The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: GOBUCKS on December 14, 2012, 11:05:28 PM
-
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:44 PM
nadinbrzezinski (113,109 posts)
The Second Amendment and it's[sic] origin.
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.
The gun owners of the day were expected to drill every month with the local militia. Granted, drill rarely included actual shooting. Lead balls were damn expensive. (So were the guns themselves). In fact, some of it included plenty of beer and food...
Our modern Court, has in my view, eviscerated the well regulated requirement with Heller.
In the modern day this drilling requirement in the Amendment describes the State Guard to a damn T. Yes, they drill once a month, like the original militias, and due to current requirements, two weeks a year.
The founders originally did not even want to have a core of professional soldiers, because of the abuses by royal forces at the end of the Colonial period. There were debates back and forth, even after the Bill of rights on the need for an army. The Navy was settled before even independence was achieved and the Marines soon after. But the army, the debate was settled in 1812. You might remember the US got well, invaded.
Regardless, for a good while, you could argue all the way to the civil war, state militias pretty much were made up of locals, and there were not that many, mostly rifle and shotgun owners. They started to become more professional after the civil war.
Blah, blah, more nutcase nadin bullshit blah....
The final clause, often cited by NRA types is this. "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." This clause is dependent on the other ones. Your right to bear arms is within a militia, and here is where Heller, in my mind, eviscerated intent. And lord knows we have plenty of letters and other documents from that period.
To be honest, even Madison would have a cow, and Jefferson would eat crow in his fear of regulars, as he called soldiers back then. His precious militia is the modern day guard and he'd have a heck of a time recognizing the RKBA arguments.
Blah, blah, more bullshit from the crazy bald dwarf blah....
Will this happen? A serious look and sensible laws that allow gun owners to be responsible and keep guns, but with sensible gun laws? Right to concealed carry gotta go (got the most part), for example, Unicorns have a better chance of farting in the forest. I hope to be proven wrong.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021986720
Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:49 PM
BeyondGeography (20,463 posts)
2. France has had 16 Constitutions since 1789
And we're still farting about over something that was written when you could get off four shots a minute if you were really skilled. It would be funny if it weren't so sad.
Response to BeyondGeography (Reply #2)
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:53 PM
nadinbrzezinski (113,109 posts)
3. Why I said they want to shoot those military grade guns
Like their forefathers in the militia, well, join the militia.
And a very well trained shooter could bring it up to six shots with a Brown Bess
She's an expert on musketry!
-
She's an expert on musketry!
Nadin is an expert on EVERYTHING! Just EVERYTHING! There's lead balls and beer and food! There's Heller! There's the drilling requirement! There are cows and crows and farting unicorns! Oh, and the Brown Bess! It's all there! Why can't people see??
-
I hope to be proven wrong.
Nadin, you sly dog, you KNOW you will never be proven wrong! You're Know-it-all Nadin, for goodness' sakes! You--wrong?? Yeah, right.
-
Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:49 PM
BeyondGeography (20,463 posts)
2. France has had 16 Constitutions since 1789
What that tells me is that their concept of freedom is much more flexible and subject to the vagaries of the political winds than ours is. They're not called surrender monkeys for nothing, whether it's the Nazis or their own upstart immigrant groups.
They're perfectly welcome to their Constitution Of The Month Club, thanks. I'll keep mine.
-
The idea that the Second Amendment is only a collective right and not an individual one is totally inconsistent with the way the Bill of Rights is arranged, no matter how unfortunate the wording of it might be and how that had been exploited by rubber-stamp Progressive Supreme Courts before Heller. Simply, why would only the second of first eight Amendments be the sole collective right listed, while all the others confer (Or acknowledge, if you prefer) individual rights? Had it been the first or eighth of the lot, you could make some sort of argument that it was only collective, but not as the Bill of Rights is actually ordered.
-
Well, she wants to be proven wrong? Okay.
The Navy was settled before even independence was achieved and the Marines soon after.
The need for Navy was not settled before independence. In fact, one of the driving reasons for the constitution was the need for a central government that would be able to protect American shipping interests at that time. Largely against French predations in the Carribean. The construction of the first six frigates were not ordered until late in Washington's first term. Before that, the US was relying on relatively small converted merchant vessels to conduct operations.
In the modern day this drilling requirement in the Amendment describes the State Guard to a damn T.
The militia during peace time did not muster. The requirement to own, have ammunition for, and operational knowledge of a military grade fire arm was enough.
The founders originally did not even want to have a core of professional soldiers, because of the abuses by royal forces at the end of the Colonial period.
That's why they established the US Military Academy at West Point. They didn't want professional soldiers, so they established an educational institution for the purpose of training professional soldiers. Those founder were devious.
His precious militia is the modern day guard and he'd have a heck of a time recognizing the RKBA arguments.
No he wouldn't. He stated that the militia was all of the men between certain ages. He did not comment on a need to muster. Further, much of the founding fathers writing on the subject indicated that they were very positive about civilian ownership of firearms.
The final clause, often cited by NRA types is this. "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." This clause is dependent on the other ones. Your right to bear arms is within a militia, and here is where Heller, in my mind, eviscerated intent. And lord knows we have plenty of letters and other documents from that period.
The entire 2nd Amendment reads "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." If only "A welll regulated militia being necessary to the securoty of a free state." Something is missing, it is a reason why. If only "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shal not be infringed" is read, the sentence is intellegible and easily understood.
Nadin, just go back to Mexico. They have gun laws to keep all those icky guns out. Maybe you aren't as incoherent in Spanish as you are in English.
-
The key word that chicken-littles grab, is "regulated".
As it was used in the amendment, it had nothing to do with centralized command or control.
It referred to the ability to shoot consistently and controllably to a point of aim.
GNads is full of shit again.
-
Dear Nads,
Considering you live in a "may issue" state, where even OPEN carry is banned (contrary to 2A, but that's just my opinion, and will have to be challenged in court) and I'm guessing you don't even OWN a weapon, let alone hold a CCW permit, let me just ask:
How the **** would you know?
-
Dear Nads,
How the **** would you know?
Apparently, as ChuckJ and Tucker have found out, she knows from wikipedia.
-
Apparently, as ChuckJ and Tucker have found out, she knows from wikipedia.
Because reading it on the Innerwebz is so much more informative than, I dunno, actually USING a weapon, taking a CCW course, or actually READING the Constitution, Federalist Papers, etc.
-
Dear Nads,
Considering you live in a "may issue" state, where even OPEN carry is banned (contrary to 2A, but that's just my opinion, and will have to be challenged in court) and I'm guessing you don't even OWN a weapon, let alone hold a CCW permit, let me just ask:
How the **** would you know?
But she's been in firefights as an emt. and all she had was a knife. So she grabbed a pipe, mixed some local substances to make gunpowder, and constructed a simple musket in 5 minutes. The locals soon learned to run in fear at the sight of the waddling dwarf.
"It's Nadin! Run! Man, you do NOT want to be put on her iggy list! Ruuuuun!"
-
Nadin....United States Supreme Court Candidate......hell, she's just about as smart as the other old hags on the BIG bench.
-
I'm still waiting for the libbies to demonstrate to me how anything in the BOR is a "collective" right.
-
She's still at it.
New thread in the DUmp.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021987588
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:57 AM
nadinbrzezinski (113,141 posts)
Federalist 29
The Federalist No. 29
Concerning the Militia
Independent Journal
Wednesday, January 9, 1788
To the People of the State of New York:
THE power of regulating the militia, and of commanding its services in times of insurrection and invasion are natural incidents to the duties of superintending the common defense, and of watching over the internal peace of the Confederacy.
>major snippage due to length<
GNads failed to read and comprehend the scope of the paper.
Thinks it gives all power to government.
One comment so far.
Response to nadinbrzezinski (Original post)
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 07:27 AM
safeinOhio (7,232 posts)
1. Todays Switzerland is the
best example of what the Founders had in mind.
-
Safeinohio has got to be a gungeon dweller with that handle.
-
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
-- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188
Men trained in arms from their infancy, and animated by the love of liberty, will afford neither a cheap or easy conquest.
-- From the Declaration of the Continental Congress, July 1775
"As to the species of exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives [only] moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun, therefore, be the constant companion to your walks."
-- Thomas Jefferson, writing to his teenaged nephew
Militias, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves and include all men capable of bearing arms. [...] To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.
-- Senator Richard Henry Lee, 1788, on "militia" in the 2nd Amendment
Are we at last brought to such a humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defence? Where is the difference between having our arms in our own possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defence be the *real* object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?
-- Patrick Henry, speech of June 9 1788
That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United states who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms...
-- Samuel Adams, in "Phila. Independent Gazetteer", August 20, 1789
---------
Yep. Those founders hated the idea of guns in the hands of the people.
-
Drill baby drill.
-
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
-- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188
Men trained in arms from their infancy, and animated by the love of liberty, will afford neither a cheap or easy conquest.
-- From the Declaration of the Continental Congress, July 1775
"As to the species of exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives [only] moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun, therefore, be the constant companion to your walks."
-- Thomas Jefferson, writing to his teenaged nephew
Militias, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves and include all men capable of bearing arms. [...] To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.
-- Senator Richard Henry Lee, 1788, on "militia" in the 2nd Amendment
Are we at last brought to such a humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defence? Where is the difference between having our arms in our own possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defence be the *real* object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?
-- Patrick Henry, speech of June 9 1788
That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United states who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms...
-- Samuel Adams, in "Phila. Independent Gazetteer", August 20, 1789
---------
Yep. Those founders hated the idea of guns in the hands of the people.
Too bad we don't know the "original intent" of the Founding Fathers on the 2nd Amendment. :sarcasm:
-
I say that idiots with computers need to have them taken away so they can't post online. The world would be a lot safer from the bald headed dwarf if that happened.
-
I say that idiots with computers need to have them taken away so they can't post online. The world would be a lot safer from the bald headed dwarf if that happened.
:clap: :clap: :clap:
-
I say that idiots with computers need to have them taken away so they can't post online. The world would be a lot safer from the bald headed dwarf if that happened.
:yeahthat: and the H5.