings in Chicago this weekend. How about Police raids through neighborhoods looking for illegal weapons.
Bunch of losers. Go to the real problem first.
Progressives (Democrats) don't care about the massive amount of Black on Black violence in all of our cities. It is because it doesn't fit their disarm, Law Abiding, Whitey ONLY. That's what this is about. Total control of the law abiding citizen.
It is fine to the Left that Blacks kill each other in massive numbers, daily.
In their defense, they had no idea what that amendment would result in some 200+ years later, no way to know the kind of advanced weaponry that would be invented and fall into hands they don't belong in, no way of knowing how Americans would misuse and abuse the amendment in ways they never intended.
But here we are.
It's time to consider amending the Constitution again.
1st Amendment too. They never could have foreseen the advancements that brought us message boards like the one I'm posting on now, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and social media in general. Why do you lunatics with your grand and sometimes dangerous ideas need to be able to broadcast them to 100s of millions of people at the click of a button in real time. Its dangerous and its not what the founding fathers intended. We need freedom of speech to only relate to those utilizing the Gutenberg printing press. Anything else is just too dangerous to let you word lovers continue to cling to your freakish love of words and forcing us all to have your ideas shoved down our throats.
I would suggest that you provide some historical examples of the Founders enforcing your interpretation of "Militia" and the 2nd amendment .
Got any historical references of arms being confiscated from every day citizens because they weren't part of a "militia"?
I'll wait.
Perhaps if you try actually reading the Second Amendment.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
In other words you are allowed to bear arms because a well regulated militia is necessary for security of the free state. Which is very different from the position the US is in today wth vast armed forces and military reserve forces.
In terms of the US in 1791 it has recently fought a war of independence and needed an armed militia to help defend the country and secure the free state. The guns of the day were muskets and the meaning was very different and the right to bear arms was in relation to civilians keeping guns so they could form a militia if the country was attacked. Other countries had similar arrangements and had militias well before the US obtained nationhood.
In terms of Militia, it was what was used to raise Armies and firces in England from Anglo Saxon times and beyond, and the actual word militia is latin for soldier.
this thread is a lie.
There is no mistake with the Second Amendment
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
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.
