26 May 22
@shavixmir saidIf you were a supreme court justice your opinion would mean something.
It implies, because there is no “and” that the armed people are part of said well regulated militia.
Ergo, not in that well regulated militia, no right to bear arms.
How do you know I am not in a well regulated militia? You cannot prove it.
My militia is regulated. We have a regulation to always carry a firearm at militia meetings.
@suzianne said"Let's see your rifles up against bazookas, RPGs, and tanks."
That was great when muskets were the high tech weapons of the time.
Let's see your rifles up against bazookas, RPGs, and tanks.
PS, the National Guard has those too, and serves at the pleasure of state governors.
The National Guard is the ONLY "well-regulated militia".
I already made the argument the 2nd amendment is outdated. Can't you read?
Do you just like repeating what I already said to pretend you came up with it first?
26 May 22
@metal-brain saidSnowden is a traitor who should spend the rest of his miserable life in prison.
( Snowden is a hero)
26 May 22
@vistesd2 saidThe short answer is Madison, but here is a good article on it.
@Metal-Brain
"...the 2nd amendment was intended to fight government tyranny."
Can you offer some evidence of that? Given that all the other (and preceding) mentions of "Militia" in the Constitution refer to Militias to defend the government?
https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/545847-according-to-the-founders-all-federal-gun-restrictions-are/
26 May 22
@metal-brain saidRegulation means controlled by law, regulation is needed to keep the militia from becoming a danger to citizens.
If you were a supreme court justice your opinion would mean something.
How do you know I am not in a well regulated militia? You cannot prove it.
My militia is regulated. We have a regulation to always carry a firearm at militia meetings.
This is why the amendment mentions a "well regulated" militia. They didn't mean a bunch of beer-drinking yahoos with guns.
As I said, the ONLY well-regulated militia is the National Guard.
26 May 22
@suzianne saidFor telling the truth about the NSA violating the constitution?
Snowden is a traitor who should spend the rest of his miserable life in prison.
Do you feel the same way about Assange? No 1st amendment rights for him.
Worse than that, the CIA wanted to kill him.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/sep/27/senior-cia-officials-trump-discussed-assassinating-julian-assange
Doesn't that explain why the Saudi kingdom can kill journalists and the USA is fine with it? Our government does it too. That means you are okay with the killing of journalists, especially when they tell the truth. Right?
26 May 22
@suzianne said....or constituted authority.
Regulation means controlled by law, regulation is needed to keep the militia from becoming a danger to citizens.
This is why the amendment mentions a "well regulated" militia. They didn't mean a bunch of beer-drinking yahoos with guns.
As I said, the ONLY well-regulated militia is the National Guard.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/regulate
..or
2 : to bring order, method, or uniformity to regulate one's habits
26 May 22
@shavixmir saidIt doesn't even say "existing" militia.
It implies, because there is no “and” that the armed people are part of said well regulated militia.
Ergo, not in that well regulated militia, no right to bear arms.
The idea was to rely for our defense primarily on an armed citizenry that can be called up as a militia. If the people themselves are the military power of the state, then that power cannot be used against the people.
Again, an outdated concept, but you need to change the constitution. You cannot just ignore it and expect others to.
26 May 22
@capacrapa saidWell we have a history of a territorial army for home defence they train during the week and sometimes at the weekend but they don’t own weapons and they do not take weapons home with them.
@shavixmir
mi·li·tia
/məˈliSHə/
noun
a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.
all able-bodied civilians eligible by law for military service.
Kinda hard to raise a civilian militia if all of the civilians are unarmed and untrained like you Shav 🙄
The revolutionary War was relatively slow com ...[text shortened]... c.
Unarmed civilians get taken over by dictators and history has proven this all over the world.
What training for militia purposes are required of gun owners in the US, that’s a rhetorical question BTW.
Doesn’t the US have a national guard, the clues in the name I think.
26 May 22
@shavixmir saidpointless to argue on 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.”
I hear a lot of Americans talk about their right to buy and wear and use guns. So, I looked up the text of the amendment. And lo! And behold!
The way I read it, you see, is that it says that the people, in a well regulated ...[text shortened]... reckons the gun lobby has scope creeped the hell out of that amendment and you’ve all been suckered.
It's become a religion at this point.
they need to vote out enough NRA whores to vote the second amendment out or to modify it. Or just pass laws despite it.
26 May 22
@zahlanzi saidIt's not pointless. If it can be pointed out that the 2nd Amendment doesn't say what gun advocates claim, that's a small step toward change. We have to get to the point where using the Second Amendment to defend private ownership is illogical.
pointless to argue on the second amendment.
I've notice you say quite frequently that dialogue is pointless when it comes to Americans. That equates to "say nothing", which then turns to doing nothing.
At the very least, these discussions can equip those who do want change with ideas that can be used outside of these forums, with family, friends, coworkers, etc. Small steps are better than none.
- Joined
- 10 May 22
- Moves
- 769
26 May 22
@kevcvs57 saidThe US National Guard is part of the government.
Well we have a history of a territorial army for home defence they train during the week and sometimes at the weekend but they don’t own weapons and they do not take weapons home with them.
What training for militia purposes are required of gun owners in the US, that’s a rhetorical question BTW.
Doesn’t the US have a national guard, the clues in the name I think.
Civilians having the right to bear arms is in place to stop governments from becoming dictatorships.
Many governments promised to protect the people...Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot etc etc
26 May 22
@vivify said"If it can be pointed out that the 2nd Amendment doesn't say what gun advocates claim"
It's not pointless. If it can be pointed out that the 2nd Amendment doesn't say what gun advocates claim, that's a small step toward change. We have to get to the point where using the Second Amendment to defend private ownership is illogical.
I've notice you say quite frequently that dialogue is pointless when it comes to Americans. That equates to "say nothing", whic ...[text shortened]... ed outside of these forums, with family, friends, coworkers, etc. Small steps are better than none.
Good luck with that.
It has been pointed out. Again and again. Do you think you can come up with a magic argument that people haven't thought of for 100 years?
That's why i said it is religious. What argument would you use to convince a christian that God is not real?
Forget the second amendment.
"We have to get to the point where using the Second Amendment to defend private ownership is illogical. "
You have been past that point since you had a standing army . 100-200 years ago? That's why i said it's religious. They don't have arguments defending it and still they do. Doesn't matter.
"I've notice you say quite frequently that dialogue is pointless when it comes to Americans. That equates to "say nothing", which then turns to doing nothing. "
It absolutely doesn't. You don't argue with religious zealots. You vote them out. You outnumber them.
Sandy Hook didn't change their minds. Nothing since then changed their minds. Stop trying to convince the minority they are wrong. Vote the NRA whores out.
"At the very least, these discussions can equip those who do want change with ideas that can be used outside of these forums"
Yes, because if there is anything we learned in the past years is that Average Joe and his like are reasonable people open to change 😀
26 May 22
@capacrapa saidDoes it say that in the constitution, that you can bear arms to defend your self from your own government, I get that’s what a lot of people think that they have them for but not sure the constitution says that, but I’m no expert.
The US National Guard is part of the government.
Civilians having the right to bear arms is in place to stop governments from becoming dictatorships.
Many governments promised to protect the people...Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot etc etc
If it’s true I guess folk had better start buying some serious air defence systems and tanks.