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)
 
Old 03-10-2020, 04:12 PM
 
Location: southern california
61,289 posts, read 87,260,493 times
Reputation: 55556

Advertisements

It’s for dealing with artifa but also Katrina and Ferguson and now San Francisco looters
It’s for those times when you call the cops but they have been told by the city fathers - don’t come
It’s for when people come to hurt you and take your stuff and the government says not my problem
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-10-2020, 04:17 PM
 
Location: Tyler, TX
23,666 posts, read 23,987,722 times
Reputation: 14996
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Oxford English Dictionary is where you will find your sources.



"well-regulated" was in normal and common use long before 1789. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order.

Anything of the day that was "well-regulated" was calibrated correctly to the best of its capabilities, and functioning as intended & expected.
Establishing government oversight of the people's arms wasn't the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so.
Well regulated people, keep our very own government in check. Don't forget the "FREE STATE" part... Free from government tyranny
The people are the government as we only have to govern, but ourselves. As Declared in our Independence.


1714: "The practice of all well-regulated courts of justice in the world."
1812: "The equation of time ... is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well-regulated clock and a true sun dial."
Preachin' to the choir. I bought it because it'll be cool to have a 230 year old dictionary on the shelf, and also specifically for this purpose. Getting tired of people trying to change the founders' intent by applying a modern definition with no recognition of acknowledgement of the fact that the word was not being used in that way at that time.

A photograph from a dictionary that literally could have been on Washington's bookshelf can't be challenged.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2020, 04:25 PM
 
Location: San Diego
50,158 posts, read 46,820,657 times
Reputation: 33986
Quote:
Originally Posted by swagger View Post
Just a reminder to everyone that the Bill of Rights exists to put restrictions on government. That's it. It says what they CAN'T do. It doesn't say what your rights are or aren't. It doesn't pretend to be an exhaustive list of rights. It's a list of specific things that the government is NOT allowed to do. It can't infringe speech. It can't deprive you of property without due process. It can't make you testify against yourself. And it can't tell you what guns you can or can't own.
Best summary
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2020, 04:43 PM
 
Location: Arizona
7,479 posts, read 4,314,715 times
Reputation: 6118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
We spend 10 times as much as Russia, twice China’s budget. If the US military doesn’t have enough bullets on a measly $700B like the poster indicated it’s time for an audit.

The point was why do we need a militia as was originally intended when we have the largest standing army in the world.
You can go back and read my post#150 for the answer to that question from those who incorporated the 2nd Amendment into the Constitution themselves. But I'll bet you won't as it doesn't coincide with your way of thinking. However those are the words of the founders and it's quite clear what their intentions were when incorporating the 2nd Amendment into the Bill of Rights under our Constitution.

The intent of a citizens militia is to prevent tyranny by their own government. That was the whole purpose of fighting the British government during the revolutionary war. It has nothing to do with whether we have the largest standing army or not. Obviously a citizens militia would have to be independent of control by a centralized government. The 2nd Amendment refers to "the people" as it's an individual right. Otherwise they could have worded the 2nd Amendment to read: "The right of the people to form a militia when called upon by their government to ward off a foreign invasion shall not be infringed". A standing army and a citizens militia are two entirely different entities, each serves a different purpose.

You must be living in fantasy world if you believe that our very own government will never become tyrannical again. As Lord Acton once said: "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely". Politicians will lie, cheat, steal and prostitute themselves to the lowest common denominator in their quest for absolute power and control over the masses.

There are only a few laws in history that are universally applicable. One of these is that the ruling classes do not want the peasantry armed. They will do what they can to convince you that to be armed is dangerous. They will attempt to do this while they themselves are surrounded by armed body guards. Idiots will not notice this hypocrisy and sycophants will ignore it. Fools will surrender their arms in the name of "safety". They will insensibly surrender their liberty at the same time. This is how slaves are made.

"If the benevolent ruler stays in power long enough, he eventually concludes that power and wisdom are the same thing. And as he possesses power, he must also possess wisdom. He becomes converted to the seductive thesis that election to public office endows the official with both power and wisdom. At this point, he begins to lose his ability to distinguish between what is morally right and what is politically expedient."--- Ben Moreell

Last edited by Ex New Yorker; 03-10-2020 at 05:03 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2020, 06:08 PM
 
Location: Honolulu/DMV Area/NYC
30,564 posts, read 18,061,935 times
Reputation: 34368
While I agree that the meaning and scope of the 2nd Amendment have not changed over time, it is important to note (and many 2nd Amendment proponents are either ignorant of this or refuse to acknowledge it) that the 2nd Amendment (as is the case with the other 9 amendments that comprise the Bill of Rights) ONLY limited Congress.

It had no bearing on the the ability of states to enact gun control.

The 2nd Amendment only applies to the states via the incorporation principle that the Supreme Court has said is inherent in the later 14th Amendment. But that is a matter of interpretation and is not clear from the text of the 14th Amendment itself.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2020, 06:30 PM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,434,384 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident View Post
While I agree that the meaning and scope of the 2nd Amendment have not changed over time, it is important to note (and many 2nd Amendment proponents are either ignorant of this or refuse to acknowledge it) that the 2nd Amendment (as is the case with the other 9 amendments that comprise the Bill of Rights) ONLY limited Congress.

It had no bearing on the the ability of states to enact gun control.

The 2nd Amendment only applies to the states via the incorporation principle that the Supreme Court has said is inherent in the later 14th Amendment. But that is a matter of interpretation and is not clear from the text of the 14th Amendment itself.
correct

the "bill of rights" does not GRANT rights...it confirms our rights as individuals, and LIMITS government (federal AND state) interference of our individual rights
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2020, 06:33 PM
 
Location: Long Island
57,073 posts, read 26,024,198 times
Reputation: 15531
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ex New Yorker View Post
You can go back and read my post#150 for the answer to that question from those who incorporated the 2nd Amendment into the Constitution themselves. But I'll bet you won't as it doesn't coincide with your way of thinking. However those are the words of the founders and it's quite clear what their intentions were when incorporating the 2nd Amendment into the Bill of Rights under our Constitution.

The intent of a citizens militia is to prevent tyranny by their own government. That was the whole purpose of fighting the British government during the revolutionary war. It has nothing to do with whether we have the largest standing army or not. Obviously a citizens militia would have to be independent of control by a centralized government. The 2nd Amendment refers to "the people" as it's an individual right. Otherwise they could have worded the 2nd Amendment to read: "The right of the people to form a militia when called upon by their government to ward off a foreign invasion shall not be infringed". A standing army and a citizens militia are two entirely different entities, each serves a different purpose.

You must be living in fantasy world if you believe that our very own government will never become tyrannical again. As Lord Acton once said: "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely". Politicians will lie, cheat, steal and prostitute themselves to the lowest common denominator in their quest for absolute power and control over the masses.

There are only a few laws in history that are universally applicable. One of these is that the ruling classes do not want the peasantry armed. They will do what they can to convince you that to be armed is dangerous. They will attempt to do this while they themselves are surrounded by armed body guards. Idiots will not notice this hypocrisy and sycophants will ignore it. Fools will surrender their arms in the name of "safety". They will insensibly surrender their liberty at the same time. This is how slaves are made.

"If the benevolent ruler stays in power long enough, he eventually concludes that power and wisdom are the same thing. And as he possesses power, he must also possess wisdom. He becomes converted to the seductive thesis that election to public office endows the official with both power and wisdom. At this point, he begins to lose his ability to distinguish between what is morally right and what is politically expedient."--- Ben Moreell
Like I indicated it was much different in 1790 than today, without a standing army they needed to rely on militias. It has much to do with not having a standard army at the time it was written, you are voicing an opinion claiming they were to protect from our own governments tyranny. We are not relying on a militia to ward off a foreign government today in 2020.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2020, 06:43 PM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,434,384 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Like I indicated it was much different in 1790 than today, without a standing army they needed to rely on militias. It has much to do with not having a standard army at the time it was written, you are voicing an opinion claiming they were to protect from our own governments tyranny. We are not relying on a militia to ward off a foreign government today in 2020.
uhm

we had a standing army... the Army's birthday is June 14th 1775



signed

Retired Army Sergeant Major
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2020, 07:23 PM
 
Location: NW Nevada
18,151 posts, read 15,578,521 times
Reputation: 17139
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
We spend 10 times as much as Russia, twice China’s budget. If the US military doesn’t have enough bullets on a measly $700B like the poster indicated it’s time for an audit.

The point was why do we need a militia as was originally intended when we have the largest standing army in the world.
Because militia does not only serve at a national defensive level. It also can and should operate at a community level. A perfect reason for militia to form would be to defend communities against criminal threat, like gangs.



Post Civil War militia did this often. Only they were called posses. Our militia capabilities have also long kept foriegn invaders at bay, But they have also made many a criminal think twice as well.

Lawrenceville with the Daltons and Youngers comes to mind. If you want to depend on government entities to defend your lived n es and community, as well as yourself tou are free to do so.

As I am free to not. Thanks to the 2A.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2020, 07:37 PM
 
Location: Honolulu/DMV Area/NYC
30,564 posts, read 18,061,935 times
Reputation: 34368
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
correct

the "bill of rights" does not GRANT rights...it confirms our rights as individuals, and LIMITS government (federal AND state) interference of our individual rights
I'll just reiterate that the Bill of Rights as originally adopted did not limit the powers of the states, only those of the federal government. It took legal maneuvering by the Supreme Court to apply most (but not all) of the Bill of Rights to the states via the 14th Amendment. Thus I have a problem with people using the 2nd Amendment as originally written to claim that the text has always limited states power. Given that the 14th Amendment was ratified more than 100 years after the 2nd Amendment was, such an argument ignores historical reality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


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 12:21 AM.

© 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