the 2nd[views:5541][posts:22]______________________________ [Jan 12,2013 4:18pm - BSV ""] "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." FIRST OFF I'M PRO FIREARMS. Yet, someone asked me a question the other night and I had no answer...."where does it say individual persons have the right to bear arms, when it clearly states it has to be a 'well regulated militia' as a 'right of the people' involved in or with the militia."????? Maybe I'm reading into this too much or maybe the other person is but it bothered me. Are pro gun supporters misreading the amendment? Did antigun folk find a wicked loop hole? VICE VERSA? On this note, is there a well regulated militia active in New England? |
| ____________________________________ [Jan 12,2013 4:26pm - arilliusbm ""] The supreme court in The District of Columbia vs Heller made it apply to a more modern definition. |
| ____________________________________ [Jan 12,2013 4:33pm - arilliusbm ""] No need to be connected to a militia, I should say. Quite funny though, because I believe the ruling is only 5 years old. |
| __________________________________ [Jan 12,2013 4:43pm - ShadowSD ""] It's an individual right to bear arms, the Supreme Court has ruled on that. Relying on the argument that the second amendment only applied to militias was weak ground to stand on for those who advocated that approach. The wording of the amendment makes it pretty obvious, I think, as obviously the people can't have particular rights if none of them have those rights individually; the bigger questions in interpreting the wording has to do with what the Founders envisioned to be arms. |
| ________________________________ [Jan 12,2013 4:44pm - Burnsy ""] The people are us. It doesn't say we have to form a militia to own them. To me, the language implies that without arms, we can't form a militia so we can't be barred from having them in the case that we do need to form a militia. |
| ________________________________ [Jan 12,2013 4:49pm - KEVORD ""] The entire idea of the people having arms to form a militia is for the people to have equal power as their government. |
| ____________________________________ [Jan 12,2013 5:18pm - trioxin245 ""] What it comes down to for me is basically that I want a gun, and I don't give half a fuck if it makes anyone unsafe, nor do I give 1/10 a fuck what the founding fathers said hundreds of years ago. What I do should not be anyone's business but mine. It's too bad some people misuse that simple basis of freedom, but hey, at least you get to shit in perfectly good drinking water every day (maybe more than once a day) while 1000's die of dehydration elsewhere in the world, right? You people can sit around tossing quotes and biased 'facts' you read in the news back and forth all you want, but what it comes down to is this: Either 1. You don't want people to have certain guns because you don't feel safe, and you don't care enough about owning one yourself that a ban would bother you at all. or 2. You don't care enough about other people feeling safe to allow more restrictions to be put on your life. It's a very ignorant sounding thing, because it's a very simple thing. |
| ________________________________ [Jan 12,2013 5:22pm - KEVORD ""] Freedom isn't free bro. |
| ____________________________________ [Jan 12,2013 5:23pm - trioxin245 ""] Yea, in the most recent case, freedom cost us, what, 25-30 kids lives? I don't give a shit, I didn't know any of them. Give me another gun. |
| ________________________________ [Jan 12,2013 5:29pm - KEVORD ""] Our government drops bombs and kills way more kids then that every year. The entire thing is laughable. |
| ___________________________________ [Jan 12,2013 5:33pm - Boozegood ""] I know it's a lot of reading but here you go: http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndpur.html http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndmea.html http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndcont.html |
| ____________________________________ [Jan 12,2013 5:34pm - trioxin245 ""] KEVORD said:The entire idea of the people having to form a metal militia is for the people, through the mist and the madness, to try to get the message to you. |
| ___________________________________ [Jan 12,2013 5:35pm - Boozegood ""] As far as militia stuff in Massachusetts goes contact me through other methods for information. |
| _______________________________________ [Jan 12,2013 10:02pm - the_reverend ""] It makes perfect sense that every American should have a pair of bear arms on their wall. |
| _______________________________ [Jan 13,2013 4:22am - Hoser ""] Get yourself a gun, Rev. Otherwise I'll laugh at you when you post that there was an intruder in your your home and it caused you to screech like a woman and run away instead of protecting your shit. |
| ___________________________________ [Jan 13,2013 11:45am - arkmass ""] KEVORD said:The entire idea of the people having arms to form a militia is for the people to have equal power as their government. L O FUCKING L. |
| _______________________________ [Jan 13,2013 11:53am - BSV ""] NITPICKY CRITICAL THINKING.... So, are you guys telling me that up until 5 years ago, Americans were legally NOT supposed own any guns? Who in the hell can declare or define what sort of regulations a Militia would need or have to answer to in order to be regulated? |
| ____________________________________ [Jan 13,2013 12:24pm - Boozegood ""] BSV said:NITPICKY CRITICAL THINKING.... So, are you guys telling me that up until 5 years ago, Americans were legally NOT supposed own any guns What? Who in the hell can declare or define what sort of regulations a Militia would need or have to answer to in order to be regulated? Did you read the links I posted? Here is another: http://www.guncite.com/second_amendment_commas.html |
| _______________________________ [Jan 13,2013 12:33pm - BSV ""] No, I didn't read those links yet.... I'm just trying to wrap my head around what was gained from, The District of Columbia vs Heller ruling 5 years ago....just having a hard time understanding it, that's all. |
| ____________________________________ [Jan 13,2013 12:48pm - Boozegood ""] BSV said:No, I didn't read those links yet.... I'm just trying to wrap my head around what was gained from, The District of Columbia vs Heller ruling 5 years ago....just having a hard time understanding it, that's all. It was illegal for a citizen to own a handgun in Washington DC, the supreme court deemed this unconstitutional (rightfully so) so the law was changed. |
| ______________________________ [Jan 13,2013 1:04pm - BSV ""] ok, that makes total sense. I thought I was reading it wrong. I always forget to include D.C. as a state compliments of their mystical electoral college. Hey, are guns now legal in Puerto Rico? |
| ___________________________________ [Jan 13,2013 1:42pm - Boozegood ""] BSV said: Hey, are guns now legal in Puerto Rico? Yes guns are legal in Puerto Rico but not the same as with States. The relationship between the Constitution and Puerto Rico is unfortunately grey, as with American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, and the Virgin Islands. |
| _________________________________________________ [Jan 13,2013 2:18pm - Arrow NLI ... on weed? ""] Without arms, how would we hold guns? |