The 2nd Amendment’s “Militia”

[cwo_ghwebb]

"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 know I’ve been talking a lot about guns, gun control, and the 2nd Amendment (2A) a lot lately. I can’t help it. Our basic rights, recognized and enshrined in our Constitution, are under attack and I feel compelled to respond.

I’ve been reading a lot from the Federalist Papers recently. I’ve also been reading the debates that took place during the adoption of that amendment so that I could understand what those 27 words mean. We hear a lot of static from all sides of the aisle. Some claim that the Founding Fathers could have never envisioned the type of weapons we have today. Others say that the 2A only applies to the military.

The 2nd Amendment’s “Militia” | Flopping Aces

Probably the best defense against this argument floated by the Left I've seen yet.

 

[PsyOps]

This whole discussion boils down to a very fundamental premise: If we elect a leader that has intentions of tyranny, how do we, the people, fend this off without firearms? Is there anyone that doesn’t recognize that our government is “of the people, by the people and for the people” not the other way around? Why do so many people fail to understand that the only way this is truly guaranteed is through the people, and cannot be accomplished without an armed citizenry? Why do so many people forget history that where the government is able to disarm the citizens, the citizens are left with no means to protect themselves from tyranny? Why can’t people, in the most basic of logic, see that this is why the second amendment was written? Not defined in terms of what things were like when it was written (muskets, pistols, swords, and cannons); but citizens having the ability to remain MORE POWERFUL than our government; this not just through our vote or voice, but through show-of-force through arms.

This is an ideal of logic that really doesn’t need a constitution to define it. It’s a simple premise you can only defend and protect your liberties when you have a strength that equals that of your strongest opponent.

 

[tommyjo]

This whole discussion boils down to a very fundamental premise: If we elect a leader that has intentions of tyranny, how do we, the people, fend this off without firearms? Is there anyone that doesn’t recognize that our government is “of the people, by the people and for the people” not the other way around? Why do so many people fail to understand that the only way this is truly guaranteed is through the people, and cannot be accomplished without an armed citizenry? Why do so many people forget history that where the government is able to disarm the citizens, the citizens are left with no means to protect themselves from tyranny? Why can’t people, in the most basic of logic, see that this is why the second amendment was written? Not defined in terms of what things were like when it was written (muskets, pistols, swords, and cannons); but citizens having the ability to remain MORE POWERFUL than our government; this not just through our vote or voice, but through show-of-force through arms.

This is an ideal of logic that really doesn’t need a constitution to define it. It’s a simple premise you can only defend and protect your liberties when you have a strength that equals that of your strongest opponent.

Among your many intellectual shortcomings, understanding definitions must be at the heart of the matter. You don't seem to understand definition of the word tyranny:

DICTIONARY
tyranny
Definition
tyr·an·ny[ t#rrənee ]tyr·an·nies Plural

NOUN
1. cruel use of power: cruelty and injustice in the exercise of power or authority over others
2. oppressive government: oppressive government by one or more people who exercise absolute power cruelly and unjustly
3. state ruled by tyrant: a country or state under the power of an oppressive ruler
4. cruel act: a cruel or oppressive act, especially one committed by a person wielding great power


No one in our govt exercises absolute power. A tyrant would not ASK the legislature to enact stricter gun laws. A tyrant would force stricter gun laws.

Your hatred for the President is obvious. Yet, I can't recall a time when justified your hatred based on actual facts. Your comments show a severe lack of understanding of almost every issue upon which you comment.

 

[aps45819]

No one in our govt exercises absolute power. A tyrant would not ASK the legislature to enact stricter gun laws. A tyrant would force stricter gun laws.

Through executive order?
Maybe he could surround himself with little kids and say he's doing it to keep them safe.

 

[cwo_ghwebb]

Among your many intellectual shortcomings, understanding definitions must be at the heart of the matter.

No one in our govt exercises absolute power.

Your comments show a severe lack of understanding of almost every issue upon which you comment.

Gosh, how do we have two in one day :dumbass posts of the day:?

Is this clown for real or doesn't preview posts for accuracy or truth?

When we have a President who signs (23???) EOs trying to circumvent the Constitution behind a shield of children and you have the audacity to think YOU are SO smart and smarmy and have all the answers. Actually, you are the classic liberal, think you're so smart, you are dumber than dirt and show your ass every day. At least to anyone who graduated high school.

 

[terbear1225]

Among your many intellectual shortcomings, understanding definitions must be at the heart of the matter. You don't seem to understand definition of the word tyranny:

DICTIONARY
tyranny
Definition
tyr·an·ny[ t#rrənee ]tyr·an·nies Plural

NOUN
1. cruel use of power: cruelty and injustice in the exercise of power or authority over others
2. oppressive government: oppressive government by one or more people who exercise absolute power cruelly and unjustly
3. state ruled by tyrant: a country or state under the power of an oppressive ruler
4. cruel act: a cruel or oppressive act, especially one committed by a person wielding great power


No one in our govt exercises absolute power. A tyrant would not ASK the legislature to enact stricter gun laws. A tyrant would force stricter gun laws.

Your hatred for the President is obvious. Yet, I can't recall a time when justified your hatred based on actual facts. Your comments show a severe lack of understanding of almost every issue upon which you comment.

it is not necessary to hate the current president, or to believe that he is making an attempt to be a tyrant, to believe that it is POSSIBLE that at some point in the future someone might attempt it.

while I am not a fan of Obama in general, I do not believe that he is setting himself up as a future dictator. I do however believe that the possibility existgs that someone might try to in the future. History has shown time and again that those in power do in fact occasionally try to gain more power, to the detriment of the average citizen.

 

[thatguy]

Wirelessly posted

Among your many intellectual shortcomings, understanding definitions must be at the heart of the matter.

No one in our govt exercises absolute power.

Your comments show a severe lack of understanding of almost every issue upon which you comment.

Gosh, how do we have two in one day :dumbass posts of the day:?

Is this clown for real or doesn't preview posts for accuracy or truth?

When we have a President who signs (23???) EOs trying to circumvent the Constitution behind a shield of children and you have the audacity to think YOU are SO smart and smarmy and have all the answers. Actually, you are the classic liberal, think you're so smart, you are dumber than dirt and show your ass every day. At least to anyone who graduated high school.

Which one of those EOs circumvented the constitution and how?

Keep in mind that EOs have not been found to be unconstitutional in and of themselves.

 

[cwo_ghwebb]

Keep in mind that EOs have not been found to be unconstitutional in and if themselves.

EOs have't been found unconstitutional YET.

But this Prez sure likes to use them don't he?

What part of national database don't you understand. Think of those idiots in NY that published all the LEGAL gun owners........ Next a government publishing a database?????

How many in that list of folks in NYC had only have a fork to protect themselves????

 

[PsyOps]

No one in our govt exercises absolute power. A tyrant would not ASK the legislature to enact stricter gun laws. A tyrant would force stricter gun laws.

Your hatred for the President is obvious. Yet, I can't recall a time when justified your hatred based on actual facts. Your comments show a severe lack of understanding of almost every issue upon which you comment.

I’m not implying there is someone in our current government that is exercising absolute power. That can’t happen until our rights are stripped from us. This discussion is about THAT – the setting of the stage to weaken the power of the people while strengthening the power of the government; everything out constitution was designed to oppose. THAT is the purpose of the 2nd Amendment. Because we may not view Obama as that tyrant doesn't give him the power to subvert the constitution.

Here is a humble little list of facts. I know you’ll reject them but they are what they are.

218 reasons NOT to vote for Obama « Current Events « PostLibertarian

I don’t hate Obama. I disagree with his politics. His form of politics are destructive to this country on nearly every level. I don’t expect someone like you, who is a die-on-the-sword Obama supporter, to see any of this. I am justified in my own mind about these thing based on my assessment of the man; and I don’t need you to define for me what is justified.

Quite honestly I have provided plenty of sources for my information while you have providing nothing more than a substanceless “you lack understanding”. That’s your answer for everything. You’re a sad example of debate. But you are a liberal and what most of us have become accustom to.

 

[thatguy]

Wirelessly posted

Keep in mind that EOs have not been found to be unconstitutional in and if themselves.

EOs have't been found unconstitutional YET.

But this Prez sure likes to use them don't he?

What part of national database don't you understand. Think of those idiots in NY that published all the LEGAL gun owners........ Next a government publishing a database?????

How many in that list of folks in NYC had only have a fork to protect themselves????

I asked about executive orders, and which ones you say circumvent the constitution. There was no national database in any of the executive orders.

 

[aps45819]

Wirelessly posted



I asked about executive orders, and which ones you say circumvent the constitution. There was no national database in any of the executive orders.

How would you illegally make health records available to law enforcement without a national database?

 

[GURPS]

If we elect a leader that has intentions of tyranny, how do we, the people, fend this off without firearms? Is there anyone that doesn’t recognize that our government is “of the people, by the people and for the people” not the other way around?

you are just paranoid, and need to report to the MD 214 Re-Education Camp for sensitivity training

 

[PsyOps]

you are just paranoid, and need to report to the MD 214 Re-Education Camp for sensitivity training

Me and about 150 million other people in this country.

 

[itsbob]

Tyrannical government doesn't only apply to our government.

Kosovo and Serbia are good examples. Unarmed society, a tyrannical oppressive counter government and he who has guns rules.

Yugoslavia, just before the rise of a rogue general, hosted the Olympics and appeared to be add stable and as the US. How fast, drastic and tragic things can change when you're an unarmed population.

Time has taught us this lesson again and again, yet the liberals, no matter how good meaning they are, are leading us right down the same path.

 

[cwo_ghwebb]

How would you illegally make health records available to law enforcement without a national database?

Dealing with HIPPA regulations and computer security, I can only say government intrusion would be impossible without a national database. Would the government violate law? Who knows?

But thatdude doesn't seem to live in the real world.

Basic interpretation of the Constitution seems to elude most liberals. Must have had a wanna be cheerleader clown for high school teachers.

 

[thatguy]

Wirelessly posted

How would you illegally make health records available to law enforcement without a national database?

Dealing with HIPPA regulations and computer security, I can only say government intrusion would be impossible without a national database. Would the government violate law? Who knows?

But thatdude doesn't seem to live in the real world.

Basic interpretation of the Constitution seems to elude most liberals. Must have had a wanna be cheerleader clown for high school teachers.

You can't show where Obama said anything about a naional database in his EOs so you are just going to make that part up. I see.....

And you think you haven't been bested in this debate

 

[BOP]

Among your many intellectual shortcomings, understanding definitions must be at the heart of the matter. You don't seem to understand definition of the word tyranny:

DICTIONARY
tyranny
Definition
tyr·an·ny[ t#rrənee ]tyr·an·nies Plural

NOUN
1. cruel use of power: cruelty and injustice in the exercise of power or authority over others
2. oppressive government: oppressive government by one or more people who exercise absolute power cruelly and unjustly
3. state ruled by tyrant: a country or state under the power of an oppressive ruler
4. cruel act: a cruel or oppressive act, especially one committed by a person wielding great power


No one in our govt exercises absolute power. A tyrant would not ASK the legislature to enact stricter gun laws. A tyrant would force stricter gun laws.

Your hatred for the President is obvious. Yet, I can't recall a time when justified your hatred based on actual facts. Your comments show a severe lack of understanding of almost every issue upon which you comment.

Stop posting while you have some brain cells left.

 

[BOP]

Me and about 150 million other people in this country.

Who's going to pay income taxes that support the leeches if we all go off to re-education camps?

 

[cwo_ghwebb]

Wirelessly posted



You can't show where Obama said anything about a naional database in his EOs so you are just going to make that part up. I see.....

And you think you haven't been bested in this debate

It's not a debate. The Presidents Executive Orders are out there for all to see. Obviously, you haven't taken the time to do your research.

One EO in particular necessitates a database. It authorizes the tracing of firearms in criminal investigations. "Firearms tracing has significantly aided law enforcement in solving violent crimes"... in Obama's words.

How would you implement this EO, oh learned one?

 

[Gilligan]

[.....

And you think you haven't been bested in this debate

Certainly never by you, mo.